Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sorry, I miss read your post :blush:

lol I usually would have let it go but its too damn hot in here and the air con stopped being effective several hours ago :P ... its making me grumpy

...Melbourne is melting!

oh and didn't URAS have a pressure sensor thing he was using to measure the effectiveness of wings? I remember the thread but can't find it.... it was a few years ago I think

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Dane I'm not sure how effective the wing pictured (your old one) would be... the airflow over the back of the 180 would probably stay attached to the car until the very edge of the boot meaning no real flow over the wing (mostly under)... however if the wing was mounted higher than the roof it would catch the unattached airflow over the car

most serious circuit cars have the wing high up above the roofline of the car for this reason...

Edit: ah beat me to the punch re. height kingscorp!

isn't that what I said? (all the airflow under, none over) I'm fairly certain I understand how wings work;) the high/low pressure is caused by the difference in speed the air passes by each side of the wing due to its shape

yeah it would have been better on an S14 Dane, not perfect cos the air would have been pretty turbulent

Laminar/attached airflow creates less turbulence and therefore the wing would get more airflow over it on the back of the 180, not less. On the S14 where the unattached flow off the roofline would become disturbed/turbulent, a wing would work less effectively in the turbulent air and need to be higher to try and get in good clean/undisturbed air. That's why race cars mount wings high as possible/allowed under ther regulations.

Laminar/attached airflow creates less turbulence and therefore the wing would get more airflow over it on the back of the 180, not less. On the S14 where the unattached flow off the roofline would become disturbed/turbulent, a wing would work less effectively in the turbulent air and need to be higher to try and get in good clean/undisturbed air. That's why race cars mount wings high as possible/allowed under ther regulations.

what he said :blink:

what he said :(

sorry, sounded like you were saying the opposite

the airflow over the back of the 180 would probably stay attached to the car until the very edge of the boot meaning no real flow over the wing (mostly under)...

(all the airflow under, none over)

it would have been better on an S14

As has been stated earlier in the thread, concentrate on mechanical grip first, then start playing with aero.

I've said it on a few different forums when this topic pops up (and generally get ignored): If your car isn't balanced without a wing then you are really just masking a problem by adding one, rather than fixing the issue and then moving forward by adding aero.

Personally i wouldn't add more than a stock style wing without looking at front splitters and decent front aero.

yeh, this is the way im going to proceed. im shore all you boys will help me with set-up. if it gets too hard well put the wing on. Definately have other things to spend the cash on. Dane, where did you get the wing and if you dont mind saying how much?

As has been stated earlier in the thread, concentrate on mechanical grip first, then start playing with aero.

I've said it on a few different forums when this topic pops up (and generally get ignored): If your car isn't balanced without a wing then you are really just masking a problem by adding one, rather than fixing the issue and then moving forward by adding aero.

Personally i wouldn't add more than a stock style wing without looking at front splitters and decent front aero.

Chris:

It's basically a flat piece that sits under the front bar as low to the ground as possible and acts like a wing sucking the car to the ground. You see them on the V8Supercars or John's 300ZX. Many race cars have them the entire length underneath the car, like an F1 car hence why they can drive upside down.

No Ando you nut-case. What I'm saying is if you load the rears up with too much down force you will lose front grip,,,hence understeer.

LOL i am nuts .. but i aint gonna generate enuff speed in the S13 to worry about loosing grip :)

Yeah great advice, aero only really comes into play at higher speeds anyway.

Your better off increasing rear grip with either increased track, better suspension or better tyres.

Thats exactly what i meant.... thus why i am considering my purchase was in vain as i want the functionality of my boot, so cant fabricate a mount to avoid the boot 'flex'

Excuse my n00bness.....again... :(

But when people say front splitters - how does this help? and any pics or info?

Cheers!

Sucks the car to the ground....

image

IMG_3021.jpg

Lol at car thou!!! Its the black thing at bottom of bumper....

plan on doing the front bar, but only allowed to sheet to the rear edge of the front bar from what i understand.

Chris:

It's basically a flat piece that sits under the front bar as low to the ground as possible and acts like a wing sucking the car to the ground. You see them on the V8Supercars or John's 300ZX. Many race cars have them the entire length underneath the car, like an F1 car hence why they can drive upside down.

Stick your arm out the window at 60km/h. If the wing has enough surface area then they can start to produce a normal force pretty early, Hence why many are adjustable so you can tweak them for different average speed tracks

True true but how does one retain standard boot usage and remove the flex of a boot under 'load'/downforce. Only thing i can think of is an aluminium frame that you bolt to the underside of the boot and wing... then has 'feet' measured up exactly to sit on the base of the boot floor creating a brace as such..... meh... seems all too hard for little gain...

There are several ways. For a Skyline the easiest way it to make sure the swing of the boot is rigid to the lock or catch and make sure the spoiler is located near the knuckle on the back of the boot as that is where its most rigid. Or you can drill holes in the boot and mount a bracket of the back of the beaver panel so that when you close the boot the mount sits proud of the boot, then you just throw on the upright and blade

There are a few other ways but they add to the complexity of getting the thing open and closed

True true but how does one retain standard boot usage and remove the flex of a boot under 'load'/downforce. Only thing i can think of is an aluminium frame that you bolt to the underside of the boot and wing... then has 'feet' measured up exactly to sit on the base of the boot floor creating a brace as such..... meh... seems all too hard for little gain...

That seems to be a good way to do it mate, see below:

post-8405-1233267608_thumb.jpg

post-8405-1233267615_thumb.jpg

post-8405-1233267622_thumb.jpg

Stu, I bought my C-West from URAS on here a few years ago, and I got it for around $300 from memory. They pop up on the forums every now and then, but I think this version is the best of the aluminium ones, with a nice big plane and good, solid uprights.

Chris: This is a front splitter on a 180 that I'm planning on copying for my car, with the addition of NACA ducts to it to aid airflow and help keep the car cool:

post-8405-1233270472_thumb.jpg

post-8405-1233270495_thumb.jpg

post-8405-1233270505_thumb.jpg

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...