Longfellow,
You have a good point. A wing on the front (like some Lamborghinis) would provide some grip on the front............when a person puts the wing on the back of a FWD, they are probably expressing their individuality,
much the same as the mods done to your car express Longfellow's individuality.-Bob

Depending on the shape, a wing on the back will also fool the airstream into believing the car is longer, and may get better gas mileage from the aerodynamics.

 

I was talking about the ''double deck metal wings'' that look like something off a race car(but are not functional). Those do nothing but cause drag. The best way to create usuable down force on a car is to lower it to within an inch or lower of the ground and make the bottom of the car completly flat,(usually using carbon fiber) which in turn creates the opposite effect of a wing and literally sucks the car to the ground because of the of a negative pressure build up under the car. But thats not something for street driving, and neither are stupendiously large wings.

you dont need a wing on the front to make down force either, their are other ways to gain 'downforce' than 'wings'

They can express their individuality all they want, It serves no purpose and I reserve the right to voice my opionion on how I think its completly stupid. Other then being a waste of money and wanting to 'look' cool there is no reason to even think about installing one on a car. Especially a street car.

Anyways the wing/rice comment was in reference to some ones comment about larger body panels and extending the fenders to make the car look lower, which is the wrong way to do it. You want a low car, lower it using the correct parts. I.E altering suspension/wheels.

I know there are laws about cars needing to adhear to a certian ride height minimum, but I never hear about it being inforced.

 

im confused?

 

Bob, longfellow and i were joking about the wings . . . not really a new thread worthy post. It was in reply to me making a joke about the whole not lowering but making it look lowered thread giving the overly awsome ideas of lowering body pannels (also were jokes hopefully longfellow noticed that )

note: just noticed longfellow=dan. i am a dan as well so that will be easy to remember

 

/fail

 

Your insightful contributions (along with your huge sig) are much appreciated in this thread.

I think most front wings would look gay, but mostly because we're not used to seeing them and it would be hard to incorporate them into most modern cars, especially since you dont even see them on racing cars. What I've noticed is that most race cars prefer to get their downforce from splitters, lips, etc. in the front, and probably just as much from having a low car with a flat bottom. Also, it would be probably be especially useless on a road car.

As far as gas mileage, theres no way to tell other than half decent aerodynamic testing such as wind tunnel testing. Vortex generators a la Evo 8/9 are functional obviously, but I believe they more efficiently direct air over the large wing in the back to more effectively use it.

Getting better gas mileage from aerodynamics is also an incredibly hard thing to do when you dont have a reliable, reputable testing source. I do know that my car has a .32 coefficient, whereas without the wing its .33 and the later, different wing and front yield a .34 coefficient. I'd say in the real world, the difference would be negligible and inconsistent.

 

ibtl

 

hahaa he said STUPENDOUS. i think barney said that

 

Great discussion, let's keep it going.
Keep the BS out of here.

I will tell you from experience too much splitter up front and not enough spoiler out back makes braking a scary experience... even on a fwd car, on the track of course.

 

wow its like pit road over here