05GT v. WRX

[gp001]

I still stand by my original statement regarding the street car, even moreso now.

The wing on the Sti is in no way functional. Unless, of course, you consider generating more parasitic drag (which is the biggest force to overcome with speed, ie it eats the most horsepower) functional

A wing on a street car is a useful as this post

 

[machfelon]

All this pointless talk about RICE (Namely the Subaru WRX)

If you like it soooo much!! BUY ONE!!

Im keeping my MACH!

EOD!

 

[Pliskin]

Why wouldn't this be like the camaro/mustang arguments we've ALL had before. Out comes a Cobra to beat an N/A camaro...oh wait the camaro can get a supercharger and we're back to square one. Same thing with these dammed STi's. Get a supercharger to offset the turbo....and there you go. More than 100 more horsepower. I dont know the numbers but a supercharged V8 in the mustang should be better than a turbo 4cyl in the STi. All the WRX's got is the AWD. Probably costs a bit more for the modded stang but whatever at least its American and wont get stomped by a suburu.



and shouldnt a CAI at least bump up the stang to more than the STi? The 05 STi has 300 HP right?

 

[NY05GT4ME]

and shouldnt a CAI at least bump up the stang to more than the STi? The 05 STi has 300 HP right?


Yea. 300hp/300tq. but its comparably light....I think a stock STi is gonna rock a stock 05GT every time, imho.....i'm more worried about running with/beating my buddy's lightly modded WRX.

 

[300bhp/ton]

I still stand by my original statement regarding the street car, even moreso now.



A wing on a street car is a useful as this post

eh?

But what is your definition of FUNCTIONAL

Downforce is only part of any areopackage, if you don't get it - FINE. But don't hassel others that do!

 

[gp001]

eh?

But what is your definition of FUNCTIONAL

Downforce is only part of any areopackage, if you don't get it - FINE.

LOL And what function were you trying to describe with your pictionary experiment? A wing used as a rudder or an air brake is not being used AS A WING as we are talking about on a street car. Hell, I even said the wing on the first WRC pic looked like a rudder and described WHY. The PDF file posted validates my claims by saying the wing is used mainly as stabiizer (rudder) or an air brake to push the rear end down when airborne. Maybe if you guys are jumping your street cars ala Dukes of Hazard style or Drifting the rear end out around corners then maybe the wing on a street car would have some function, but otherwise NOPE!
but like I said in the beginning - ON A STREET CAR A WING IS USELESS.A 3000+LB, 300HP STREET CAR IS NOT GOING TO GAIN ANYTHING FROM A WING EXCEPT DRAG
I think it is you that does not get it.

But don't hassel others that do!

Not sure what powers you think you have to tell others what they can and can't do, but it's cute none the less.
Besides, I'm not. I'm hassling those that don't get it. So quit hassling me!

 

[2MFF-Z28]

you guys are tireless.....................excellent.

 

[300bhp/ton]

. Maybe if you guys are jumping your street cars ala Dukes of Hazard style or Drifting the rear end out around corners then maybe the wing on a street car would have some function, but otherwise NOPE!

This is exactly WHY you don't get it.

Outside the US - where lets face it all competative rally cars hail from. Roads are not just STRAIGHT,we make use of the steering wheel and yes we do drift the car round bends.

Also you admit that the wing does act as a stabilizer - well surly thats a FUNCTION is it not.

 

[SVTdriver]

This is exactly WHY you don't get it.

Outside the US - where lets face it all competative rally cars hail from. Roads are not just STRAIGHT,we make use of the steering wheel and yes we do drift the car round bends.

Also you admit that the wing does act as a stabilizer - well surly thats a FUNCTION is it not.

Your right cars over here don't even need steering wheels. They are just added weight. Heck I don't remember the last time I used my steering wheel. I mean it does hold the air bag. But otherwise I think it should be outlawed. And I must have forgotten Ford is a UK based company.

I think you are being over generalizing things a bit much. I mean I realize the Ford Focus rally car may not win a lot. But last I saw it was competitive. While yes as a stabilizer the rear wing may add something. Is that stabilizer really REALLY doing anything ANYTHING at all, at street speeds?

 

[gp001]

This is exactly WHY you don't get it.

OK, we'll see who doesn't get it. Ready??? See below***.

