The Best Performing Rear Wing for the FRS/BRZ/FT86

[Roadcone]

I hate to be that guy but you're going to need a front splitter/diffuser setup about this big to balance out the aero..



or you had better offer a solution for the nose as well Chris Rado style

[LucidMomentum]

Originally Posted by TJ3000

Take for example this pic, yes that hood spoiler looks rediculous but he's going for distance and he's going for speed.

I see what you did there...

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by TJ3000

Take for example this pic, yes that hood spoiler looks rediculous but he's going for distance and he's going for speed.

And she's all alone in her time of need.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

And she's all alone in her time of need.

Because he's racing and pacing and plotting the course

[Koa]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Because he's racing and pacing and plotting the course

He's fighting and biting and riding on his horse

[MikeM7]

Originally Posted by Koa

He's fighting and biting and riding on his horse

He's going the distance

[jblmr2]

We can argue all day long about the validity of the design, but the OP's stated purpose is to sell these to the track day HPDE crowd. As a member of his intended market, I wouldn't put that wing or any other one on my car. I've been participating in track day events for 2 years with my car and have never seen anyone put a wing on their 86 to improve performance. Most of us have limited budgets and put our money into mods that have proven results, brakes, exhaust, suspension, etc. Also the vast majority of us drive our cars on the street and wings are just butt ugly. OP, I don't think you'll will ever sell enough of these to recover your investment.

[Sideways&Smiling]

lol @ all the daily driver warriors who will never track their car commenting on this thread.

but also lol @ an unknown guy saying his wing will be superior to proven designs from very well respected companies like Voltex, Kognition, APR, etc.

Although a universal design, this APR wing by Andrew Brilliant seems to be the best bang for the back out there, IMO:

http://aprperformance.com/racing-pro...justable-wing/

[Haeb]

Wing did you say??

[MRE]

Originally Posted by joe strummer

I applaud your efforts, for what that's worth. Good on ya, mate.

One bit of advice, you did solicit any feedback- "Please express your thoughts and opinions. Ask questions if you have any. Any feedback is appreciated."

In the future, you might want to restrict that to- Any intelligent and/or constructive feedback is appreciated.

I have no idea why there is such negativity on this thread.

That is fine. Any feedback is welcomed. Intelligence, constructiveness, or negativity is only relative. I've foresaw that a product like this would stir thing up, and I only hope to clear things up and open people's eye as to what true aerodynamic designs can do for a car. I'm more than happy to address most of things and questions brought to me.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by MRE

The biggest factor dictating the downforce goals I've set is the mass of the car. The wing, being shaped and sized the way it is, a by-product of the performance goals I've set.

While somewhat true, the biggest factor dictating downforce goals is WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION, not "mass".

Your assumptions are great, except the car's mass is distributed across two axis front and rear. Your aerodynamics should be based off this, because at the end of the day, what's the use of all this extra downforce if your wheel/tire/suspension setup can't take advantage of it?

-alex

[MRE]

Originally Posted by ZDan

I don't think you can just *assume* that an underbody will counter all of the lift you're going to get at the front of the car from the downforce and drag of this wing. I predict that you're gonna need a BIG splitter up front to balance the car, if not a big front wing like in the tC pic!

Approach seems to assume that "more downforce is always better". If you have a ton of power, yes. But on a 200hp car, you're likely to lose more on the straights than you gain in the corners with a wing this big.

Giant wings like this are for slower courses like autoX, or for cars with big horsepower like this 875hp Pikes Peak Peugeot:

Actually, looks like this car has a *smaller* wing than yours. Also, note the front splitter required on this car to balance the rear wing.

This wing will mark the beginning of an entire aerodynamics product line I will be designing for the FRS, which will include splitter, front bumper, undertray, diffuser, rear bumper, and aerodynamic bits that doesn't exist in the popular market yet.

Regarding the lift on the front. I'm not assuming this. I've ran the simulations on another vehicle and results show there weren't any increases in lift along the length of the car.

I'm looking at your endplates and thinking you could get a better l/d ratio if they were slotted. I think you'd do better with a larger main element and a smaller, second, and third elements at a higher angle of attack. You'd be bleeding off a lot of the pressure and minimizing the vortices coming off the wing.

