Spoiler Delete=Performance or Cosmetic?
11/25/06, 12:00 AM
#82
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where is your tech "PROOF" that shows I am not correct.
Sounds like somebody believes BS and not hard evidence or they would agree with me.
TELL ME THE CERTAIN SPEED...
Prove me wrong, I double dog dare you!
By the way... it looks just like the spoiler on my Hyundai Accent GT.
(At what certain speed...?)
Sounds like somebody believes BS and not hard evidence or they would agree with me.
TELL ME THE CERTAIN SPEED...
Prove me wrong, I double dog dare you!By the way... it looks just like the spoiler on my Hyundai Accent GT.
(At what certain speed...?)If you want to learn something, search corner carvers or read:
http://www.circletrack.com/techartic...h_definitions/
11/25/06, 03:17 AM
#83
Speaking of spoilers what about the NASCAR Dodge Daytonas,that had to be the "Mother" of all spoilers installed,what was strange the Torinos of that vintage didn't run one(spoiler) but certainly kept up with competition.Go figure.
11/25/06, 08:42 AM
#84
I lust for a M24
Join Date: November 6, 2004
Location: Football HOF, Canton OH
Posts: 7,045
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Are you a licensed NHRA driver?
No, but I did stay at a
last night!
I did 120mph for about 45 mins with no spoiler through curvy, misty, West Virginia roads (I77 through the upper Appalachian's) the second day I had my car. Not the smartest thing to do, but - No problems, stock suspension and rubber.
Is anyone who's arguing that the spoiler is functional considering suspension or the fact that the car sits so high off the ground that it looks like a 4x4 in the rear end? There's a lot of air movement under that car, and a cheap plastic wing mounted to the decklid will have a minimal, if any effect.
But no, I don't have any scientific data. Hang on, let me hook up my X-cal to the wind tunnel in my garage.
Ask the "pros" on the ricer forums for their opinions.
http://www.superhonda.com/forum/show...hreadid=143882
http://www.superhonda.com/forum/showthread.php?t=145809
http://www.honda-acura.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=99259
http://www.automotiveforums.com/t546...gestions_.html
3 out of 4 ricers agree. Spoilers are FUNCTIONAL!
Even the hybrid guys like them.
http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/h...iler.4048.html
They probably increase gas mileage too.
No, but I did stay at a
last night!I did 120mph for about 45 mins with no spoiler through curvy, misty, West Virginia roads (I77 through the upper Appalachian's) the second day I had my car. Not the smartest thing to do, but - No problems, stock suspension and rubber.
Is anyone who's arguing that the spoiler is functional considering suspension or the fact that the car sits so high off the ground that it looks like a 4x4 in the rear end? There's a lot of air movement under that car, and a cheap plastic wing mounted to the decklid will have a minimal, if any effect.
But no, I don't have any scientific data. Hang on, let me hook up my X-cal to the wind tunnel in my garage.
Ask the "pros" on the ricer forums for their opinions.
http://www.superhonda.com/forum/show...hreadid=143882
http://www.superhonda.com/forum/showthread.php?t=145809
http://www.honda-acura.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=99259
http://www.automotiveforums.com/t546...gestions_.html
3 out of 4 ricers agree. Spoilers are FUNCTIONAL!
Even the hybrid guys like them.
http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/h...iler.4048.html
They probably increase gas mileage too.
11/25/06, 08:54 AM
#86
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
I can't tell you the exact speed, but you would be a fool and are arguing against basic principles of aerodynamics. C&D did a test of factory spoilers a few years back and found that they made a difference above 90 mph. I am sure that's close to where the s197s factory spoiler starts to provide downforce, albeit mininal.
If you want to learn something, search corner carvers or read:
http://www.circletrack.com/techartic...h_definitions/
If you want to learn something, search corner carvers or read:
http://www.circletrack.com/techartic...h_definitions/
11/25/06, 08:00 PM
#88
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read Ford's own press release. Now how much of it is marketing and which part is factual, you be the judge. I do know at higher speeds the spoiler does something based on simple aerodynamic principles. Now does the added downforce(minimal) offset the drag? I don't have a wind tunnel, so I cannot answer that. If I had a wind tunnel, I could answer both questions very easily.
11/25/06, 09:20 PM
#89
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Read Ford's own press release. Now how much of it is marketing and which part is factual, you be the judge. I do know at higher speeds the spoiler does something based on simple aerodynamic principles. Now does the added downforce(minimal) offset the drag? I don't have a wind tunnel, so I cannot answer that. If I had a wind tunnel, I could answer both questions very easily.
.
Spoiler Delete=Performance or Cosmetic? .
