Jump to content
SAU Community

Aeromotions Wing, Installed And Tested X 2


GGTTRR
 Share

Recommended Posts

There has been a lot of discussions on this topic posted by LSX-438 with lot of people having doubts about this wing.

My car is running Willall's tune and a mid pipe. Until today I've run this car twice at Wakefield Park with times 1:03.79 in December and 1:03.81 in April, I've installed the Aeromotion wing (form The Tuners Group) last Friday and today I've run 1:02.83.

This is almost full second improvement and the only difference was the wing.

By the way Duncan run 1:02.44 which is incredibly fast for a road car. Well done.

So my recommendation for people which take they cars to the track, and want to go fast is get the tune and get the wing. This is the best bang for your dollars you can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a lot of discussions on this topic posted by LSX-438 with lot of people having doubts about this wing.

My car is running Willall's tune and a mid pipe. Until today I've run this car twice at Wakefield Park with times 1:03.79 in December and 1:03.81 in April, I've installed the Aeromotions wing (from The Tuners Group) last Friday and today I've run 1:02.83.

This is almost full second improvement and the only difference was the wing.

large1295.jpg

Great work GGTTRR !

Almost a full second improvement is a great result, especially at a track like Wakefield with a lap time of just over 1 minute.

GGTTRR is running the static version of the Aeromotions R2 wing, the R2 Static. So that makes the laptime improvement of almost a second even more impressive.

The Aeromotions R2 Static Wing uses the same aerofoil as the R2 Dynamic Wing, but does not have the added benefit of dynamic wing angle control (though the R2 Static Wing can be upgraded to dynamic operation later with the dynamic upgrade kit).

By the way Duncan run 1:02.44 which is incredibly fast for a road car. Well done.

Well done to Duncan also ! Duncan also has an Aeromotions wing - the R2 Dynamic Wing.

So my recommendation for people which take they cars to the track, and want to go fast is get the tune and get the wing. This is the best bang for your dollars you can get.

Well said GGTTRR :)

We spend an enormous amount of time keeping right up to date with cutting edge high quality racing technology and being ahead of the curve. We always knew that once Australian cars started running Aeromotions wings that just like the overseas results the Australian lap times would show that the Aeromotions wings work very well indeed. So we're very pleased to see another Australian car posting such a great lap time improvement with one of our Aeromotions wings on it. And it's yet more confirmation that we got it right when we first discovered the Aeromotions wings many months ago and made the decision to bring the Aeromotions range to Australia.

As we've said many times in other threads about the Aeromotions wings ...

The key is the laptime, which speaks for itself and clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of the Aeromotions Dynamic Wings.

The stopwatch doesn't lie.

- The Tuners Group

Edited by TheTunersGroup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until today I've run this car twice at Wakefield Park with times 1:03.79 in December and 1:03.81 in April, I've installed the Aeromotion wing (form The Tuners Group) last Friday and today I've run 1:02.83.

This is almost full second improvement and the only difference was the wing.

After you ran your 1:02.83 did you think to take the wing off and really see what the back to back benefit was?

SK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After you ran your 1:02.83 did you think to take the wing off and really see what the back to back benefit was?

Hi Stephen,

Aeromotions has already done extensive back to back testing and published data from the back to back testing at Thunderhill Raceway complete with Traqmate Data Acquisition data, a summary of the data and info about the car, driver and testing methodology, and a detailed turn by turn data analysis, which includes plots turn by turn of the lateral G-force, acceleration and braking G-force, velocity, and time difference.

As mentioned in the other thread with Duncan's results ...

If you want to see back to back testing data, as previously mentioned in this thread:

The Aeromotions Dynamic Wings are a proven quantity and there is already a lot of hard data to show how well they work ... and Aeromotions have already published detailed testing data.

As we wrote in a post earlier in this thread ...

"A number of teams running the Aeromotions Dynamic Wings have already publicly released info on their lap time improvements with the Aeromotions Dynamic Wing. Physics works exactly the same way in Australia as it does in the US, so the US results are just as relevant to Australia."

large1298.jpg

Aeromotions also did a back to back test at Thunderhill Raceway (screenshot from the test above). As it says on our website, lap times at the back to back test were ...

Without Aeromotions Wing: 2 minutes 10.1 seconds

With Aeromotions Static Wing: 2 minutes 9.2 seconds

With Aeromotions Dynamic Wing: 2 Minutes 8.4 seconds

With Aeromotions Dynamic Wing With Centre Fence: 2 minutes 7.7 seconds.

So at the Thunderhill test, adding an Aeromotions Static Wing shaved 0.9 second off the lap time without an Aeromotions Wing.