Outside the US - where lets face it all competative rally cars hail from. Roads are not just STRAIGHT,we make use of the steering wheel and yes we do drift the car round bends.

Well, golly gee Mr. Limey you must know everything. All roads in the US are completely straight. No curves or bends. All turns are perfect 90* right angles, straight as can be. Get a clue

You guys drift STREET CARS???????????????? Come on now, who doesn't get it??????? This whole discussion started about STREET CARS. STREET CARS DO NOT PERFORM MANEUVERS THAT WOULD REQUIRE STABILIZERS (IE DRIFTING OR JUMPING)!!!!!!!! Even if they did STABILIZERS CREATE DRAG TOO!

Also you admit that the wing does act as a stabilizer - well surly thats a FUNCTION is it not.

Yep, but not a function a street car can use. The whole WRC thing was thrown in to show proof that the street car surely had a functional wing because the WRC team had one. Again, a rudder function or air brake function are not properties associated with a "wing". If you think it is then a rear view mirror mounted to a door could be considered a "wing", so could the door if you open it while driving the car. please, keep grasping.

*** To calculate a vehicles drag (Cd) you use the following formula:

D = Cx*q*A

D = aerodynamic drag force in lbs
Cx = coefficient of draq
A = automobile frontal area in square feet (ft**2)
q = dynamic pressure in lbs/ft**2

Note- drag is directly proportional to both frontal area and Cx and proportional to
velocity squared. Therefore, if you double your speed, you will quadruple drag.

Now, you might be saying "But gp, you said the wing created drag and this only uses frontal are to calculate drag". Well, this assumes the flow over the body stays attached (no spoiler on the rear decklid). Since the STi's wing i mounted directly to the trunk lid (no vertical slats elevating the upper wing surface) the bottom of the wing creates a spoiler.

Take a look at the air flow in the pic of the Mercedes in a post above. Imagine a small vertical spoiler on the decklid and how that would affect the flow lines going over the car. The airflow hitting the spolier would shoot up into the flow above, and thus drag is created.

Now let's move on to the wing itself: does it create useable downforce, or just drag?
First off, for a wing to generate any form of down force it must be in clean air. This would mean it needs to be higher than the roofline of a sedan (and therefore would affect the drag formula above by increasing frontal area). Look at the picture of the 69 Dodge Daytona posted earlier. The wing is higher than the roofline, and that is why it was functional. To keep the flow attached over the body the Dodge engineers made the rear window flush with the pillars (Daytona and Charger 500). But since the STi wing (as with most production car wings) is mounted lower than the roofline it's not in clean air and is not producing downforce. So, we know it is not producing downforce as part of the fow over the car, so what about on it's own? Let's investigate.

I hope you would agree that wings in their purest design are devices to produce lift (downforce or negative lift in cars). But a direct by product of generating downforce/lift is the production of drag. But this amount of drag is only one component. The wing itself generates profile drag (this would be the drag produced in a neutral state - ie zero lift). So, how do we calculate this drag? Well, it's called Induced Drag and it is proportional to the square of the lift or downforce created

Cdi = Cl**2/(pi*e*AR)

Cdi = induced drag coefficient
Cl = coefficient of lift
AR = aspect ratio of wing (wing span squared/wing area)
pi = mathematical constant (approximately 3.14159)
e = wing efficiency factor

So, we know that the STi wing creates drag (both at the mounting base and the profile of the top) and little downforce (if any) based on the physics above. We also know that drag varies with the square of speed. we also know that the power required to fight drag varies with the cube of speed.

What does all thie mean? Well it means:

The wing on the Sti is in no way functional. Unless, of course, you consider generating more parasitic drag (which is the biggest force to overcome with speed, ie it eats the most horsepower) functional

Anything extended upward into the airflow generated drag. Most of a car's horsepower is used trying to overcome drag.

Yes reduction of aero lift and downforce are not the same ON A RACECAR, but since we are talking street cars that will never see enough speed and a good enough aero package to overcome their bulk the WING people are claiming is functional must be used to counter lift (you certainly don't believe a 300hp street car weighing 3000+ lbs would need more downforce for anything other than to counter lift, do you?).

