I hope that this book explains the usefulness of putting giant spoilers on front wheel drive cars to all idiots who continue to do so. I also hope that it explains the difference between a real exhaust system, and a fart pipe. Kids these days are really, really, really stupid, it seems (either that, or I'm getting old).
And don't forget, the apparently irresistibile desire to put on tires that are either far too small or far too tall to work safely and effectively...like those tiny wide tires on the "slammed" cars, or the equally ridiculous, center-of-gravity raising 20 and 22 inch tires.
If you put lower profile tires on a bigger rim, you keep the same diameter and you don't raise your center of gravity.
But very low profile tires are only useful on a glass smooth track, on everyday roads they have a lot less traction because they don't follow the bumps on the road, so it gives you a very inneficient bumpy ride. Every inch more of contact patch you have with a wider tire is not useful if the tire is too rigid and bounces off the asphalt.
Not big on physics, huh? Spoilers (if they work correctly) create downforce at very high speeds. At those speeds, it doesn't matter WHICH wheels are moving you from a start. Downforce to the rear wheels is always benificial at a track. Think about it a little, m'kay?
Well, I dunno how drifting is scored (I presume there is an element of subjective judging in addition to timing), but I'd call it a kind of constrained racing. There are many types of racing where there are requirements other than getting from the start to the finish as fast as possible.
Disclaimer: I'm a race car engineer. I make race cars go faster. It's my day job.
If we work under the assumption that the wing in question actually produces signifigant downforce (not a trivial assumption, given the typical aluminum extrusion pretending to be a wing from most rice shops) the download generated by the wing will be borne by all 4 tires.
Depending on a number of parameters, the rears may carry a larger share of that download, but the net effect will be increased normal force on the front tires, which in turn increases grip.
Now if our boy was smart enough to use a real airfoil on his wing, he was probably smart enough to fit a front airdam and splitter, which means he probably has way more FRONT downforce than rear, and is probably using the wing to help balance out a high-speed oversteer condition. On production-based cars, building front downforce is much easier than building rear downforce.
If we work under the assumption that the wing in question actually produces signifigant downforce (not a trivial assumption, given the typical aluminum extrusion pretending to be a wing from most rice shops)
the download generated by the wing will be borne by all 4 tires.
I heard the part about this being your day job, but you'll have to explain the physics of that specific part to me because that doesn't make sense. If the wing is on the rear deck of the car (behind the rear wheels), it is going to act as
Spoilers (if they work correctly) create downforce at very high speeds.
Yea, but most of the time, if the cars they are on were capable of reaching the speeds needed to produce any aerodynamic effect - the way the spoiler is mounted will cause the trunk deck to collapse. Think about that, mmmmkay?
You're all somewhat wrong. Spoilers create downforce at _any_ speeds, including 0 (more weight). It's only really appropriate at higher speeds though. An FWD car, while not up high on the list of "needs more downforce" (FWD cars usually understeer very terribly because the front wheels have so much force (and usually weight by design) on them), but any car will benefit from more downforce in the "able to stay on the road while turning" category.
So, when was the last time you saw a Civic, or any other family car that kids like to dress up, lose traction in the rear wheels? Living in a college town, I see lots and lots of Civics and Corollas every day, but never have I seen one lose traction in the rear, no matter how fast they were going.
When was the last time you needed 2 GHz to check your e-mail. When was the last time you needed a giant SUV to get a carton of milk? When was the last time you needed anything more than bare minimum to do anything?
Personally, I hang out with a different crowd of people that actually does race their cars (on tracks, not the street like assholes), and I've seen many a car kick out the rear end around a corner (FWD or otherwise).
The average joe doesn't need much more than bare minimum. But it's fun to go
I actually spun a FWD Mazda3 at a Rev It Up event. Caught me completely by surprise that FWD will spin when the driver was simply trying to go fast through a cone course.
A riced out civic once passed me at about 80 mph down a narrow residential side street. The back end moved a lot when the driver threw the car back into his lane. To this day, I'm still suprised he kept that thing under control. The old trees and parked cars on the side of the road would have made his life momentarily very, very painful.
