[lolersk8ter]

Hey Revscene!

I'm currently working on creating an aftermarket rear wing for the FRS/BRZ/FT86. Currently there are already many choices out there, but I want to stand out from the rest by producing one that has ultra high performance. I started out 2 years ago when I wanted improved lap times on the track through aero mods. After studying the subject and researching the many companies that sell performance aero parts, I've concluded that many of them wouldn't give me the performance gains I was looking for. My background is engineering from UBC, and I took full advantage of the resources and knowledge I have access to and started from scratch in designing my own rear wing.

After over 80 different iterations designs and CFD testing, this rear wing is the result.

S C I O N F R S Photos by lolersk8ter | Photobucket (http://s1190.photobucket.com/user/lolersk8ter/library/S%20C%20I%20O%20N%20%20%20F%20R%20S)

Design for the wing elements and position is set.
The wing mount for the final product will adopt this look, with perhaps some adjustments. The base of the mount is also up for design changes.
So far, there are 3 different endplate designs:

#1 is the most conservative, cosmetically. Produces the least downforce. Best used at 0° to 15°
#2 produces more downforce much more efficiently, with higher downforce and less drag. This is the by-product of endplate #3. Designed to be used at 25°
#3 is the the direct by-product from the experimental wing in the simulation. Produces over more 10% downforce compared to the shorter endplate.

The only thing finalized so far are the wing element profiles and positioning with one another. I have suppliers and manufacturers ready. The only thing left for me now is to spread word of what I have and collecting interests. Creating a website is also desired too. I plan on expanding this wing to other car chassis with different mount designs. In the near future, I will also work on a diffuser, undertray, and diffuser for the FRS that will yield the highest downforce gain in the market.

I hope this doesn't go against this forum's rules as advertising. Please express your thoughts and opinions. Ask questions if you have any. Any feedback is appreciated.

I hope to get CFD results of the wing on the car soon.

[boatcaptain]

wow, can you make one for a miata ?? i wana improve my laptime aswell

[lolersk8ter]

wow, can you make one for a miata ?? i wana improve my laptime aswell

Yes I can! But at this moment, I am focusing on the FRS chassis. I'll be creating a website soon, you'll be able to stay tuned for latest updates and development for other chassis.

[boatcaptain]

can i see improvement with a full stock frs?

[tofu1413]

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5517/12200835723_1f35b60bf0_o.jpg

how about a swan neck?

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=32963&stc=1&d=1365214933

Then mounts like the rocket bunny rear wing.


A bit more wild idea may be a duck bill / twin wing aero package like the rear of the FXX K

http://ferrari-4me.weebo.it/static/1400445_CAR-Ferrari_FXXK-1280x0_PE6BGC.jpg?v=3

The wings themselves molded and mounted on the quarter panels of a wider body.



Just a few ideas

[BoostedBB6]

Adding huge amounts of down force to a stock car will not net you much if any gains as all you will end up doing is compression suspension.
To make use of additional down force the whole car needs to be tuned for it.

So adding the wing to a stock FRS will give you more down force but that will translate to slower lap times, drop in fuel economy and the balance of the car would be thrown off at any kind of higher speeds.
On a track car its another story (when set up for it)

[Timpo]

sorry if im being rude and I'm not an engineer however the first impression was, that thing is fucking HUGE.

Visually, that looks like you're heavily relying on angle of attack to create downforce.
More angle of attack, more induced drag. Maybe try redesign the shape of wing(not planform, I am talking about shape of airflow) so that it can create super low pressure at the bottom of wing?

What's the point of huge winglet? That looks HEAVY and for FRS/BRZ, I don't think you would be creating enough wingtip vortices or slipstream to the point you would actually need that...

[Timpo]

Adding huge amounts of down force to a stock car will not net you much if any gains as all you will end up doing is compression suspension.
To make use of additional down force the whole car needs to be tuned for it.

So adding the wing to a stock FRS will give you more down force but that will translate to slower lap times, drop in fuel economy and the balance of the car would be thrown off at any kind of higher speeds.
On a track car its another story (when set up for it)

this.

That massive wing will only make sense on 800-1000+hp super high performance racing cars.

http://globalfutureevents.ru/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/F1_1.jpg
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140503181056/motorstorm/images/0/09/Suzuki_escudo_pikes_peak.jpg

Suzuki Escudo and F1 cars have enough power to fight all the induced drag created from angle of attack, but for FRS/BRZ? I don't know about that.

[Timpo]

Even professional who are fighting for best laptimes don't use that much of angle of attack.

http://www.tune86.com/sites/default/files/pictures_photos/2012/04/gt300-brz-race.jpg
http://www.racecar-engineering.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/up86.jpg
http://as-web.jp/photo/pnews/201409/62906/01.jpg

if you want to gain your laptime, just get a widebody kit and wing that gives you some downforce without giving you too much drag, just adding one giant wing will not only add so much weight but will slow you down.

http://www.3si.org/forum/attachments/f11/148970d1402343942-rocket-bunny-fender-flare-idea-39281_194812733986668_81603244_n_1.jpg

[vitaminG]

Best suited to world of outlaws

http://www.knfilters.com/images/press/terry8.jpg

[Timpo]

Anyways, rather than adding a giant wing at the back, which could potentially cause understeer, here are some alternatives

Widebody kit to increase tread and width for better cornering
lowered center of gravity(low seat rails, weight reduction on hood, trunk, roof, door, coilovers, etc)
add front canards and rear wing, maybe vortex generator

I'm sure you can get better skidpad test result with these mods.