And my favorite

A wing on a street car is a useful as this thread*

*edited for clarity

 

[2MFF-Z28]

gp001


dayyyyummm!!!!!!!!

 

[300bhp/ton]

And I must have forgotten Ford is a UK based company.

Well no.

But all of Fords rally cars have alway been built and run by FOrd RS and Cosworth which IS.

So is Prodrive who run Subura WRC cars and Ralliart who run Mitsibushi's.

 

[300bhp/ton]

STREET CARS. STREET CARS DO NOT PERFORM MANEUVERS THAT WOULD REQUIRE STABILIZERS

Yep, but not a function a street car can use. The whole WRC thing was thrown in to show proof that the street car surely had a functional wing because the WRC team had one.

First off, for a wing to generate any form of down force it must be in clean air. This would mean it needs to be higher than the roofline of a sedan (and therefore would affect the drag formula above by increasing frontal area). Look at the picture of the 69 Dodge Daytona posted earlier. The wing is higher than the roofline

1. You say a wing has no function for a street car.

ok, how fast does one need to drive to make use of it? You often hear of drag races @130+mph, surly areodynamic stability would be beneficial at these speeds.

Even more so as there are no speed or g limits on how fast cars are allowed to corner at.

2. Wings do work on rally cars, for 1 simple fact they would not have them if they didn't - SIMPLE!

Yet rally cars do not noramlly exceed 120mph (gearing limited), so many street races are likely to exceed this.

3. Comparing a 40 year old design like the Daytona Charger to modern cars is stupidity, aerodynamically speaking. I mean working on your theory a late 60's F1 car would produce more down force than a modern F1 car of today.

As you can see on a 2005 Williams the rear wing is mounted much lower than the top air intake, thus not in 'clean' air as you state.

A 68 Lotus F1 car, note the high rise wing just like the Charger.

4. If the rear wing produces so much drag how come this car is factory rated at 175mph top speed?

Its a Mitsibushi Evo FQ400. 2.0 Turbo with 400bhp stock.

 

[awdspider]

this must be hype cause i pulled it off a website
http://www.mustangworld.com/ourpics/News/mwcobraR/body.htm

this cars wing is supposed to be very functionable and its mounted below the roof line or out of clean air, plus its mounted on working trunk lid. its also a street car, granted most would never need the wing but its there for those folks that do some tracking.......but i guess subaru doesnt do homework like ford does. check out how much drag actually hinders speed.

just going by what the engineers say about this car is that it creates 80lbs of downforce at 120mph.....that also goes against everything you said how a wing or spoiler can be mounted and be truly effective.
http://members.tripod.com/~mustangsusa/index-2.html

thats all hype also

and little downforce (if any)

so are you saying that it might produce some downforce? i know you wish the sti spoiler to be a total useless piece of plastic but it simply is not the case.

 

[gp001]

1. You say a wing has no function for a street car.

ok, how fast does one need to drive to make use of it? You often hear of drag races @130+mph, surly areodynamic stability would be beneficial at these speeds.

Even more so as there are no speed or g limits on how fast cars are allowed to corner at.

Yep, no benefit. A street car does not have a traction problem, especially at speed (look at vettes, vipers, etc). When you increase speed you increase drag. Low coefficient of drag is NOT created with a wing.

2. Wings do work on rally cars, for 1 simple fact they would not have them if they didn't - SIMPLE!

Yet rally cars do not noramlly exceed 120mph (gearing limited), so many street races are likely to exceed this.

Simple, eh? Did you read the PDF file posted by shaun? If not, I suggest you do. They have them becasue the marketing department chooses the overall body to be raced - NOT THE AERODYNAMICISTS. They know clueless skippys will go gaga over the mAd TiGhT wInGzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, yo!

3. Comparing a 40 year old design like the Daytona Charger to modern cars is stupidity, aerodynamically speaking. I mean working on your theory a late 60's F1 car would produce more down force than a modern F1 car of today.

Really? I bet that car has more aerodynamic capability than the STi and most non-exotic cars made today. You do realize that was the first car to do an average lap of a superspeedway at over 200mph? Wait, of course you don't realize that. That wing is adjustable and can even be sat on by a grown man (they have a pic of a Dodge engineer sitting on one in one of the Charger books).

As you can see on a 2005 Williams the rear wing is mounted much lower than the top air intake, thus not in 'clean' air as you state.