I got caught off my guard when my FWD Probe started throwing it's rear end around when I was going around a corner, but then I WAS going 60, and on a dirt road. It suprised me because I always thought it was 'impossible' to lose rear traction on a FWD, but I'm glad I learned the easy way.
Ive seen my old lacer without a spoiler geting blowen across lanes on the freeway in gale force winds, and could feal most crosswinds hit the car, add a spoiler problem goes away, but no spoiler will be fine if your just driving yoru car to chuch down the street grandmar...
You're all somewhat wrong. Spoilers create downforce at _any_ speeds, including 0 (more weight). It's only really appropriate at higher speeds though. An FWD car, while not up high on the list of "needs more downforce" (FWD cars usually understeer very terribly because the front wheels have so much force (and usually weight by design) on them), but any car will benefit from more downforce in the "able to stay on the road while turning" category.
You're also wrong, by the way. A spoiler doesn't create any downforce. A wing is used to create downforce (negative lift, as the wing is exactly the same areofoil shape as you'd find on an airplane, except inverted). A spoiler simply "spoils" the lift generated by the inherent shape of a car. A car is roughly shaped like an aerofoil (rounded on top, flat on the bottom), and thus at higher speeds it tends to generate lift. It's certainly not enough for your car to actually fly, but it is enough to reduce traction necessary for handling and braking. By spoiling that aerofoil shape, a spoiler lessens the natural lift generated by the body shape of a car. For most non-racing applications, a spoiler is all you need, and in most cases you don't even need that (most factory spoilers are indeed cosmetic -- why is it that a Chevy Cavalier needs a spoiler, while a C6 Corvette doesn't?).
In a racing application, a simple spoiler is often not enough, however, and it doesn't really matter where your drive wheels are in that application. That's why you'll see touring cars like the Acura RSX or TSX, or the Mazda 6 with big wings in the Speed World Challenge races (and other touring car series). These are fully adjustable wings that generated downforce (the amount determined by the angle of attack, just as the amount of lift generated by an airplane is determined by its angle of attack). You simply do not need a big-ass wing like that outside of a full race car. That is why the ricers are silly for putting big ol' wings on their cars (well, aside from the facts that they suffer from "bigger is better" and "more is better" syndrome with huge and multi-level wings, and that 9 times out of 10 the wings they're buying are not fully adjustable, and that 10th time the wing isn't properly adjusted for the conditions).
And the difference between generating downforce and generating less upforce is . . . zip, zilch, zero, nada.
Not quite. You're correct about the net effect at "normal" speeds, but the way they approach it is completely different. A spoiler negates most (but not all) lift. You're never going to get a net downforce out of a spoiler, and you're always going to end up with some amount of positive lift. A wing generates an opposing force that cancels positive lift. Because it's generating its own force
Also, back in their time, these devices ran on double a's and triple a's and couldn't be recharged easily. They failed because of the 4-6 hour life, yes, but because not everyone had a battery recharger, and a quick means to recharge them was not available.
Not entirely correct. See the videos of the Mercedes CLK Le Mans cars from a few years back. One "took off" during practice. A second "took off" during the race and was caught on film. The car had a serious aerodynamic flaw that allowed it to briefly
There's a reason for the addition of the spoiler on later model year TTs.
Most probably there is a reason. However, (at least here in Europe), every owner of an original TT could get a free upgrade to the spoiler version. That was not the only thing changed: they also modified the suspension and a whole list of other things. Note that the spoiler that was *not* mandatory in the recall. If you wanted you could leave it out. Occasionally I see one without, but mostly all have spoilers. (The TT is a ve
The Audi TT's not that popular where I live. But then, it's the American south where domestics are still regarded very highly. I couldn't find an article about the exact study that I read, but here is another article that talks briefly about the lift phenomena of the two cars:
So it was interesting to since find that on the recently released 1.8 Turbo New Beetle, an auto-deploying lip spoiler is placed at the top of the rear window. It pops up at 150 km/h - obviously the generated lift was so bad that Vo
A spoiler simply "spoils" the lift generated by the inherent shape of a car.