[lolersk8ter]

@tofu1413
I chose the design of my mount because of how the forces are applied to the trunk lid. This will provide a solid anchoring point for the loads the wing will output. The rocket bunny mount works fine for a the rocket bunny wing or similar wing, since it provides very little downforce. I won't be doing the FXX K's wing style. It does not nearly produce as much downforce as my current design.

@BoostedBB6
Your statement is not true. Even on a completely stock vehicle, a comparison of lap times will reveal that the one equipped with this wing will be faster. The immediate increase in cornering and braking potential overshadows the lack of ideal suspension components and power output to overcome the drag. The only scenario I imagine this wing would perform worse is if comparison was made on Le Sarthe. A car with improved suspension would definitely improve the synergy my wing has to offer.
I have accommodated the use of this wing on street use. When it is set at 0° it produces no downforce at all, and only very little drag. Regarding the balance, with downforce enhancement on any car, the load distribution at speed is always changing, but one thing in common is it will always be more rearward bias. It is important to remember that driving a car like this requires different inputs to the car's control. There will still be a net downforce across the whole car, allowing you to take the same turns you are used to, easier, and even faster.

@Timpo
This design is the way it is because it nets the highest amount of downforce. Other considerations for this design are my manufacturer's and supplier's limitation. I have many more ideas for future designs. The longer endplates allows better flow dynamics on this wing. They won't be heavy at all. They will be made of carbon fiber foam core sandwich. Extremely light and high in strength. The design of my endplate allows the best suppression of vortex generation, therefore increasing downforce and reducing drag. The length allows more downforce overall.
Those professionals are running wings that meet racing series regulations. Many of them limits the dimension of the wing to a cross sectional area. They also only limit to a single airfoil element. Endplate lengths and width are also regulated. Wing width, length, and extension beyond certain dimension of the body are also regulated. Your statement regarding the downforce of my wing being too overwhelming is not true. The decrease in straight performance will be overshadowed by the much faster cornering and braking potential.

[lolersk8ter]

Anyways, rather than adding a giant wing at the back, which could potentially cause understeer, here are some alternatives

Widebody kit to increase tread and width for better cornering
lowered center of gravity(low seat rails, weight reduction on hood, trunk, roof, door, coilovers, etc)
add front canards and rear wing, maybe vortex generator

I'm sure you can get better skidpad test result with these mods.

Currently, the market is already saturated with products like those you've mentioned, and many of them do a great job at those already, the only thing I disagree on the list are those that affect aerodynamics. What I'm creating here is something that does not exist yet. It is the highest level performance mod one can make regarding to aerodynamics. However, in the list you've made, I feel suspension can be improved vastly—it is something I have a huge interest in investing into once I have the aerodynamics sector secured.

As a note, currently this is just the wing. But the full aero package will be completed too, including splitter/bumper, undertray, diffuser/bumper, sideskirt, and hood(for turbo application). Once that is all completed, I will create a comparison between a fully stock FRS to another with just my aero mods. The hard results will be eye opening for many.

Also, its true that this will cause the car to have more of an understeer feeling. But in the end, the result in lap times will still be faster, that is the goal. Driving style will need to changed to accommodate this. It is impossible to enter a car with downforce enhancement, and drive it the same as a neutral car.

[Timpo]

@tofu1413
I chose the design of my mount because of how the forces are applied to the trunk lid. This will provide a solid anchoring point for the loads the wing will output. The rocket bunny mount works fine for a the rocket bunny wing or similar wing, since it provides very little downforce. I won't be doing the FXX K's wing style. It does not nearly produce as much downforce as my current design.

@BoostedBB6
Your statement is not true. Even on a completely stock vehicle, a comparison of lap times will reveal that the one equipped with this wing will be faster. The immediate increase in cornering and braking potential overshadows the lack of ideal suspension components and power output to overcome the drag. The only scenario I imagine this wing would perform worse is if comparison was made on Le Sarthe. A car with improved suspension would definitely improve the synergy my wing has to offer.
I have accommodated the use of this wing on street use. When it is set at 0° it produces no downforce at all, and only very little drag. Regarding the balance, with downforce enhancement on any car, the load distribution at speed is always changing, but one thing in common is it will always be more rearward bias. It is important to remember that driving a car like this requires different inputs to the car's control. There will still be a net downforce across the whole car, allowing you to take the same turns you are used to, easier, and even faster.

@Timpo
This design is the way it is because it nets the highest amount of downforce. Other considerations for this design are my manufacturer's and supplier's limitation. I have many more ideas for future designs. The longer endplates allows better flow dynamics on this wing. They won't be heavy at all. They will be made of carbon fiber foam core sandwich. Extremely light and high in strength. The design of my endplate allows the best suppression of vortex generation, therefore increasing downforce and reducing drag. The length allows more downforce overall.
Those professionals are running wings that meet racing series regulations. Many of them limits the dimension of the wing to a cross sectional area. They also only limit to a single airfoil element. Endplate lengths and width are also regulated. Wing width, length, and extension beyond certain dimension of the body are also regulated. Your statement regarding the downforce of my wing being too overwhelming is not true. The decrease in straight performance will be overshadowed by the much faster cornering and braking potential.
How does it increase braking performance? By adding drag? something like 90+% of braking performance comes from front wheel, I don't know rear-biased setting is going to be good idea? Cornering performance or rear grip may be increased, but added understeer characteristics may be compensate for that. But I know you said you're going to offer it as a complete package so it may not be an issue.

I don't know if this is going to be street legal? Most province or state will not allow rear wing that is wider than car width or increase the rear overhang.
I understand that it may be too difficult for you to make it completely street legal, but I'm sure many of your customers would expect you to design something that doesn't catch immediate police attention. Because that wing looks like it's begging for VI.