Are you really this dense? The air over an F1 car travels over the pods and to the wing. TOTALLY different than A STREET CAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Look at the pics of the F1 car in the wind tunnel I posted in a previous post. You will notice the flow being channeled around the cockpit and intake and to the wing. So, the wing IS in clean air.

A 68 Lotus F1 car, note the high rise wing just like the Charger.

Completly different world. Back then the only clean air was up high, now the air over the front and pods are channeled to the wing(see above)

4. If the rear wing produces so much drag how come this car is factory rated at 175mph top speed?

Its a Mitsibushi Evo FQ400. 2.0 Turbo with 400bhp stock.

So, you are saying the wing creates less drag? Or it creates downforce without creating drag? Or, well, WTF are you saying? High speed = low drag and high downforce = high drag. Without looking into the friggin specs of yet another car to prove you wrong, I will simply point out that the wing on that car is is mounted up off the decklid, so no added drag from it's location. So it probably only creates profile drag. To push a 3000lb car to 175 you need low drag NOT high down force

 

[tylers65]

just going by what the engineers say about this car is that it creates 80lbs of downforce at 120mph

Because all the posted speed limits in the US are 120 MPH

Please read this portion very carefully...

Don't strain your eyes now....

























STREET CAR!!!!!

 

[tylers65]

Now I love a good debate....

This thread will end up going nowhere.

I see many facts and a lot of useful data, but this looks like it is becomeing a religious debate.

There will be no winners so stop being a bunch of losers.

 

[gp001]

this must be hype cause i pulled it off a website
http://www.mustangworld.com/ourpics/News/mwcobraR/body.htm

this cars wing is supposed to be very functionable and its mounted below the roof line or out of clean air, plus its mounted on working trunk lid. its also a street car, granted most would never need the wing but its there for those folks that do some tracking.......but i guess subaru doesnt do homework like ford does. check out how much drag actually hinders speed.

Ah, how cute, shauny called some of his mAd TiGhT sKiPpYs in to help.

OK, I'm gonna make this one quick and painless because I am tired of dealing with tards that don't wat to read. As I have made very clear I have said this applies TO ALL street cars. HEAVY FRIGGIN CARS DON'T NEED ANY GENERATED DOWNFORCE. The laws of physics apply to all manufacturers. To check out how much drag actually hinders speed read the Physics of racing link I posted (or have someone read it to you)

just going by what the engineers say about this car is that it creates 80lbs of downforce at 120mph.....that also goes against everything you said how a wing or spoiler can be mounted and be truly effective.
http://members.tripod.com/~mustangsusa/index-2.html

thats all hype also

Boy, comprehension is not your strong suit. Spoilers are different than wings. A spoiler WILL create downforce as the attached air deflects off of it and travels up into the flow above it (creating drag). The resulatant force of the deflection is downward (downforce). Now, with downforce you get drag. If you have a heavy car with low hp (LIKE A STREET CAR) the downforce is uselss and only the drag remains. The bottom of the STi wing acts in this manner except that it is not even angled backward, it is basically a vertical spoiler, which is the worst kind.
Think about it, when is a 3600lb car gonna need 80lbs of down force? Never.

so are you saying that it might produce some downforce? i know you wish the sti spoiler to be a total useless piece of plastic but it simply is not the case.

Arg! You know what? You guys are right. The STi defies all laws of physics. You can mount the wing in any direct (vertical, diagonal, longitudanal) and it will magically produce downforce for a 3000+, 300hp car without creating drag.

I'm done! Physics be damned!

 

[gp001]

For those thinking manufacturers don't put wings/spoilers on for cosmetic reasons go find someone with an 05 Mustang GT and push down on the center of their spoiler. Notice how it flexes? Cosmetic and drag inducing

OK, I'm done

 

[SVTdriver]

Well no.

But all of Fords rally cars have alway been built and run by FOrd RS and Cosworth which IS.

So is Prodrive who run Subura WRC cars and Ralliart who run Mitsibushi's.

But without the American Ford. Ford RS would not have much of a car to build. And all that shows is that the UK can run a rally team. But which car is actually designed and built in the UK and run in rallying. You are going to have a tough time telling me Subaru and Mitsubishi are from the UK.