Have you decided how you're going to be mounting, and supporting, it?

Also think you'd be getting much better feedback in the track section of the forum.

Those slots in the endplates yield better results. At the moment though, I won't be implementing those. In the future I will. This will be a developing and growing brand that will get more advance through time. Some aspects of my design is currently the way it is right now, because my supplier and manufacturer are my limitation—as well as my capital.

Mounts are included in the pictures too.

All aerodynamic forces increase with the square of speed. So the wing will be generating four times the down force at 80, versus 40.

This fact makes wings on street cars pointless. At legal street speeds they will only really start to be of any use on freeways at high speed.

The aerodynamic forces produced by almost any wing will be "negligible" below 30mph, at 60mph they will be 4 times negligible and only then will there be any tangible effect.

Most airliners don't even bother checking the controls for feedback until 80knots on the runway. Although some planes will fly at 40mph they have HUGE, thick, high area wings to do so and they weigh very little, like a quarter of what our cars weigh. My paraglider will fly at 20mph, but it lifts only 120Kg and needs a 9 x 3 meter (27m^2 area) wing to do so! The wing is also over a foot deep!

I would conclude that a wing for downforce is all but pointless on a street going car. The negative effect of the drag produced would also put one off regarding fuel effec. This is why Porsche etc. only have their wings pop up over 60mph when you brake.

I am not including spoilers in this of course, they serve a different purpose.

If this wing were to be used on the streets, I've accomodated 0° angle of attack setting. It creates no downforce at all, and extremely negligible drag, at 120kph. I will provide solid data once I've had the CFD done of the wing on the car. I will be conducting live-testing, and fuel economy is something I'll demonstrate too.

I'm no engineer, but I fail to see how the downforce can be evenly distributed over the entire car when the wing is attached behind the rear wheels.

As has already been mentioned, there also must be some lift created at the front. Have someone sit on the back bumper of any car (with a suspension); it doesn't take a rocket scientist to predict the general effect of the weight on a vehicle.

It is not evenly distributed, it is rear biased. There won't be lift created on the front, or any point on the car. The placement of my wing increases underbody airflow, and creates a pressure differential large enough to overcompensate the moment forces created from the generated downforce of the wing. Somebody sitting on the bumper is a static situation, and doesn't apply the same way.

I hate to be that guy but you're going to need a front splitter/diffuser setup about this big to balance out the aero..

or you had better offer a solution for the nose as well Chris Rado style

I'll be designing those products in the future too for the FRS.

While somewhat true, the biggest factor dictating downforce goals is WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION, not "mass".

Your assumptions are great, except the car's mass is distributed across two axis front and rear. Your aerodynamics should be based off this, because at the end of the day, what's the use of all this extra downforce if your wheel/tire/suspension setup can't take advantage of it?

-alex

I'll clarify what I meant. The mass of the car is extremely important, because it dictates how much downforce you want to produce to acquire a noticeable amount of difference. My wing, on a 1700lb car, would react extremely differently than the 2700lb scion FRS, because applying an arbitrary amount of force on the lighter car has a much larger differential in load compared to the heavier car. Regarding forces being displaced across the car. Having some of this rear-bias has benefits overall that impacts lap-times. There will be a huge increase braking distance performance. Also, the addition of an adjustable brake proportioning valve would yield even greater braking distance performance! Tuning of a car without aerodynamics is different than one with. But one with aerodynamics will, many times, yield faster laptimes than one without them. A car tuned for without aerodynamics will simply be one that isn't fully optimized to use it, but that definitely will not mean that it won't gain any benefit from it at all either. It is important to remember that driving a car like this requires different inputs to the car's control. In the end though, what my customers hope to get out of this is, faster lap-times, as they are all seeking the same thing when they choose to invest suspension, power, etc.

[paulca]

Originally Posted by MRE

If this wing were to be used on the streets, I've accomodated 0° angle of attack setting.

You could make it active....

[MRE]

Originally Posted by paulca

You could make it active....

Will be in the future. Stay tuned for those, it will be awesome.