As far as I know, most GT or FIA races do not regulate angle of attack itself, they do have regulations on planform, mounting height, width, shape of Zone F or Zone R, but you can mount in any angle you like.
http://www.24h-lemans.com/wpphpFichiers/1/1/ressources/Pdf/2015/24-heures-du-mans/regulations/2015-technical-regulations-lm-gte.pdf

Again, I'm not an engineer and just an average joe, you know more stuff that I do so you might prove me wrong once the product is done and that wing may perform well but at this point, I'm not that convinced..

[BoostedBB6]

Equipping aero pieces to a stock car with NOTHING done to it will aid in nothing but slowing it down.
The down force is generated from the drag of the aero against the air passing over it. You take a bone stock FRS, equip it with a wing that produces down force (of which you need to be going at a decent speed to generate any usable down force) you will see nothing more than a reduction of speed and slower lap times.
You have just increased drag on the car without increasing the mechanical grip between the car and the road. If it had some stickier tires to utilise the additional down force and allow it to corner faster (Prius tires are crap.....and the FRS has then in stock trim).

So I say it again, equipping this wing to a bone stock car (FRS/BRZ) will do nothing but slow it down. The mechanical grip can be overcome in stock form, adding down force where the limits are already exceeded will result in nothing more than a cool looking car running around a track slower. Slap some sticky tires on and it becomes a different story.

Regardless if the car has the wing set a 0 degrees, it will degrade performance on a stock car. The added weight and wind resistance will reduce the cars performance and fuel mileage. The only people who will utilize something like this wing (other than for looks) are track people who have allowed for more mechanical grip than stock and want to increase there corner speeds.

[BoostedBB6]

How does it increase braking performance? By adding drag? something like 90+% of braking performance comes from front wheel, I don't know rear-biased setting is going to be good idea? Cornering performance or rear grip may be increased, but added understeer characteristics may be compensate for that. But I know you said you're going to offer it as a complete package so it may not be an issue.

I don't know if this is going to be street legal? Most province or state will not allow rear wing that is wider than car width or increase the rear overhang.
I understand that it may be too difficult for you to make it completely street legal, but I'm sure many of your customers would expect you to design something that doesn't catch immediate police attention. Because that wing looks like it's begging for VI.

As far as I know, most GT or FIA races do not regulate angle of attack itself, they do have regulations on planform, mounting height, width, shape of Zone F or Zone R, but you can mount in any angle you like.
http://www.24h-lemans.com/wpphpFichiers/1/1/ressources/Pdf/2015/24-heures-du-mans/regulations/2015-technical-regulations-lm-gte.pdf

Again, I'm not an engineer and just an average joe, you know more stuff that I do so you might prove me wrong once the product is done and that wing may perform well but at this point, I'm not that convinced..

The braking force is potentially increased due to increased downward loads created by the wing in high speed corners (not a place where many do braking tho as it will effect the car in a negative way to be braking hard enough to utilized the down force in a corner).

Again, this is only applicable to a car on a race track with ideal set-up as the grip potential of stock tires is already exceeded with the car completely stock.

[Timpo]

Currently, the market is already saturated with products like those you've mentioned, and many of them do a great job at those already, the only thing I disagree on the list are those that affect aerodynamics. What I'm creating here is something that does not exist yet. It is the highest level performance mod one can make regarding to aerodynamics. However, in the list you've made, I feel suspension can be improved vastly—it is something I have a huge interest in investing into once I have the aerodynamics sector secured.

As a note, currently this is just the wing. But the full aero package will be completed too, including splitter/bumper, undertray, diffuser/bumper, sideskirt, and hood(for turbo application). Once that is all completed, I will create a comparison between a fully stock FRS to another with just my aero mods. The hard results will be eye opening for many.

Also, its true that this will cause the car to have more of an understeer feeling. But in the end, the result in lap times will still be faster, that is the goal. Driving style will need to changed to accommodate this. It is impossible to enter a car with downforce enhancement, and drive it the same as a neutral car.
I don't know man, it's just that I read all the tuners articles all the time and nobody ever came up with an idea like you have.

Japanese tuners go to Suzuka and Tsukuba Circuit.
American tuners go to Willow Spring and Laguna Seca.

Those Japanese and American tuners are fighting hard to come up with the best possible laptime setting for their street tuned cars.
They develop their own suspension, engine components, wheels, aerodynamic devices, everything.

If your theory is that amazing, I don't know why nobody has come up with the idea until now.

[BoostedBB6]

Stock FRS is around 14lb/hp. Simply adding the additional weight of all that aero parts at around 200lbs brings it to 15lb/hp, then you are going to significantly change the dc of the car which will again reduce its lb/hp figure and this is simply talking about a static car. Once you have the aero loads on the car everything will increase exceps the mechanical power and grip of the car.

Simply adding aero will not make a car faster, other areas need to be taken into account. The stock suspension is not designed to be loaded in the ways additional aero will load them. The stock tires will not handle the load properly. As you said, it will change how the car drives, and in a case with full aero on a stock car it will not improve the car.

The addition of the aero, with proper suspension setup and sticky tires may yield faster times on a very technical course, but without adding power to overcome the increased weight, stain and cd the car will simply become slower.

No insult intended, but there are companies that do this for a living....this is all they do. There is a balance between it all, adding aero to a car will not make it faster. Its like saying adding big brakes will stop a car sooner. Without the supporting modifications (tires that will allow you to go beyond the stock tires grip) you will gain nothing from getting bigger brakes....in fact you will become slower as you have more weight to move around and slow down.