Incorrect. [bodydynamicsracing.com] 'Spoilers' do generate downforce, which is why theri shape and size are tightly restricted in NASCAR. If you look at the GoodWrench [ultimatecarpage.com] C5 Corvette road car, it does need a big ass wing! Big ass wings generate more force at lower speeds than spoilers, but also more drag. The higher speeds that NASCAR runs in (as opposed to GT cars) don't require the surface area of a wing, therefore a spoiler is sufficient. But the GT
Yes, I agree - if the kid picks up some tools and actually does something, that's to be applauded. Too many times tho the kid just picks up his keys and drives it down to the "tuning shop" and has them do it. I'm all for modifying your car - but the props only roll out for those that do it or at least help out.
You're also wrong, by the way. A spoiler doesn't create any downforce
hmm... now either you're wrong, or the ride and handling Engineers at Lotus Cars are wrong.
When I went to drive the new Lotus Eixge around a track, then engineers first gave a slide show, giving the differences between the new model Lotus Elise, and the new Lotus Exige (which is based on the Elise).
The Elise has only a spolier, which is integrated into the body of the car. The Exige has a spoiler, sitting about 20cm above the rear
Most of the spoilers you see on street cars are flat horizontal -- there's no angle to them relative to the surface plane they're mounted on. Without angle, the spoilers, they do nothing. Well, that's not entirely true -- the leading edge will slow down the wind a bit, which will introduce an almost immesurable amount of drag/downforce -- but that is no more noticeable than the "downforce" of "more weight" provided by the spoiler. Negligible, and better achieved by other methods.
Oh, and I've driven FWD cars at Willow Springs -- you really have to make a big mistake to lose it on the back end. The RealTime Racing crew, which races Acuras and (recently) Spec Vs in the SPEED touring series, has a driver that described his setup as this (from memory): 'we make the car as loose as we possibly can, then keep the power down to make the car straight.'
In other words, downforce at the rear isn't really an issue, and in fact they work hard to keep the back end as loose as possible to help th
DogDude didn't relay a point, other than he's ignorant of why people put spoilers on front wheel cars (As if the answer is different than rear wheel cars).
No, a front wheel car is not in danger of doing a wheelie, but the wheelie bars do help keep the front wheels from lifting and losing traction.
From NHRA magazine (talking about the for-runner for the car pictured in the link)
Bergenholtz earned his nickname when he and his brother, Ron, reinvented the wheelie bar and then broke the 10-second benchmark in the quarter-mile. Wheelie bars are like car training wheels. They trail behind a dragster, preventing it from tipping over backwards on launch. The Bergenholtz brothers put wheelie bars on their '89 Honda CRX - a front-wheel-drive car, which, by definition, cannot wheelie. On a front-wheel-drive car, the (now slightly misnomered) wheelie bars shift the center of gravity forward. They prevent the rear shocks from compressing at launch. This is, in fact, genius in its simplicity: Gain traction by planting the front end more firmly on the tarmac.
Moral of the story? When someone complains he doesn't see a reason for something, that is not a point its an admition of ignorance.
As to your point about caving in the rear deck, they can handle the weight of a 300lb person, at most denting the sheet metal. 300lb of downforce is quite a bit.
That said, they are probably superflous on many cars. But I'm not going to go parading my ignorance by laughing at it. You never know.
300 pounds is quite a bit, but consider the wing on a Ferrari F-40. It is capable of generating 1G of downforce. The car can run at full speed, shiny side down. The 'wing' on many ricers is much larger than on an F-40. That's about 1200kg for the Ferrari, and I don't know many cars that can take their own mass resting on the trunk;)
The weight doesn't rest on the trunk. I think it was the F40, but it may have been some other race-style car (I can't even call them sports cars, because enough people think of a Cavalier or Mustang as a sports car). Perhaps a McLaren F1. Anyway, the rear spoiler was linked to the rear suspension. The reason was that the increased downforce on the back changed the geometry and resulted in lift on the front, so by putting the force directly on the rear suspension, it didn't change the vehicle's geometry.
Have you seen a Hyundai Accent with a HUGE aluminum spoiler, driving around town with a "wheelie bar" lately ?
Didint think so.
Its not because 10 NHRA professional drag racers with TUBE FRAMES and fully built FWD cars have huge spoilers and wheelie bars to compensate for those spoilers that its not a stoopid idea for all street driven FWD cars.
