Bros Wing
Per Bros:
Although we do not have CFD simulation of our wing, this wing is directly from Hyundai Genesis Cup(Professional League).
It is one-make racing which all the Genesis coupe race cars are using our design for years already.
The bracket is specially re-designed to work with S2000.
I'd rather pay $1300 for an APR-300 wing which has analysis to back it up; rather than a copy of a wing off a Genesis.
Although we do not have CFD simulation of our wing, this wing is directly from Hyundai Genesis Cup(Professional League).
It is one-make racing which all the Genesis coupe race cars are using our design for years already.
The bracket is specially re-designed to work with S2000.
I'd rather pay $1300 for an APR-300 wing which has analysis to back it up; rather than a copy of a wing off a Genesis.
the APR wing mounts in the stock location, so it has little to no effect of the trunk from flexing like my old H.P.M. wing did, i have ran the gtc 300 for over 2 season now and have never had any issues with it.
if the genesis cup is a factory backed effort it probably has a lot more CFD R&D than the APR wing. what is the genesis cup anyway? is it an asian series? I did a quick search and could not find anything...
Also, any CFD that APR does on the wing is pretty much garbage if not done in conjunction with the body of the car it is mounted on. At our level of motorsports and the level of most rent-a-seat pro teams CFD analysis is not cost effective, misleading, and way too complicated. The only thing that works is empirical evidence.
Also, any CFD that APR does on the wing is pretty much garbage if not done in conjunction with the body of the car it is mounted on. At our level of motorsports and the level of most rent-a-seat pro teams CFD analysis is not cost effective, misleading, and way too complicated. The only thing that works is empirical evidence.
if the genesis cup is a factory backed effort it probably has a lot more CFD R&D than the APR wing. what is the genesis cup anyway? is it an asian series? I did a quick search and could not find anything...
Also, any CFD that APR does on the wing is pretty much garbage if not done in conjunction with the body of the car it is mounted on. At our level of motorsports and the level of most rent-a-seat pro teams CFD analysis is not cost effective, misleading, and way too complicated. The only thing that works is empirical evidence.
Also, any CFD that APR does on the wing is pretty much garbage if not done in conjunction with the body of the car it is mounted on. At our level of motorsports and the level of most rent-a-seat pro teams CFD analysis is not cost effective, misleading, and way too complicated. The only thing that works is empirical evidence.
The Bros. brake pads are not under-engineered. They just simply don't have the thermal capacity to live up to what the two reviewer's happened to need. The reviewers also fade XP10/8, which are extremely popular in this forum. CT pads have fitment issues of their own, but that's another story.
Dunno. I didn't fade Carbotech 10/8s when running 265 star specs and supercharged at Road America and didn't fade them on 285 Hoosier A6s when turbo'd at Brainerd.
A "hardcore" race pad shouldn't fade with street tires, IMHO.
A "hardcore" race pad shouldn't fade with street tires, IMHO.
if you will run the wing near the roof line, in clean air, stay away from the APR wing. its designed to be mounted and be most efficient near the trunk. for clean air efficiency use simpler, flatter wings.
for clean air aero the BROS wing doenst look that bad but untested its def not worth 1300
You wont see a professional team(grand am and WC)run an APR type of element and mount it near the roof line.
for clean air aero the BROS wing doenst look that bad but untested its def not worth 1300
You wont see a professional team(grand am and WC)run an APR type of element and mount it near the roof line.
It is not a good guide towhat actually work best IMHO. The rule dictate what they can and can not run.