[Timpo]

The braking force is potentially increased due to increased downward loads created by the wing in high speed corners (not a place where many do braking tho as it will effect the car in a negative way to be braking hard enough to utilized the down force in a corner).

Again, this is only applicable to a car on a race track with ideal set-up as the grip potential of stock tires is already exceeded with the car completely stock.

For added braking performance on FRS, I'd take TRD big brake kit and maybe Advan Neova or some high grip tires. Thank you very much. http://www.autoguide.com/blog/wp-content/uploads//2014/07/Scion-FRS-TRD-Project-Car-main.jpg

[Timpo]

Stock FRS is around 14lb/hp. Simply adding the additional weight of all that aero parts at around 200lbs brings it to 15lb/hp, then you are going to significantly change the dc of the car which will again reduce its lb/hp figure and this is simply talking about a static car. Once you have the aero loads on the car everything will increase exceps the mechanical power and grip of the car.

Simply adding aero will not make a car faster, other areas need to be taken into account. The stock suspension is not designed to be loaded in the ways additional aero will load them. The stock tires will not handle the load properly. As you said, it will change how the car drives, and in a case with full aero on a stock car it will not improve the car.

The addition of the aero, with proper suspension setup and sticky tires may yield faster times on a very technical course, but without adding power to overcome the increased weight, stain and cd the car will simply become slower.

No insult intended, but there are companies that do this for a living....this is all they do. There is a balance between it all, adding aero to a car will not make it faster. Its like saying adding big brakes will stop a car sooner. Without the supporting modifications (tires that will allow you to go beyond the stock tires grip) you will gain nothing from getting bigger brakes....in fact you will become slower as you have more weight to move around and slow down.

actually, if you engineer it right, sometimes you can gain significant top speed.
Shelby Daytona was 30mph faster than Shelby Cobra just because of aerodynamic efficiency.
https://rantonthiscar.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/daytonalmedition_04.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1m9VONeM14

SPOON took this idea and put it on S2000, and it worked very well.
??????? PHILOSOPHY (http://www.spoonsports.jp/philosophy06.html)
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/207/456508542_57d07045c7.jpg

Although they were not available in North America, Mazda had this car called Roadster Coupe in Japan. Same idea.
http://cdn.mkimg.carview.co.jp/minkara/userstorage/000/002/589/508/da741d0883.jpg
http://www.roadster194.com/DSCF0001.JPG

But still, nobody does that giant wing.

[hud 91gt]

For once I actually agree with Timpo. I have a basic, but limited knowledge of aerodynamics. But his points are correct. The drag created is huge. The amount of drag reduced, and the "lift", or thrust created by the end pieces are are not proportional. This effect may not be seen on the Lower Mainlands Race Track, as the speeds are lower, but I do believe it will hurt performance in the top end. But pretty cool to design something your interested in, for school. Keep it up!

[Timpo]

I have a basic, but limited knowledge of aerodynamics. But his points are correct. The drag created is huge. The amount of drag reduced, and the "lift", or thrust created by the end pieces are are not proportional.
yeah I'm wondering what's the lift to drag ratio after installing that giant wing on the FRS/BRZ?
Does OP realize that FRS has little torque with poor towing capacity...it better not be getting 1000+lbs of drag

Most BONE STOCK street cars have more drag than downforce, as an engineer, he better be making more downforce than drag.

Mazda RX-7 FD

Lift:
266 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 322 lbs. of drag
Aero. Balance @ 150 mph:
F: 177 lbs.
R: 89 lbs.

Lift-to-drag ratio: .826:1
Coefficient of drag: .29
Coefficient of lift, total: .24
Reference area: 1.79 m^2

Mazda RX-7 R2 FD

Lift:
199 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 344 lbs. of drag
Aero. Balance @ 150 mph:
F: 110 lbs.
R: 89 lbs.

Lift-to-drag ratio: .578:1
Coefficient of drag: .31
Coefficient of lift, total: .18
Reference area: 1.79 m^2

Ferrari 360 Modena

Downforce:
294 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 400 lbs. of drag
424 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 576 lbs. of drag
Lift-to-drag ratio: .73:1
Coefficient of drag: .34 (factory claim)
Coefficient of lift: -.25 (factory claim)
Reference area: 1.9 meters square


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now look at some of the modified cars/race cars


1997 McLaren GTR Long-Tail Downforce:
1234 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 561 lbs. of drag
1776 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 807 lbs. of drag
2193 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 997 lbs. of drag
Lift-to-drag ratio: 2.2:1

1999 Toyota GT-One Downforce:
1980 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 596 lbs. of drag
2851 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 859 lbs. of drag
3520 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 1060 lbs. of drag
Lift-to-drag ratio: 3.32:1

1991 Sauber Mercedes-Benz C291 Downforce:
3476 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 695 lbs. of drag
5005 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 1001 lbs. of drag
6179 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 1236 lbs. of drag
Lift-to-drag ratio: 5:1

1993 Joest-Porsche 962
High downforce configuration:
Max L/D:
2971 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 675 lbs. of drag
4278 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 972 lbs. of drag
5281 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 1200 lbs. drag

Aero. Balance @ 200 mph:
F: 1796 lbs. (34%)
R: 3485 lbs.

Lift-to-drag ratio: 4.40:1
Coefficient of lift: -2.655
Reference area: 1.806 meters square

Max Downforce:
3141 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 785 lbs. of drag
4523 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 1131 lbs. of drag
5584 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 1396 lbs. drag

Aero. Balance @ 200 mph:
F: 1619 lbs. (29%)
R: 3965 lbs.

