When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I would have thought on the S2000 as much wing as possible would be fastest, as long as it could be balanced in the front, would be advantageous at nearly all tracks. But other than outright size, is there as much attention to front aero and downforce as there is to the rear? If a GTC 300 or equivalent can be balanced, why wouldn't that be the norm?
At the beginning of this thread there was a comment about Singular endplates for the APR wings. But not further comments. Is playing with then endplates important?
BattleAero was mentioned in another post. They have a chassis mounted 66" and 74" chassis wing with either regular or swan neck mounts for what seems like a very low price. Are they not competitive?
I would have thought that all of the competitive classes have lots of rules around wing and splitter sizes and heights. Isn't this usually the determining factor? The NASA TT rules seem to allow a height 8" above the roof, with a 12" endplate. While the width is limited to the width of the car, there doesn't seem to be a limit on how far behind the car it can go, or in front for a splitter. Are there setups that press this to the max?
Endplates such as the Singular ones increase downforce. Therefore allowing you to run less AOA, decreasing drag while maintaining the same amount of downforce.
Two question have popped up from reading other threads. First: for trunk mounted wings was a trunk lid reinforcement necessary. It looks like some Voltex come with a reinforcement in the trunk and J's racing offers a reinforcement kit. Did everyone fabricate a reinforcement?
It appears the swan neck, which I hadn't heard of 4 days ago, is very popular in the big leagues. F1, Le Mans, etc.
This video discusses the issues that make it preferable:
The Voltex Type 7 has been available as a swan neck and comes with inside trunk reinforcements that apparently also function as a drilling guide.
The APR GT-250 is available as a swan neck, but requires custom brackets. They don't list a swan neck version for any of the GTC models. The GT-1000 slotted flap wing (interestingly the main element is fixed at 5° and the flap adjusts) apparently can be ordered as a swan neck.
The vertical bracket on all of the swan necks (other than F1) seems to be cut from a flat plate with some holes drilled. It looks like it would be straightforward to create a bracket to get any height.
Why have the swan necks not been part of the discussion?
what about mounting the wing by the end plates? its my understanding that big end plate increase the wings effectiveness, so why not make big end plates that double as mounts, that way you don't have anything spoiling the air flow on either side of the wing, and nothing getting in the way in front... I mean swan neck wings definitely look the coolest, but in my very rudimentary understanding of aero, a wing mounted by the end plates would be best
This appears to be the battle aero swan neck. It has ~1700mm span with ~350mm cord, is chassis mounted, and seems to be the least expensive wing available: Swan Neck Chassis Mount Kit for Honda S2000 – BattleAero. It is pretty far back and up, so should be in relatively clean air, but the cantilever would require more front downforce to balance. Their chassis mount would allow a lot of down force without damaging the bodywork.
The wing in the picture is wider than the car; they offer a 66" and a 74" model. A higher aspect ratio should have less drag for a given downforce. For auto racing, surface area for creating downforce is the limiting factor unless rules interfere, Formula 1 wings looked really deep in 2016 with a max width rule. At LeMans a max cord rule makes them look long and shallow. I have no idea what the best mix is for an S2000.
Note, that even at Monza, the wings are two-element. It begs the question if an APR GT-1000 with Battle Aero like high, rearward, chassis mount may offer the best results options.
Originally Posted by warmmilk
what about mounting the wing by the end plates? its my understanding that big end plate increase the wings effectiveness, so why not make big end plates that double as mounts, that way you don't have anything spoiling the air flow on either side of the wing, and nothing getting in the way in front... I mean swan neck wings definitely look the coolest, but in my very rudimentary understanding of aero, a wing mounted by the end plates would be best
However, supporting the wing at its ends requires a very strong wing. I think most of these wings are a simpler internal structure. Some Toyota Supra wings use the OEM mounting position on the fenders, but don't use the end plate for support. In that application the wing is far enough forward that the roof probably has a major influence.
However, supporting the wing at its ends requires a very strong wing. I think most of these wings are a simpler internal structure. Some Toyota Supra wings use the OEM mounting position on the fenders, but don't use the end plate for support. In that application the wing is far enough forward that the roof probably has a major influence.
ok so bigger isn't necessarily better, but this only compared different size end plates. The article didn't address if an end plate mounted wing is better than a swan neck mount... or you can go all out and do an end plate swan neck mount, making the end plate optimal size but then have the vertical mount portion shrink down to standard mount size... kinda like this:
Note, that even at Monza, the wings are two-element. It begs the question if an APR GT-1000 with Battle Aero like high, rearward, chassis mount may offer the best results options.
if i wasnt such a frugal asshole i would have went with that instead of the battle aero
The CG Technic mount is nice, but it isn't a swan neck. It uses the APR GT-250 wing. Evasive has the GT-250 Swan Neck with no mounting bracket (like the GT-1000, the buyer needs to fabricate that), for $2500. If you have the Battle Aero Swan Neck, it is probably worth the price just for the mount. Unless you are having a problem with the mount or the wing. Has the Battle Aero caused a problem? Is it effective aerodynamically?
This is a picture of the CG Technic from their website. It does appear to keep the GT-250 far enough up and back to be in clean air.
I made a huge plywood splitter that seemed to keep the car pretty neutral at Sebring, both Todd and Nick drove it and loved my car.
I did this to balance out the gigantic Battle Aero 74" swan neck wing I put on
Weighs about 15lbs tho!
The underside of that splitter looks very rough. Anything that slows the air there will raise the pressure reducing downforce.
Have you considered countersinking the washers/bolts or just putting a thin sheet of metal/Formica/Alumalite over the underside and nailing a half round strip on the leading edge? Or just making the splitter out of Alumalite?
01-11-2017, 09:15 PM