Honnestly, a Type-R spoiler... is fine, not all that practical, but fine.
An aluminum spoiler on a street FWD is useless without a proper front spoiler/split
Actually, there's some pretty sound physics behind those wheelie bars on FWD drag cars.
The amount of rearward weight transfer is a function of CG height, wheelbase and longnitudnal acceleration amount - that's it.
The resultant pitch ANGLE that the sprung mass adopts as a result of the weight transfer is a function of weight transfer, pitch stiffness (driven primarily by spring rate) and jacking geometry (anti-squat) and you'd be suprised how many people confuse pitch angle with weight transfer.... anyway.
And how many of these morons running around with big wings ever see these "high speeds". With as much weight as their stupid body kits add, a wing isn't hurting anything besides their credibility.
How many cars do you see running 10 second 1/4 mile that have wings on them? Even the fast rice rockets don't have wings on them.
Downward forces applied behind the rear wheel will reduce the force on the front wheels where the braking, turning, and acceleration forces are most important. It's a simple matter of calculating the torque around the rear wheel and setting it equal to zero since the car is (hopefully) not going to rotate around the rear wheel. If your goal is to do "wheelies" in your car, it's another story.
In short, although rear mounted fins are helpful on rear wheel drive cars to increase acceleration, they are harmful
Downward forces applied behind the rear wheel will reduce the force on the front wheels where the braking, turning, and acceleration forces are most important.
That's why a proper (functional) aerodynamic package includes not just a wing for the rear, but also a front lip spoiler, and perhaps underbody panelling and tunnels as well. But I agree, most people putting wings and body kits on their cars are doing so for the look, not the physics.
In short, although rear mounted fins are helpful on rear wheel drive cars to increase acceleration, they are harmful on front wheel drive cars in almost all cases.
Completely false. In most cases, a small fin will improve traction on all 4 wheels. In most cases, a small fin will improve aerodynamics (thus top speed and mileage). The normal car shape is that of a wing, disrupt that shape, and you reduce lift. Lift causes drag. Reduce lift on the back and you improve balance (thus traction), as well as
As bconway noted spoilers (plural) help with downforce in both turns and straigh aways. I'm always amused by the Honda or Toyota that has some moster wing on the back of it and no air dam in the front. Basically at high speeds the front of the car will start to lift off the ground depriving it of power, stearing, and control. These things can come in handy while driving. Of course this depends on the angle of the wing, design, placement, etc.
Thus when making aerodynamic modifications to a car it ought
They do work well on REAR wheel drive cars. On front wheel drive cars i.e. the infamous 'Type R' all they do is reduce the amount of traction applied by the front wheels as the downforce provided by the spoiler is LIFTING the front wheels. They would work well mounted in front though...
Not really. Rear spoilers are only really useful on rear-wheel drive cars. The idea is to produce downforce, which is a term much bandied about by people without any real idea of what it actually means. What you are trying to do is get the rear wheels to stick to the road more firmly. Now, I can remember my father sticking a few paving slabs in the boot of his old Mk.II Ford Escort in the winter (back when we used to have winters) so the driven rear axle wouldn't slide about in the snow. Adding a spoil
and lets not forget its also good on the highway for those of us with lighter cars, doing 120kph down the highway in my old lancer(insert rice jokes hear) and it used to nearly get blown out of the lane with only a semi desent wind, new one with spoiler, and its sweet as =>
nothign ricey about stoping your car salming into another on the freeway IMHO
You've obviously never taken any aerodynamics classes. The point of the spoiler isn't for traction, it goes along with the basic understanding that an airfoil will provide a significant horsepower increase. Your typical spoiler on a Civic will increase horsepower 40 to 60 percent.
Take airplanes for instance. They need a large amount of thrust to get off the ground, so aircraft engineers went ahead and put TWO big airfoils on each side, as well as some smaller ones in back.
It's all simple engineering really. Let me guess, you think that stickers are purely aesthetic, and don't serve their main purpose of abrateable heat sheilding during fast runs?
You've obviously never taken any aerodynamics classes. The point of the spoiler isn't for traction, it goes along with the basic understanding that an airfoil will provide a significant horsepower increase. Your typical spoiler on a Civic will increase horsepower 40 to 60 percent.