Lift-to-drag ratio: 4.00:1
Coefficient of lift: -2.8
Reference area: 1.806 meters square

Source: Mulsanne's Corner: Race Car Aerodynamics Database (http://www.mulsannescorner.com/data.html)

[lolersk8ter]

There's just one too many points laid out too fast in front of me right now to address. I foresee that I'd be writing one response after another, as I answer questions with points that can be questioned upon thereafter. All I can say is, some statements you guys are stating of how aerodynamics, tire dynamics, and braking dynamics work are not true. It is beyond the grasp of a forum post to lay down all the facts of how these dynamics work. My knowledge and understanding of how the many components in a vehicle work come 2 years worth of non-stop reading and study of many textbooks, scholar articles, and researches that the current engineers utilize to build racing cars. At a time before all this, I thought that a wing of this magnitude too would be impractical, but now, I disagree with my preconceived notion.

My wing will not be performing at a level where it overcomes the specs of the OEM car. Live test results of the wing will show positive, eye-opening results to everyone, I guarantee it.

[BrownBear]

Wow dude respect. You had a dream and made it come true. Hit me up when you start doing dc5s. I'll buy a wing

[white rocket]

Congrats for pursuing your dream! buuuuuuuut.......I have some questions.

Are you saying that you are creating a wing/spoiler specifically for a bone stock FRS/BRZ that will instantly improve lap times over a bone stock FRS/BRZ without a wing/spoiler under the same conditions? In terms of testing, was or will this be done on a bone stock FRS/BRZ or a modified one? A bone stock car is much different than the same car after it's been heavily modified so it's hard to paint them with the same brush. Besides, a wing like that on a bone stock car would look retarded as fuck. Usually aero parts are used in conjunction with one another so I'm thinking a wing like your design is better suited for a heavily modified/aero'd vehicle, not a stock one. What aspect of your design makes it superior to what is currently available? What's the gimmick basically? 'cause without something to differentiate you from the pack it'll be a tough sell. Not hating, just sayin'.

My $0.02.......I would be shocked if you showed me back to back comparisons on a bone stock FRS/BRZ at the same track, on the same day, with and without the wing and laps times improved while the wing was equipped. If I'm wrong, I'll buy you a Coke. :tipshat:

[iHeat]

Sorry to pop your bubble but planes use their wings to create lift, race cars use theirs to create downforce. That means that, theoretically, at high speeds they could drive upside down. I don't see the point of a FRS needing one as a OEM FRS can't even reach speeds that are capable of doing so.

[Timpo]

Besides, a wing like that on a bone stock car would look retarded as fuck.

yea gigantic wings sure have existed already, some of them wider than stock body, but they were heavily modified.
simply putting gigantic wing on a bone stock car doesn't make much sense.

http://nightshift.opal.ne.jp/jp8/subaruj140209.jpg
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/images/large/88-2.jpg
http://www.b-otaku.com/diary-23/diary130317-2.jpg
http://dupfdpeuykf2f.cloudfront.net/uploads/article/thumbnail/815/maxresdefault__12_.jpg
http://www.zeal-pro.com/blog/upload/772517a31678dcf4.jpg
http://cdn.mkimg.carview.co.jp/minkara/photo/000/002/763/371/2763371/p8.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BQPp91Bhzss/U7-Ia_HMjDI/AAAAAAAAMQ8/9Ex3Go2pyaM/s1600/Lotus-Exige-Time-Attack-race-car-01.jpg
http://cdn.mkimg.carview.co.jp/minkara/userstorage/000/001/662/314/6c7ed71338.jpg
http://cdn.mkimg.carview.co.jp/minkara/userstorage/000/005/548/166/d341a7c7e4.jpg
http://cdn.mkimg.carview.co.jp/minkara/photo/000/003/863/730/3863730/p5.jpg
http://fanblogs.jp/kurumaasobi/file/jzx30.jpg

What aspect of your design makes it superior to what is currently available? What's the gimmick basically? 'cause without something to differentiate you from the pack it'll be a tough sell. Not hating, just sayin'.

yeah that's what I was thinking too... other than the gigantic size, it's nothing new

[Timpo]

for a wing of that size, if you're looking for some innovations, I would at least make it active.

Bugatti Veyron, Porsche 911, Mitsubishi GTO, Toyota Supra(front lip), Lexus LFA, McLaren P1, etc....they all had active aero system.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MZVMQZS9TUg/UKJF-gB60rI/AAAAAAAALqo/DkUOMaRC2zo/s950/re+1.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qxWh3RyL7_c/UKJF_sfXLLI/AAAAAAAALqw/iOUq5s9B6PU/s950/re.jpg
http://www.carformance.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/motionactivad.jpg
http://www.carformance.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/motionactivad2.jpg

[Timpo]

Mitsubishi HSR II was awesome, it even had dual active rear wing so that you can steer with airflow and active front canards, lip too.

http://hooniverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/1989_Mitsubishi_HSR-II_concept_09.jpg
http://hooniverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/1989_Mitsubishi_HSR-II_concept_12.jpg

[inv4zn]

Timpo, for fuck's sake, you can stop.

There was an episode of Top Gear where JC was making fun of members of the "Ferrari Owner's Club" about how they know every minute detail of every Ferrari ever made, but they don't own one.

[Timpo]

Timpo, for fuck's sake, you can stop.


oh ok

http://cf.chucklesnetwork.com/items/1/2/2/0/4/9/original/you-mad-bro.jpg

[mos_skeeto]

I like to imagine Timpo having a folder in his My Documents called car pics and there is over a terabyte of pictures like above.

