S14 wing downforce test.

[Brian]

B wave style wing

Cusco GT wing

Cusco GT wing (different type)

Silvia wing

http://bhworld.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/0124092325.jpg



So, as you can see, wings DO something for your S14. Even the stock Silvia wing does a little (surprisingly!)


I hope this helps out somebody or just makes you go, "ohhh, interesting"

[drftmark]

So the first cusco wing wins

[Matej]

The stock wing probably only does something by weighing 3kg. :)

[irax]

clearly the kouki wing would of performed better if it was on a kouki

lol jk jk

how come they did not test more wings? like the HKS or nismo270R or stock zenki wing? or the do-luck?

[Brian]

I don't know.
Maybe I can go back in time to 7 years ago when they made the article and then call them overseas and ask to perhaps include more wings in the article.

[ZilviaKid]

out of curiosity, what is the thing thats creating lift at the bottom of the chart?

[CAMFabrication]

Someone care to translate what exactly I'm looking at? All it looks like to me is a bunch of japanese lettering and some crazy lines doing their own thing.

[Brian]

zilvia - I THINK that is with no wing. I don't read Japanese, but I am assuming.

Camfab - If you can't figure it out from the pictures / line graph / BIG RED NUMBERS, you need to be more creative. I hope nobody translates anything for you.

[signalpuke]

Sweet post. The wave looks like the winner to me, most linear increase.

[irax]

I don't know.
Maybe I can go back in time to 7 years ago when they made the article and then call them overseas and ask to perhaps include more wings in the article.

well you didn't exactly say how old this article was.

[Brian]

Well, even if it was from a magazine put out last month, I still wouldn't know why they didn't choose those other wings.

:)

[ZilviaKid]

just confirmed with my jap reading friend. the wing that creates lift is in fact wingless..

[Sleepy240]

the results are pretty interesting! I'd be interested in seeing what caused the large spikes in the Cusco GT. Its a shame magazines nowadays aren't even nearly as informative stuff from the 90's =(

[Brian]

Cusco Adjustable GT wing type 2
http://www.cusco.co.jp/en/img/gt_wing_type2.gif

Cusco 3D Carbon GT wing
http://www.cusco.co.jp/en/img/gt_wing_3d.jpg

[ChicagoS14]

the results are pretty interesting! I'd be interested in seeing what caused the large spikes in the Cusco GT. Its a shame magazines nowadays aren't even nearly as informative stuff from the 90's =(

Thats because the general public in many ways is dumber.... everyone's all about looks, flush wheels, spacers, over fenders... no one cares as much about pure performance and functionality. People want that "Track" or "Drift" look but don't necessarily have the parts that warrant it.

Perfect example is the local Chicago 240 forum. Most people on there care about how their car looks, what wheels it has, how flush they are and anyone that joins with a stock 240 gets laughed at because their car isn't "cool".

[simmode1]

ohhh, interesting! Bookmarked!

[OptionZero]

since the silvia wing is actually in the negative at high speeds. . . it's creating LIFT @ 150kph?

[Brian]

Just barely, but it certainly appears to be.

150kph should be around 90mph FYI.... i think.

[iwishiwas-all*]

i wonder what kind of drag each produces. i mean the shovel wing made 36kg of downforce, but the think looks like a damn wind-parachute. i bet the s14 wing produces the least drag.

[irax]

Well, even if it was from a magazine put out last month, I still wouldn't know why they didn't choose those other wings.

:)

very valid point, im sure some where in the article it probably says they tested these wings because they were the most popular, i'm almost sure of that to be the answer.

[DMaxUSA]

the results are pretty interesting! I'd be interested in seeing what caused the large spikes in the Cusco GT. Its a shame magazines nowadays aren't even nearly as informative stuff from the 90's =(

The spikes are a natural result of the type of testing they did. They put the different wings on the same car, same driver, and same road course. Since they were not always going at constant speed and passing through corners, some wings would provide better downforce than others based on shape (which is why its common to straight plane wings, as well as "3D" curved plane wings).

The stock S14 Kouki wing was purely designed to bring the S14 to zero lift as much as possible. S14's have a tendency to lift at high speeds due to the shape of the rear bumper, and the bottom line (the no wing line) shows negative downforce which is lift.

[Sleepy240]

The spikes are a natural result of the type of testing they did. They put the different wings on the same car, same driver, and same road course. Since they were not always going at constant speed and passing through corners, some wings would provide better downforce than others based on shape (which is why its common to straight plane wings, as well as "3D" curved plane wings).

The stock S14 Kouki wing was purely designed to bring the S14 to zero lift as much as possible. S14's have a tendency to lift at high speeds due to the shape of the rear bumper, and the bottom line (the no wing line) shows negative downforce which is lift.

I thought since they were using speed as an axis the corners etc would be irrelevant since they are only measuring the downforces at a speed? Either way a SPIKE that large to me would show inconsistency in the product since ALL the other wings are relatively flat as far the graph goes. If they were to redo this test wouldn't testing it in a wind tunnel or the like provide more quality results? And also provide additional information such as drag etc.?