Lap times with the Aeromotions Dynamic Wing With Centre Fence were 1.5 seconds a lap faster than with the Aeromotions Static Wing, and 2.4 seconds faster than without an Aeromotions wing.

There is data from the back to back testing at Thunderhill Raceway complete with Traqmate Data Acquisition data, a summary of the data and info about the car, driver and testing methodology, and a detailed turn by turn data analysis, which includes plots turn by turn of the lateral G-force, acceleration and braking G-force, velocity, and time difference ...

The data from the Thunderhill test and the feedback from teams using the Aeromotions Dynamic Wings is here ...

http://www.tunersgroup.com/Products/aeromotions.html

- The Tuners Group

Edited by TheTunersGroup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way Duncan run 1:02.44 which is incredibly fast for a road car. Well done.

Well done to Duncan also ! Duncan also has an Aeromotions wing - the R2 Dynamic Wing.

Duncan, is that a new class record at Wakefield ?

- The Tuners Group

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done to Duncan also ! Duncan also has an Aeromotions wing - the R2 Dynamic Wing.

Duncan, is that a new class record at Wakefield ?

- The Tuners Group

Not sure, it may be. We'll find out tomorrow perhaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam we have received notice on the records set yesterday, so yes you can chalk up another aeromotions success..

Duncan Forrest is continuing on in his winning way setting an Outright,

Type 4 and Class 4D record in his GTR R35 with a time of 62.440. It is

unfortunate that the record books will only mention Duncan as breaking the

Outright Record but it should not go without saying that Marek Tomaszewzki

also broke the previous Outright Record record with a sub 63 time of 62.835.

The old record was 63.080. It's too bad that Duncan was around on the day.

Congratulations Duncan and commiserations Marek

Too bad i was around on the day apparently! Seriously though i actually feel like an arse, Marek broke the record books too. In fact on the day Marek was in front for a while so he was the outright, type and class record holder for about an hour or two.

I can't believe the hunt is on for 1:01's now

Edited by LSX-438
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After you ran your 1:02.83 did you think to take the wing off and really see what the back to back benefit was?

SK

Marek has already run two times prior (similar days and very similar times) there is simply no need for more testing, we know the wing works the results speak for themselves. i dont think marek is going back to the stocker wing somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Well, yeah, the RB26 is definitely that far off the mark. From a pure technology point of view it is closer to the engines of the 60s than it is to the engines of the last 10 years. There is absolutely nothing special about an RB26 that wasn't present in engines going all the way back to the 60s, except probably the four valve head. The bottom end is just bog standard Japanese stuff. The head is nothing special. Celicas in the 70s were the same thing, in 4cyl 2 valve form. The ITBs are nothing special when you consider that the same Celicas had twin Solexes on them, and so had throttle plates in the exact same place. There's no variable valve timing, no variable inlet manifold, which even other RBs had either before the 26 came out or shortly afterward. The ECU is pretty rude and crude. The only things it has going for it are that the physical structure was pretty bloody tough for a mass produced engine, the twin-turbos and ITBs made for a bit of uniqueness against the competition (and even Toyota were ahead on the twin turbs thing, weren't they?) and the electronic controls and measuring devices (ie, AFMs, CAS, etc) were good enough to make it run well. Oh, and it sounds better than almost anything else, ever. The VR38 is absolutely halfway between the RB generation and the current generation, so it definitely has a massive increase in the sophistication of the electronics, allowing for a lot more dynamic optimisation of mapping. Then there's things like metal treatments and other coatings on things, adoption of variable cam stuff, and a bunch of other little improvements that mean it has to be a better thing than the RB26. But I otherwise agree with you that it is approximately the same thing as a 26. But, skip forward another 10 years from that engine and then the things that I mentioned in previous post come out to play. High compression, massively sophisticated computers, direct injection, clever measuring sensors, etc etc. They are the real difference between trying to make big power with a 26 and trying to make big power with a S/B50/54 (or whatever the preferred BMW engine of the week is).
    • Is the RB26 actually that far off the mark? Honestly from where I'm sitting a VR38DETT is not actually that much more advanced than the RB26. Yes, there is a scavenge pump on the VR38, it's smarter in a number of ways but it's not actually jumping out to me as alien technology. Something like a B58 or V35A-FTS on the other hand has so many surprising little design features that add up to be something that just isn't comparable. 
    • https://www.carsales.com.au/cars/details/2021-nissan-skyline-400r-auto-rv37/SSE-AD-17857548/ Well there you go 
    • Chris won't reply. He doesn't visit the forum much anymore. You can try these guys https://www.facebook.com/autotainment/ They did mine many years ago
×
×
  • Create New...