[BoostedBB6]

actually, if you engineer it right, sometimes you can gain significant top speed.
Shelby Daytona was 30mph faster than Shelby Cobra just because of aerodynamic efficiency.
https://rantonthiscar.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/daytonalmedition_04.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1m9VONeM14

SPOON took this idea and put it on S2000, and it worked very well.
??????? PHILOSOPHY (http://www.spoonsports.jp/philosophy06.html)
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/207/456508542_57d07045c7.jpg

Although they were not available in North America, Mazda had this car called Roadster Coupe in Japan. Same idea.
http://cdn.mkimg.carview.co.jp/minkara/userstorage/000/002/589/508/da741d0883.jpg
http://www.roadster194.com/DSCF0001.JPG

But still, nobody does that giant wing.

The reason for the increase in speed/performance was because of a smoother/less turbulent air flow over the car resulting in a lower drag coefficient. A wing will cause it to be higher no matter what you do.

[BoostedBB6]

My points stand. Bolting this wing, or any similar designed wing onto an FRS that is bone stock will gain no difference.
Leading minds in the world of racing will tell you the same thing. Real world vs ideas often differ.

Your wing on a stock FRS will only lead to slower lap times. Simple test for this would be taking the car to Mission Raceway. The only area where you would make any usable downforce would be 3/4 down the main straight where you don't need any downforce....infact you don't want any there. Once you get into the corners they are not fast enough to make use of the wing, so at that point it simply becomes more weight to carry around the track and cause more drag.

Another test you could do, drive down the highway and measure the increasing downforce on the rear of the car. At the same time measuring the increased lift at the front end of the car. Causing the rear of the car to squat with the increased downforce of this wing will cause the front to lift with will disturb the airflow over the car and to the wing as well as create lift from making the front end lighter and causing it to pitch up.

Now saw we are talking about a much faster track where you can retain more speed in the corners you would be able to generate more downforce. However with the vehicles limited power, added drag, added aero weight coupled with a now very light front end from the aero downforce....it simply will not work. These tests have been done with other wings on similar cars.....if it worked like this is would already be utilized by people wanting to lap faster ;)

[BoostedBB6]

Also worth mentioning, a wing design like that has a high stall characteristing with a car like the FRS unless you get is far above the roof line due to the air flow of the wing. If you were to step the wing down in the center (similar to a 3d wing you see so much of these days) you would see less stall and more usable downforce.

http://robrobinette.com/images/S2000/Aerodynamics/CFD_Miata_Wing_Flow.png
Perfect example of the stall that you will most likely see with this style of a wing on the FRS.

http://robrobinette.com/images/S2000/Aerodynamics/Wing.jpg
Dropping the center section down like they do with these style wings will fix that issue.

Also, the use of the large side plates will help with the low pressure area and keep things planted. They tent to look silly but they are functional in that regard.

[Timpo]

^ yeah if it's that easy to stall, that's like carrying a giant airbrake all the time.
if wind ever gust from unintended direction that would also cause some problem.

[Timpo]

The reason for the increase in speed/performance was because of a smoother/less turbulent air flow over the car resulting in a lower drag coefficient. A wing will cause it to be higher no matter what you do.

well decreased slip steam too, Shelby Cobra's windshield was creating huge slipstream and causing this air brake effect.

[Timpo]

With my completely amateur engineering knowledge, prejudice and very limited business/marketing background, here's my summary.

-Car enthusiasts do care about their cars' appearance. Your wing needs to be aesthetically pleasing.
-That wing is begging for VI when driven on the road.
-Gigantic wings have existed in the past. Not many people put that on their cars. Either due to functionality(extreme drag) or appearance.
-Who would put that on completely bone stock car? I've seen people lowering by 0.5-1.0 inch, get a lip and very subtle exhaust, but I have never seen anyone getting a big rear wing on a stock car.
-This product is not proven. Theory is one thing, but real world is another. Soichiro Honda(founder of Honda) came up with so many theories that are supposed to work, but something always different in the real world. Same as other tuners.
-At this point, from my amateur perception, theory isn't even looking that good due to induced drag and stall characteristics.
-We are yet to the theoretical numbers. What's the Cd? Drag/Lift ratio? at what wind speed? How durable is it? if it's creating huge downforce, can it sustain? What's the Vne airspeed?
-If there's actually something proprietary about this product, you patent it, and do a licensing deal with major tuners, professional race teams and race chassis/body manufactures.

https://i.imgflip.com/hojk4.jpg

[v67gsr]

Funny to read this thread. So many people with so little knowledge criticizing someone else idea.

I bet most nay sayer have never test any aero parts themselfves.

[Timpo]

Funny to read this thread. So many people with so little knowledge criticizing someone else idea.

I bet most nay sayer have never test any aero parts themselfves.
The idea of big wing has existed.

Did OP actually test the wing himself? As far as I know he doesn't even have a prototype.

https://i.imgflip.com/holyt.jpg

[v67gsr]

Did OP actually test the wing himself? As far as I know he doesn't even have a prototype.


Did you? My guess is you might have. I also think wing is all you have tested.

OP mentioned the wing is only part of a complete aero package.

[hud 91gt]

Timpo, it's a school project. Give it time. Personally other then personal opinion with my few aerodynamics courses i've taken in the past it seems it would create plenty of downforce. Whether or not it will increase/decrease his lap times is going to be pure trial and error.