[irax]

isn't drag a function of downforce?

[Andrew Bohan]

just confirmed with my jap reading friend. the wing that creates lift is in fact wingless..

yes, that is correct

it says WINGU NASHI (no wing)

[LS240]

since the silvia wing is actually in the negative at high speeds. . . it's creating LIFT @ 150kph?

No, the wing is actually cancelling lift, or in other words creating downforce. The overall net effect with the Kouki wing is very slight lift at speed, but compared to no wing, there is far less lift. So the wing is in fact doing it's job.

[Sleepy240]

No, the wing is actually cancelling lift, or in other words creating downforce. The overall net effect with the Kouki wing is very slight lift at speed, but compared to no wing, there is far less lift. So the wing is in fact doing it's job.

Technically wouldn't it be doing its job UP until the 150kph? At which point it becomes a negativte effec (even though its still greater than no wing)? Either way it does its job from a practicality standpoint

[atom]

No, because like LS240 said the lift amount is still less than a wingless S14. It's creating downforce, just not enough to get the car to zero lift. That doesn't make it a negative effect. A negative effect would means it has MORE lift than a wingless S14.

That heinous b-wave wing actually does something LOL. Neat.

[Sleepy240]

No, because like LS240 said the lift amount is still less than a wingless S14. It's creating downforce, just not enough to get the car to zero lift. That doesn't make it a negative effect. A negative effect would means it has MORE lift than a wingless S14.

That heinous b-wave wing actually does something LOL. Neat.

By the WING actually creating LIFT it is having a negative effect... Its like a diminishing return, my assumption would be if the speed was increased past the 150kph the effects would be more obvious. When the wing goes from creating downforce (positive) to creating life (negative) it is NOT doing its job. At slower speeds absolutely it works fine.

[atom]

Dude, it's not creating lift. You're confusing the wing creating lift and the chassis having lift. Look at the brown line. That's a wingless S14. The chassis has a natural amount of lift at speed. The red line is with the kouki wing it has less lift overall, therefore the wing is creating downforce even if the chassis isn't at zero lift. If at any point the red line was lower than the brown line then the wing would be creating lift.

[luftrofl]

By the WING actually creating LIFT it is having a negative effect... Its like a diminishing return, my assumption would be if the speed was increased past the 150kph the effects would be more obvious. When the wing goes from creating downforce (positive) to creating life (negative) it is NOT doing its job. At slower speeds absolutely it works fine.

I don't see how the wing itself can go from creating downforce to creating lift. The only explanation that I can see is that its effectiveness decreases as the speed increases, possibly because it sits so low on the car.

Keep in mind that the downforce is still less than no wing, which means that it's still producing downforce, ableit not enough to counter the lift caused by the aerodynamic properties of the S14.

[OptionZero]

Ah, I understand. I forgot that the starting point is "no wing", so we really do need to look at the effect of the wing relative to where we're starting from.

Not that I'm hitting 90mph while driving to work, lol.

[xs240]

That is very nice, but I have an s13, although it would be a similar result. It would be nice if we could do these kinds of tests on other wings available today... ah well :(

[Om1kron]

someone ask RedStripe to post his wing dyno in this thread. His was tested as well. I would like to see how it fairs against kognitions chassis mounted gt wing. Which I would also like to see some dyno charts for.

[g-via]

isn't drag a function of downforce?

drag is a function of shear stress and area

[TheArkitekt]

drag is a by-product of lift. and computing drag gets a little tricky. while some wings may look like they create more drag they might not. it has a lot to do with laminar and turbulent flow and without a wind tunnel test on the wings it would be hard to determine these. it is possible however, to create more downforce then another wing while still generating the same amount of drag.

[Sleepy240]

I don't see how the wing itself can go from creating downforce to creating lift. The only explanation that I can see is that its effectiveness decreases as the speed increases, possibly because it sits so low on the car.

Keep in mind that the downforce is still less than no wing, which means that it's still producing downforce, ableit not enough to counter the lift caused by the aerodynamic properties of the S14.

The Red Line that represents the s14 wing, finishes the graph BELOW its starting point at 40kph. Besides that point it finishes BELOW the neutral line on the graph, which to me would indicate it is in fact creating lift or atleast not effective enough to cancel out the effects of the chassis lift and just slowing its effects. Where as the other wings CREATE downforce and tend to stay ABOVE their starting points

[ThatGuy]

Awesome post Brian. Thanks for sharing this information. :bow:

[luftrofl]

The Red Line that represents the s14 wing, finishes the graph BELOW its starting point at 40kph. Besides that point it finishes BELOW the neutral line on the graph, which to me would indicate it is in fact creating lift or atleast not effective enough to cancel out the effects of the chassis lift and just slowing its effects. Where as the other wings CREATE downforce and tend to stay ABOVE their starting points

The assumption that you're making is that the chassis itself does not cause lift. This is not true (see brown/gray graph of downforce which is a wingless chassis)

The graphs are not a direct representation of how much downforce the wings are causing. They are a representation of the total downforce on the car.

