S2000 Talk Discussions related to the S2000, its ownership and enthusiasm for it.

A call for aerodynamics discussion (wings and underside kit)

Thread Tools
 
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 12:20 PM
  #1  
mingster's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 10,134
Likes: 0
From: Baltimore
Default

I thought I accidentally erased my original post

I was wondering out loud if a removable wing (secured by clamping on the trunk) would help in traction during high speed runs at say autoX or racing. some people barfed (hahahahahaha) like I expected, some people asked some good questions, and here's what I have so far:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by funcar:
[B]Why wings?
Why not clean up the underside of the car, add a splitter on the front and a diffuser on the rear. Then you can have down force without a big wing.
Plus you would have less drag than what a wing generates.
To get a wing big enough and with enough angle on it to create downforce at the speeds our car will do you will have a lot of drag. And if you don't add something to the front of the car you could cause lift at the front. Just ask some Porsche owners that have put big wings on the rear and nothing on the front.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 12:33 PM
  #2  
GTRPower's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Default

Mingster-

The Mugen front lip spoiler includes an underbody tray that extends to the rear of the front suspension arms.

Take a look at that one too. That may or may not help you. I would be careful changing the aerodynamics of the underbody since it can change the cooling of the engine, transmission, and rear differential housing.

-Nick
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 12:38 PM
  #3  
mingster's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 10,134
Likes: 0
From: Baltimore
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GTRPower:
[B]Mingster-

The Mugen front lip spoiler includes an underbody tray that extends to the rear of the front suspension arms.

Take a look at that one too.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 12:42 PM
  #4  
Ben's Avatar
Ben
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
From: Gardena
Default

I love it!

I've been thinking about this for a while...its good that at least one of us is considering going through with it.

For the rear section, check the feels carbon fiber rear diffuser, already been done. For the front, GTR was on the money Mugen's done it. Center..no one has done that yet.

I've been talking with my engineer about greating a body kit, along with a flat underbody tray (like your saying), that as a whole would combine techniques outlawed in F1 due to their effectiveness in creating extreme downforce (outlawed because it would allow the cars to corner too fast, causing saftey issues).

Well, keep us updated...

Ben
Bulletproof Auto
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 01:02 PM
  #5  
Strike's Avatar
Former Moderator
25 Year Member
Former Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,826
Likes: 5
From: Denver CO
Default

Mingster,

I question the need for this particular piece of equipment. I've had my car over 100 MPH on the racetrack and never felt I needed additonal downforce. I also know someone who had his S2K over 120 MPH at Willow Springs and he didn't mention the car feeling light. I don't think our car has the power to attain much higher speeds than that on most race tracks because the straights end. From what I understand Autocross is generally at much lower speeds than a typical racetrack so Autocross shouldn't require it. Has there been anyone who felt the car was unstable at high speeds and needs this? I'm not trying to rain on your parade; I'm just doubtful as to the need for this type of equipment.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 01:18 PM
  #6  
mingster's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 10,134
Likes: 0
From: Baltimore
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Strike:
[B]Mingster,

Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 02:01 PM
  #7  
S2WOOOW's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 657
Likes: 0
From: Camarillo
Default

My $.02, if you're not going to the Salt Flats to see how fast it can go, then it's not worth the $ and effort. Aluminum will weigh a ton, it will have to be fairly thick to hold it's shape. The bottom of the car doesn't have enough empty space for a diffuser type bottom. I think a flat bottom could be dangerous. If you don't get the center of pressure right, you'll effect (most likely adversely) the handling, maybe to the point of loosing front end traction. I think that maybe you should think about a bigger air dam in the front if your feeling the car lift at high speeds.
Reply

Trending Topics

Old Nov 22, 2000 | 02:12 PM
  #8  
Ray's Avatar
Ray
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Default

I don't see how a flat underside tray would create downforce. I thought in most cars the tray was there to reduce aerodaynamic drag in the bottom of the car.

And if you look at the bottom of the 360 Modena, there are two tunnels beside the transmission, which create vacuum as the air flows under the body thereby sucking the car down and creating downforce.

I am no expert on the subject so if I am wrong then please enlighten me.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 02:33 PM
  #9  
mingster's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 10,134
Likes: 0
From: Baltimore
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ray:
[B]I don't see how a flat underside tray would create downforce.
Reply
Old Nov 22, 2000 | 02:48 PM
  #10  
MacGyver's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,134
Likes: 3
From: Columbia, MD
Default

Want cooling? I think we've finally found a good use for the front air dam ports Honda provided us with, but closed them off with cheapy covers. I quick chop with a coping saw and a couple of tubes would do wonders here...

Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:45 AM.