So, assuming that you have a Civic that will go 120 MPH +, how exactly does downward pressure on the back end accomplish adding horsepower? And I'm sorry, I only took a few college level physics classes, but from what I remembe
Well, see, since it is front wheel drive it forces hte back end of the car down, which decreases traction up front, which means the drive wheels spin easier/faster - and isn't that what HP is about?
Now pardon me while I go teach some ricers about proper handling in the twisties with my wimpy 4 cylinder car [356registry.org]...
As someone who's owned cars with spoilers, I confirm that they do add downward pressure to the back of the car. The calculation for this is quite simple: if the spoiler weighs 15lbs, it adds 15lbs of downforce.
Of course, you could put 15lbs of potatos in the trunk, and you'd get the same effect.
The purpose of a spoiler is not to provide traction, it's to provide stability at high speeds (120+), and that's only if it's functional (many spoilers have not been tested in a wind tunnel and aren't functional- for looks only). Spoilers provide pretty much zero downforce at speeds where traction is an issue.
You've obviously never taken any aerodynamics classes. The point of the spoiler isn't for traction, it goes along with the basic understanding that an airfoil will provide a significant horsepower increase.
Pot... come in pot, this is Kettle. You're looking mighty black today, over.
You forgot the thrust generated from the "fart can" style muffler. The rythmic pulse generated will induce a thrust coefficient similar to what a turbo would effect. Sure the sound is nice but the extra 50hp is the real gain. Tinted windows also reduce cabin temp allowing for increased ignition timing without detonation. Lets not forget how VTEC technology has brought hydraulic roller lifters into the spotlight. The reduced friction coupled with boost potential from the carbon fiber bling items have maximum
Wow. If a spoiler adds 40 to 60 percent horsepower, then I'm sure if I put some of those black racing stripes down the center of my 4 cylinder Neon they will add at least 10 to 20 percent, don't you think?
This has been explained on Slashdot before. Of course, maybe "giant" spoilers are different from smaller spoilers- but spoilers (in general)do give aerodynamic advantages. That is why many manufacturers are putting (admittedly small, unobtrusive) spoilers on fron wheel drive cars. So today's kids rate one or two reallys, grandpa
With all the fancy scientists in the world, why can't they just once
build a nuclear balm?
Spoliers! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
But very low profile tires are only useful on a glass smooth track, on everyday roads they have a lot less traction because they don't follow the bumps on the road, so it gives you a very inneficient bumpy ride. Every inch more of contact patch you have with a wider tire is not useful if the tire is too rigid and bounces off the asphalt.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Not if you're drift racing.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
No. (Score:5, Informative)
If we work under the assumption that the wing in question actually produces signifigant downforce (not a trivial assumption, given the typical aluminum extrusion pretending to be a wing from most rice shops) the download generated by the wing will be borne by all 4 tires.
Depending on a number of parameters, the rears may carry a larger share of that download, but the net effect will be increased normal force on the front tires, which in turn increases grip.
Now if our boy was smart enough to use a real airfoil on his wing, he was probably smart enough to fit a front airdam and splitter, which means he probably has way more FRONT downforce than rear, and is probably using the wing to help balance out a high-speed oversteer condition. On production-based cars, building front downforce is much easier than building rear downforce.
DG
Re:No. (Score:2)
I heard the part about this being your day job, but you'll have to explain the physics of that specific part to me because that doesn't make sense. If the wing is on the rear deck of the car (behind the rear wheels), it is going to act as
Re:No. (Score:1)
As it is, there is this whole spring/suspension system designed to distribute the forces across the wheelbase, even under different motions.
The same suspension that keeps the weight over the tires during cornering.
Re:No. (Score:1)
Re:No. (Score:1)
Is this what ricers prefer to be called now?
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Yea, but most of the time, if the cars they are on were capable of reaching the speeds needed to produce any aerodynamic effect - the way the spoiler is mounted will cause the trunk deck to collapse. Think about that, mmmmkay?
I believe DogDude's point stands.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:3, Informative)
-Jesse
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I hang out with a different crowd of people that actually does race their cars (on tracks, not the street like assholes), and I've seen many a car kick out the rear end around a corner (FWD or otherwise).