For the true measurement of how much downforce these wings create, you must take the level on the graph and subtract the lift created by the chassis itself.

[Sleepy240]

I noted the chassis lift and if that's the way it was intended to be read then the WING is in fact not creating ENOUGH downforce to counteract the chassis lift at the higher speeds. The wing should clearly NOT have a downward turn on the graph regardless. No matter how you decide to read the graph having it drop below its starting point is a negative. Obviously its better than no wing but it doesn't stop the chassis lift so it IS not effective at that point

[racepar1]

Do the results of that test REALLY surprise anyone? Of course almost all wings will make some amount of downforce and of course the cusco 3d GT wing will make the most downforce of any of the ones tested. Shit is common sense.

[ThatGuy]

Not really surprising, but nice to see anyway.

[Sleepy240]

Do the results of that test REALLY surprise anyone? Of course almost all wings will make some amount of downforce and of course the cusco 3d GT wing will make the most downforce of any of the ones tested. Shit is common sense.

I'm not surprised that they all created downforce however I AM surprised at how large the gap is between the top and bottom performers

[luftrofl]

I noted the chassis lift

If you had, you never would have said that the wing caused lift.

and if that's the way it was intended to be read then the WING is in fact not creating ENOUGH downforce to counteract the chassis lift at the higher speeds.

Yes, that is what we've been saying all this time.

The wing should clearly NOT have a downward turn on the graph regardless. No matter how you decide to read the graph having it drop below its starting point is a negative. Obviously its better than no wing but it doesn't stop the chassis lift so it IS not effective at that point

Why shouldn't it? Look at how low it is on the car.

[Sleepy240]

The function of the wing is to counteract the effects of chassis lift and create downforce. At the point in the graph where it takes a downward turn it is NO longer creating enough downforce to counteract the force and therefor is not doing its job. Again having a wing is clearly better than not having one, but the stock wing is clearly "flawed" as far as canceling chassis lift after a certain point of speed that is VERY attainable. And the fact that it starts its downward trend so early is a huge put off IMO

[luftrofl]

The function of the wing is to counteract the effects of chassis lift and create downforce. At the point in the graph where it takes a downward turn it is NO longer creating enough downforce to counteract the force and therefor is not doing its job. Again having a wing is clearly better than not having one, but the stock wing is clearly "flawed" as far as canceling chassis lift after a certain point of speed that is VERY attainable. And the fact that it starts its downward trend so early is a huge put off IMO

That's true but considering that it's a wing that came stock on a road car, I'd have to say that its function was not just creating downforce- it's a compromise between function, looks, and civility. If its function was solely to create downforce, it would look very different.

[LA_phantom_240]

Neat!

Makes me want to put a factory wing back on my s14.

[Brian]

Do the results of that test REALLY surprise anyone? Of course almost all wings will make some amount of downforce and of course the cusco 3d GT wing will make the most downforce of any of the ones tested. Shit is common sense.


It SHOULD be common sense, but sadly....
it aint.



I just skimmed through 20 posts or so of nonsensical jargon jibber jabber.

Guys, shut up.

[fliprayzin240sx]

Hmm...they should have tested some Pep-boys special wing for shit and giggles.

[xs240]

AEROMOTIONS (http://aeromotions.com/)

I'm special cause the above is special

[Otto347]

Nice thread sir!

[racepar1]

I'm not surprised that they all created downforce however I AM surprised at how large the gap is between the top and bottom performers

The 3d GT wing was designed to create a drastic amount of downforce. It doesn't surprise me at all.

It SHOULD be common sense, but sadly....
it aint.



I just skimmed through 20 posts or so of nonsensical jargon jibber jabber.

Guys, shut up.

:stupid:

I REALLY don't feel like putting on an areodynamics 101 class here.

[Def]

:stupid:

I REALLY don't feel like putting on an areodynamics 101 class here.

I don't even think we'd be up to the 101 level with the dumbshit responses I've seen in this thread. More like the 001 remedial level, with having to curve the tests heavily.

[HyperTek]

you should watermark those before some ebay assholes try to claim their wings have the same output lol

[!Zar!]

An effective wing is one that is flush with the roof line.

Just a statement by me.

[Brian]

you should watermark those before some ebay assholes try to claim their wings have the same output lol


nah, it's 100% okay for companies to rip off designs and sell them. Stealing is "okay".


Where have you been?

[vodka2]

cusco gt wins
stock fails hard.

[!Zar!]

nah, it's 100% okay for companies to rip off designs and sell them. Stealing is "okay".


Where have you been?

Only if you own a 240.

[murda-c]

nah, it's 100% okay for companies to rip off designs and sell them. Stealing is "okay".


Where have you been?

Hey man if the companies cared they'd sue...it's not as if our society is becoming overly litigious.

[Brian]

Off topic thread.

fuck it.

Locked.