i guess canards are to re-direct airflow am i right?

J's_racing: those are beautiful wing but i can't fork out $1300 for a wing on track application =\


i've been reading a lot on the APR GTC200 wing though. anyone ever used it?

i just would like to keep my car planted for long sweeping corners.........( dont really like the rocking boat feeling with my stock suspension)

 

make for a pretty crappy tool to redirect airflow when you have prickly corners and edges.
Besides, if the purpose is indeed to generate downforce, surely someone should look into making some louvres for the wheel arches instead of tacking on the dive planes

I've always believed that downforce should be generated from the bottom and not the top (ie, have the air suck the car onto the asphalt instead of pressing onto it); just look at how the GP2 cars can race nose to tail but the F1 cars can't and one can see what's the way to go.

If you always have clean air in front of you, then ya it doesn't matter; but how often does that happen in wheel to wheel racing.

 

If that's the case, then it's the dampers that are a bigger culprit than the aero; because honestly unless every BIT of the car is sorted aerowise, than it could be a billion things that's causing the instability.

sort out the dampers and alignment first before worrying about the aero. There aren't that many tracks in North America where aero grip plays priority over mechanical grip as far as lower power tin tops are concerned.

 

hmm maybe you're right but what's there to upgrade with $500 bucks? a decent set of coilovers will put me at $1500 at least with installation =\.

so for the apr gtc-200 wing it wont improve stability on the S?


if anyone ever saved any good thread on big wing for the S please post here thanks . i've been trying every key word to search but not much luck =\

 

I'm not saying it won't improve the stability, but for the money you spend on the wing compared to the improved stability you'll get from it, dampers would get you better improvement per dollar IMO.

you'll gain better overall grip with properly sorted (and setup) dampers; where the wing will only gain you better overall grip where the car's going fast enough for the wing to work.

 

i dont know how you can tell what the profile of the wing is from that angle, off my car sitting in a room on a box...

i use what works and what I can afford... using my "little" bit of knowledge about aerodynamics, I think I have the wing at a good angle.



J_racer.... the GTC 200 wing is a great wing, thats what I would suggest short of the 1000+ ones.
find a NASA or SCCA racer and have them order you one with there discount... like 15% off of a 500 dollar wing.

 

...so you've rarely gone over 80 mph on a track then? If you can gain an advantage in one corner on a track, and have it not gain you anything anywhere else, you won't lose anything substantial and you'll still keep that gain.

Man, step out of the 60's. Even a modest wing and a splitter on a car with stock suspension will definitely yield measurable results. Sure, coilovers will help everywhere... but there are wings out there that are pretty cheap and effective, and you can make your own splitter with relative ease and low cost... so why not? Besides, they look cool too, whereas suspension is hidden.


Also, I hate calling diveplanes "canards". I don't know who came up with that name, but I don't like it. Canards are either ducks, or the small wings on the front of planes. Diveplanes are also small, and generate lift (negative, in the case of the car), but they accomplish it by slowing the air and use the resultant raised pressure to generate a force, opposed to canards on planes, which are small aerofoils that accelerate the air and use the resulting relative low pressure to generate a force. Henceforth, I shall refer to the as diveplanes.

Diveplanes are there to create downforce. Sure, they don't create much, but their purpose is for aero-tuning, not massive downforce. Most racing cars get their front downforce from front diffusers and splitters. Diveplanes can be added and adjusts to fine-tune the aero-balance of the car. A side benefit, depending on design, can be air-extraction from the front wheel-openings. However, a simple Gurney lip is more effective for that purpose. I'd like to know what you think their purpose is.




J, how is the handling through the low-speed corners? If you like the handling through the low speed corners, but it's just the high-speed corners that worry you, then you need to work on the aero balance. If the car is loose everywhere, fast or slow, then you need to work on the mechanical balance of the car (suspension/tire/etc). ie: If the car understeers like a pig through the slow corners, but is super loose on the fast corners, you would then need to increase the rear aero grip, and increase the front mechanical grip (increasing the rear aero more to offset the increasd front mechanical grip)...

 

man, no offense... but can you tell us a little about your hpde/racing experience before giving advice out

 

Canards are vortex generators. When placed properly, VGs can have amazing results for very little aerodynamic costs. When placed randomly, they usually just function as a source of drag.

 

[QUOTE=3312DC,Jul 10 2007, 05:44 PM] man, no offense...