The only thing keeping me very skeptical is the science of aerodynamics is not new. People have been racing cars for over 100 years, with few wings of this design. Yes, regulations may regulate the size etc in racing events. I don't know. But that doesn't stop a street legal vehicle manufacturer to design such a product for a "street car".

Interested to see the outcome.

[jing]

http://photos.motoiq.com/MotoIQ/Project-Cars/Project-FRS/i-f2z86rv/0/L/JEF_8044-L.jpg

[lolersk8ter]

With my completely amateur engineering knowledge, prejudice and very limited business/marketing background, here's my summary.

-Car enthusiasts do care about their cars' appearance. Your wing needs to be aesthetically pleasing.
-That wing is begging for VI when driven on the road.
-Gigantic wings have existed in the past. Not many people put that on their cars. Either due to functionality(extreme drag) or appearance.
-Who would put that on completely bone stock car? I've seen people lowering by 0.5-1.0 inch, get a lip and very subtle exhaust, but I have never seen anyone getting a big rear wing on a stock car.
-This product is not proven. Theory is one thing, but real world is another. Soichiro Honda(founder of Honda) came up with so many theories that are supposed to work, but something always different in the real world. Same as other tuners.
-At this point, from my amateur perception, theory isn't even looking that good due to induced drag and stall characteristics.
-We are yet to the theoretical numbers. What's the Cd? Drag/Lift ratio? at what wind speed? How durable is it? if it's creating huge downforce, can it sustain? What's the Vne airspeed?
-If there's actually something proprietary about this product, you patent it, and do a licensing deal with major tuners, professional race teams and race chassis/body manufactures.


-Appearance is a subjective manner. Semantically, I find beauty and art of automotive components that functions well. It is not the popular opinion, but there are those who find functionality and purpose, to be art.

-Like many aftermarket parts we put on our vehicles, manufacturers usually state it is not their liability, 'For off road use only'. It is up to the discretion of the user to exercise the appropriate decision.

-One point I have stirred up is, the addition of my wing onto a stock vehicle. While I did not intentionally design this for a stock vehicle, I can still guarantee and will prove that my wing will improve lap-times. I am creating a product and listing out the specs and what it can be done with it, but it is up to the customer's imagination to decide what to do with it, even if it's for cosmetic reasons.

-CFD & Live testing is something that will take place. The stage I am at right now is beyond mere theories. The equipment I've used to result in what I have so far are very accurate, and are the same equipment used by some OEM car manufacturers, aftermarket manufacturers, and racing teams.

-My wing/mount does not stall similarly to the Miata example shown. My wing resembling or being similar to another does not mean it will perform the same way. Drag being produced by my wing will be overshadowed when one realizes the huge benefits the downforce will provide in reducing lap-times. You give up straight away time, for exponentially better cornering and braking times.

-I am missing the proper 3D model to perform the CFD with the car. That has not taken place yet.

-There are many different business models out there. I've built mine differently than the one you've stated.

[meme405]

I like to imagine Timpo having a folder in his My Documents called car pics and there is over a terabyte of pictures like above.

No it's actually worse then that, because if you look at the pictures they are all linked to individual websites, not stored on his photobucket.

So that means he either has a MASSIVE library of bookmarks on his computer, or he fucking just googles all this crap every time he needs to make his point.

[Timpo]

-Appearance is a subjective manner. Semantically, I find beauty and art of automotive components that functions well. It is not the popular opinion, but there are those who find functionality and purpose, to be art.

-Like many aftermarket parts we put on our vehicles, manufacturers usually state it is not their liability, 'For off road use only'. It is up to the discretion of the user to exercise the appropriate decision.

-One point I have stirred up is, the addition of my wing onto a stock vehicle. While I did not intentionally design this for a stock vehicle, I can still guarantee and will prove that my wing will improve lap-times. I am creating a product and listing out the specs and what it can be done with it, but it is up to the customer's imagination to decide what to do with it, even if it's for cosmetic reasons.

-CFD & Live testing is something that will take place. The stage I am at right now is beyond mere theories. The equipment I've used to result in what I have so far are very accurate, and are the same equipment used by some OEM car manufacturers, aftermarket manufacturers, and racing teams.

-My wing/mount does not stall similarly to the Miata example shown. My wing resembling or being similar to another does not mean it will perform the same way. Drag being produced by my wing will be overshadowed when one realizes the huge benefits the downforce will provide in reducing lap-times. You give up straight away time, for exponentially better cornering and braking times.

-I am missing the proper 3D model to perform the CFD with the car. That has not taken place yet.

-There are many different business models out there. I've built mine differently than the one you've stated.

OK, if you're missing the CFD, that's a problem. Isn't that like a first thing engineers take into account?
TRD body kit shown below are done by career engineers, they have done CFD, Navier Stokes, all the stuff I don't even understand, as well as multiple trials and errors.

http://img.response.jp/imgs/thumb_h/768535.jpg
http://img.response.jp/imgs/zoom/768539.jpg

I understand that appearance is a subjective thing however I do find F1, LeMans 24, Super GT, all those machines look amazing.
If you put a F1 wing on top of bone stock FRS? that may look funny.

Other than you telling us you went to school and studied aerodynamics, you haven't even showed us what your calculations and expected improvement on grip, skidpad, etc. You told us you simply can't explain it just because it takes too long. While that may be true, you could give us some very basic specifications like how many g of skidpad or how much % of loss of topspeed, how many lbs of downforce and drag @ how many km/h(or mph or knots) of windspeed, etc.

