Quote:
Originally Posted by Aluma007
you got them to fit, but it doesn't mean the angle of attack is correct...if it is, then great. If they were just for looks, then it looks fine.
|
You sure are complaining a lot. I mean, you could be contributing at least halfway meaningful commentary to this thread, but you're not even doing that; you're just coming across as a **** that I, to be honest, did not expect you to be.
But, I'll respect your attempt at a 'critique' a bit. Least I can do for your time.
I mean, I obviously prefer it to be at least a little functional. but on the other hand I'm not going for a maximum performance build or anything. This car is one half daily, one quarter mountain roads challenger, and
potentially one quarter track/road handling course car, but I have yet to do more than a single track day.
So, do I care if the "angle of attack" is correct? Sure. But if it's off by a bit and not getting me the best amount of additional airflow do I give a fuck? No.
FWIW, this is direct from the TRD Japan site:
Now, obviously my bumper is different from an 86 bumper. But this shows roughly the same positioning.
And another FWIW, while I don't have a picture to show this right now, the corners of the canards actually line up almost exactly with the winglets of my STI front lip. Now I'd assume their "angle of attack" is pretty accurate, and I'd thus imagine (though not being an expert myself, obviously, except with talking out of my ass) that if they match up with the canard, then they should be plenty "functional", if only a little.