The average joe doesn't need much more than bare minimum. But it's fun to go
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
I actually spun a FWD Mazda3 at a Rev It Up event. Caught me completely by surprise that FWD will spin when the driver was simply trying to go fast through a cone course.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Another 'Me too' post... (Score:1)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:5, Informative)
You're also wrong, by the way. A spoiler doesn't create any downforce. A wing is used to create downforce (negative lift, as the wing is exactly the same areofoil shape as you'd find on an airplane, except inverted). A spoiler simply "spoils" the lift generated by the inherent shape of a car. A car is roughly shaped like an aerofoil (rounded on top, flat on the bottom), and thus at higher speeds it tends to generate lift. It's certainly not enough for your car to actually fly, but it is enough to reduce traction necessary for handling and braking. By spoiling that aerofoil shape, a spoiler lessens the natural lift generated by the body shape of a car. For most non-racing applications, a spoiler is all you need, and in most cases you don't even need that (most factory spoilers are indeed cosmetic -- why is it that a Chevy Cavalier needs a spoiler, while a C6 Corvette doesn't?).
In a racing application, a simple spoiler is often not enough, however, and it doesn't really matter where your drive wheels are in that application. That's why you'll see touring cars like the Acura RSX or TSX, or the Mazda 6 with big wings in the Speed World Challenge races (and other touring car series). These are fully adjustable wings that generated downforce (the amount determined by the angle of attack, just as the amount of lift generated by an airplane is determined by its angle of attack). You simply do not need a big-ass wing like that outside of a full race car. That is why the ricers are silly for putting big ol' wings on their cars (well, aside from the facts that they suffer from "bigger is better" and "more is better" syndrome with huge and multi-level wings, and that 9 times out of 10 the wings they're buying are not fully adjustable, and that 10th time the wing isn't properly adjusted for the conditions).
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Not quite. You're correct about the net effect at "normal" speeds, but the way they approach it is completely different. A spoiler negates most (but not all) lift. You're never going to get a net downforce out of a spoiler, and you're always going to end up with some amount of positive lift. A wing generates an opposing force that cancels positive lift. Because it's generating its own force
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Not entirely correct. See the videos of the Mercedes CLK Le Mans cars from a few years back. One "took off" during practice. A second "took off" during the race and was caught on film. The car had a serious aerodynamic flaw that allowed it to briefly
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Most probably there is a reason. However, (at least here in Europe), every owner of an original TT could get a free upgrade to the spoiler version. That was not the only thing changed: they also modified the suspension and a whole list of other things. Note that the spoiler that was *not* mandatory in the recall. If you wanted you could leave it out. Occasionally I see one without, but mostly all have spoilers. (The TT is a ve
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
So it was interesting to since find that on the recently released 1.8 Turbo New Beetle, an auto-deploying lip spoiler is placed at the top of the rear window. It pops up at 150 km/h - obviously the generated lift was so bad that Vo
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Incorrect. [bodydynamicsracing.com] 'Spoilers' do generate downforce, which is why theri shape and size are tightly restricted in NASCAR. If you look at the GoodWrench [ultimatecarpage.com] C5 Corvette road car, it does need a big ass wing! Big ass wings generate more force at lower speeds than spoilers, but also more drag. The higher speeds that NASCAR runs in (as opposed to GT cars) don't require the surface area of a wing, therefore a spoiler is sufficient. But the GT
Re: Picking up a wrench... (Score:1)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
hmm... now either you're wrong, or the ride and handling Engineers at Lotus Cars are wrong.
When I went to drive the new Lotus Eixge around a track, then engineers first gave a slide show, giving the differences between the new model Lotus Elise, and the new Lotus Exige (which is based on the Elise).
The Elise has only a spolier, which is integrated into the body of the car. The Exige has a spoiler, sitting about 20cm above the rear
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
A flat spoiler can provide
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
In other words, downforce at the rear isn't really an issue, and in fact they work hard to keep the back end as loose as possible to help th
Re:Spoliers! (Score:4, Informative)
DogDude didn't relay a point, other than he's ignorant of why people put spoilers on front wheel cars (As if the answer is different than rear wheel cars).