You're keep saying that your wing will improve laptime even on bone stock car, but by how much and on what race circuits do you have in mind? Because if you put a TRD GT wing on bone stock FRS, that might improve your laptime too. But the question is, is your gigantic wing superior to the TRD wing despite a huge drag on small torque vehicle like FRS. It doesn't even have to be TRD wing, but how is your wing fundamentally that much different than the other big wings on the market. Don't just say it can give you more downforce and drag just because you made it bigger...and not to mention, these things are not even proven.

Again, I do not believe this works, once the product is done, you might prove me wrong and I might look like a retard in the end. But it really makes me wonder why other engineers, like hundreds and thousands of engineers around the world, didn't think about making wings bigger and give more angle of attack if that's gonna give you that much of benefits.

https://i.imgflip.com/hovva.jpg

[sekin67835]

LOL the armchair GMs are out in full force. Good job OP for trying. Let us know when u got results

[lolersk8ter]

@Timpo

I have yet to perform experimentation of the wing on the FRS. I've done experimenting on the wing on its own, and the wing on another vehicle. Because of that, I can confidently keep saying my wing will improve laptimes and that it will perform better than competitors—even without the more direct evidence of live-testing and CFD with the FRS. The flow dynamics and interaction of the wing from that test can be translated and adopted as a starting ground for the mount and wing placement you see here now. The mount/placement of the wing on the car is not finalized yet.

TRD had more than just improved lap-time performance in mind when they designed their product. They follow a business model different than mine. It does perform, but I know that mine will perform way much better.

I have not laid out the full spec of the wing and the expected performance it has on the FRS, because I have not reached that stage yet. It is important to keep in mind that this is still a product under development. I do request you wait then, as your particular questions can only be confidently answered once live testing has taken place.

There aren't many popular companies that make the same big wings with mounts that accommodate each vehicle design, or companies that experiment on the vehicles they advertise to be applied to. I even see many of the big wing companies are majorly flawed in designing and optimizing mounts, placement of their wings, etc. Many of the wing's you see on those hill-climb and time-trial cars are custom made and are not produced in batches for sale. Regarding their popularity, maybe they do not go through the same marketing and advertising strategy that I have in store. I wish that I'll reach the same branding level as APR or Voltex, and prove that my products outperforms theirs.

[jasonturbo]

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/xen/index.php?attachments/stupid-thread-gif.245217/

[em1.ac]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-reD5LXzUqi8/VGIzpnZ2mSI/AAAAAAAAgqU/GMpq8z1aSCw/s1600/sorre%2BIm%2Blate%2Bhad%2Bto%2Bget%2Benough%2Bpopc orn%2Bfor%2Ball%2Bof%2Bus.jpg

[SpuGen]

I don't even want to bother getting involved in this thread.. but Timpo makes a valid point.

[BoostedBB6]

well decreased slip steam too, Shelby Cobra's windshield was creating huge slipstream and causing this air brake effect.

......slip stream would be referring to the air behind the car that another car would use ton draft off of. The coefficient of drag refers to any drag generated by the car passing through the air. So raking the wind shield more dropped the CD and made the car faster.

[BoostedBB6]

@Timpo

I have yet to perform experimentation of the wing on the FRS. I've done experimenting on the wing on its own, and the wing on another vehicle. Because of that, I can confidently keep saying my wing will improve laptimes and that it will perform better than competitors—even without the more direct evidence of live-testing and CFD with the FRS. The flow dynamics and interaction of the wing from that test can be translated and adopted as a starting ground for the mount and wing placement you see here now. The mount/placement of the wing on the car is not finalized yet.

TRD had more than just improved lap-time performance in mind when they designed their product. They follow a business model different than mine. It does perform, but I know that mine will perform way much better.

I have not laid out the full spec of the wing and the expected performance it has on the FRS, because I have not reached that stage yet. It is important to keep in mind that this is still a product under development. I do request you wait then, as your particular questions can only be confidently answered once live testing has taken place.

There aren't many popular companies that make the same big wings with mounts that accommodate each vehicle design, or companies that experiment on the vehicles they advertise to be applied to. I even see many of the big wing companies are majorly flawed in designing and optimizing mounts, placement of their wings, etc. Many of the wing's you see on those hill-climb and time-trial cars are custom made and are not produced in batches for sale. Regarding their popularity, maybe they do not go through the same marketing and advertising strategy that I have in store. I wish that I'll reach the same branding level as APR or Voltex, and prove that my products outperforms theirs.

:suspicious:

So far you have 0 proof of anything, simply your theory of how it should work. The proof is in the pudding.
Build it, show me wind tunnel testing, show me corner side load charts that indicate the wing is producing down force and not flexing. Until you have physical data to back anything your claiming you will be stuck with a tone of holes in the design and nothing more than an idea.

I look forward to seeing the results but right off the bat I know its not going to perform in the way you are expecting from my first hand experience with these types of things. It needs work, and that work can only be done with proper testing to show the results, until then you have a very large boat anchor slowing the car down.

[Timpo]

......slip stream would be referring to the air behind the car that another car would use ton draft off of. The coefficient of drag refers to any drag generated by the car passing through the air. So raking the wind shield more dropped the CD and made the car faster.

yeah but slipstream does pull the car back though, which you don't want.
you want your airflow to go through the car as smoothly as possible instead of making slipstream(low air pressure) behind and causing it do pull back the car.

[lolersk8ter]

http://ehealthwoman.com/apple/images/9.gifwow, can you make one for a miata ?? i wana improve my laptime aswellhttp://ehealthwoman.com/apple/images/34.gif

Yes I can! But at this moment, I am focusing on the FRS chassis. I'll be creating a website soon, you'll be able to stay tuned for latest updates and development for other chassis.