One place you won't see "ricer" nonsense is on the drag racing track. But you will see wheelie bars and spoilers on front wheel cars [todaracing.com].
No, a front wheel car is not in danger of doing a wheelie, but the wheelie bars do help keep the front wheels from lifting and losing traction.
From NHRA magazine (talking about the for-runner for the car pictured in the link)
Moral of the story? When someone complains he doesn't see a reason for something, that is not a point its an admition of ignorance.
As to your point about caving in the rear deck, they can handle the weight of a 300lb person, at most denting the sheet metal. 300lb of downforce is quite a bit.
That said, they are probably superflous on many cars. But I'm not going to go parading my ignorance by laughing at it. You never know.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
donour
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Have you seen a Hyundai Accent with a HUGE aluminum spoiler, driving around town with a "wheelie bar" lately ?
Didint think so.
Its not because 10 NHRA professional drag racers with TUBE FRAMES and fully built FWD cars have huge spoilers and wheelie bars to compensate for those spoilers that its not a stoopid idea for all street driven FWD cars.
Honnestly, a Type-R spoiler... is fine, not all that practical, but fine.
An aluminum spoiler on a street FWD is useless without a proper front spoiler/split
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Wheelie bars are illegal for public roads.
Physics behind the FWD wheelie bars (Score:3, Interesting)
The amount of rearward weight transfer is a function of CG height, wheelbase and longnitudnal acceleration amount - that's it.
The resultant pitch ANGLE that the sprung mass adopts as a result of the weight transfer is a function of weight transfer, pitch stiffness (driven primarily by spring rate) and jacking geometry (anti-squat) and you'd be suprised how many people confuse pitch angle with weight transfer.... anyway.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
How many cars do you see running 10 second 1/4 mile that have wings on them? Even the fast rice rockets don't have wings on them.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
And a wing at the drag strip on a FWD car wouldn't be much help, but at the track (the kind with corners to turn) a wing is actually useful.
But you are correct, most the cars that you see with a "park bench" rear wing never actually spend any time on a track.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
In short, although rear mounted fins are helpful on rear wheel drive cars to increase acceleration, they are harmful
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
That's why a proper (functional) aerodynamic package includes not just a wing for the rear, but also a front lip spoiler, and perhaps underbody panelling and tunnels as well. But I agree, most people putting wings and body kits on their cars are doing so for the look, not the physics.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Completely false. In most cases, a small fin will improve traction on all 4 wheels. In most cases, a small fin will improve aerodynamics (thus top speed and mileage). The normal car shape is that of a wing, disrupt that shape, and you reduce lift. Lift causes drag. Reduce lift on the back and you improve balance (thus traction), as well as
Rear wing w/o front dam, ground effects (Score:1)
Thus when making aerodynamic modifications to a car it ought
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (sic) (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
nothign ricey about stoping your car salming into another on the freeway IMHO
Re:Spoliers! (Score:5, Funny)
Take airplanes for instance. They need a large amount of thrust to get off the ground, so aircraft engineers went ahead and put TWO big airfoils on each side, as well as some smaller ones in back.
It's all simple engineering really. Let me guess, you think that stickers are purely aesthetic, and don't serve their main purpose of abrateable heat sheilding during fast runs?
OMG!!! (Score:2)
Re:OMG!!! (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:3, Funny)
So, assuming that you have a Civic that will go 120 MPH +, how exactly does downward pressure on the back end accomplish adding horsepower? And I'm sorry, I only took a few college level physics classes, but from what I remembe
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Now pardon me while I go teach some ricers about proper handling in the twisties with my wimpy 4 cylinder car [356registry.org]...
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course, you could put 15lbs of potatos in the trunk, and you'd get the same effect.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
The purpose of a spoiler is not to provide traction, it's to provide stability at high speeds (120+), and that's only if it's functional (many spoilers have not been tested in a wind tunnel and aren't functional- for looks only). Spoilers provide pretty much zero downforce at speeds where traction is an issue.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:1)
I guess you've never stomped on the brakes hard enough.
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Pot... come in pot, this is Kettle. You're looking mighty black today, over.
What? Informative? Insightful? (Score:2)
Re:What? Informative? Insightful? (Score:2)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Spoliers! (Score:2)
Re:You're Old (Score:1)