Only the Mustang GT can have the spoiler deleted from the factory.
.
The GT500 has functional rear aerodynamics. Read Ford's own press release.
.
The Mustang GT has a nice little thing stuck on the trunk like half of all the new cars on the road.
.
Having no spoiler on the back does something based on simple aerodynamic principles.
.
11/25/06, 10:32 PM
#90
Bullitt Member
Join Date: June 17, 2004
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A 3500+ lb street car will never need downforce. Turbulent flow under the car, pressures across the top, large front area all play into the aero(or lack of on a street car).
ANY amount of downforce (un-needed down force) will be negated by the huge amount of drag created by extending the body upward into the air flow and increasing the coefficient of drag (Cd), thus eating more horsepower.
This is a great article on how much horsepower is required to overcome drag on a street car
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...cing/part6.htm
As you can see by the equation, the amount of horse power required to overcome drag goes up exponentially with speed. This means that ANY protrusion that would increase the Cd of the vehicle would increase the amount of horse power required to over come drag.
Some other terms to search for more info are "airfoil" and "Bernoulli Principle"
Ever wonder why top end super cars all have relatively the same side profile shape (a reverse tear drop)? These light weight, high horsepower, super cars don't need a wing, so why would a 3500+ lb slug Mustang?
ANY amount of downforce (un-needed down force) will be negated by the huge amount of drag created by extending the body upward into the air flow and increasing the coefficient of drag (Cd), thus eating more horsepower.
This is a great article on how much horsepower is required to overcome drag on a street car
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...cing/part6.htm
As you can see by the equation, the amount of horse power required to overcome drag goes up exponentially with speed. This means that ANY protrusion that would increase the Cd of the vehicle would increase the amount of horse power required to over come drag.
Some other terms to search for more info are "airfoil" and "Bernoulli Principle"
Ever wonder why top end super cars all have relatively the same side profile shape (a reverse tear drop)? These light weight, high horsepower, super cars don't need a wing, so why would a 3500+ lb slug Mustang?
11/25/06, 11:36 PM
#91
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do realize the title of this thread is:
.
Spoiler Delete=Performance or Cosmetic?
.
Only the Mustang GT can have the spoiler deleted from the factory.
.
The GT500 has functional rear aerodynamics. Read Ford's own press release.
.
The Mustang GT has a nice little thing stuck on the trunk like half of all the new cars on the road.
.
Having no spoiler on the back does something based on simple aerodynamic principles.
.
.
Spoiler Delete=Performance or Cosmetic? .
Only the Mustang GT can have the spoiler deleted from the factory.
.
The GT500 has functional rear aerodynamics. Read Ford's own press release.
.
The Mustang GT has a nice little thing stuck on the trunk like half of all the new cars on the road.
.
Having no spoiler on the back does something based on simple aerodynamic principles.
.
11/25/06, 11:43 PM
#92
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The supercars you posted have built in spoilers and ground effects.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...Top+Gear&hl=en
Watch and learn....
Also, read up on the 2001 Audi TT and high speed instability.
11/26/06, 12:17 AM
#93
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
I have all the C&Ds for the past 15 years, doesn't matter because the 2005 Mustang GT didn't exist about 5 years ago.
11/26/06, 10:01 AM
#95
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: October 9, 2006
Location: It's tough in the jungle !
Posts: 2,758
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
A 3500+ lb street car will never need downforce. Turbulent flow under the car, pressures across the top, large front area all play into the aero(or lack of on a street car).
ANY amount of downforce (un-needed down force) will be negated by the huge amount of drag created by extending the body upward into the air flow and increasing the coefficient of drag (Cd), thus eating more horsepower.
This is a great article on how much horsepower is required to overcome drag on a street car
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...cing/part6.htm
As you can see by the equation, the amount of horse power required to overcome drag goes up exponentially with speed. This means that ANY protrusion that would increase the Cd of the vehicle would increase the amount of horse power required to over come drag.
Some other terms to search for more info are "airfoil" and "Bernoulli Principle"
Ever wonder why top end super cars all have relatively the same side profile shape (a reverse tear drop)? These light weight, high horsepower, super cars don't need a wing, so why would a 3500+ lb slug Mustang?
ANY amount of downforce (un-needed down force) will be negated by the huge amount of drag created by extending the body upward into the air flow and increasing the coefficient of drag (Cd), thus eating more horsepower.
This is a great article on how much horsepower is required to overcome drag on a street car
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...cing/part6.htm
As you can see by the equation, the amount of horse power required to overcome drag goes up exponentially with speed. This means that ANY protrusion that would increase the Cd of the vehicle would increase the amount of horse power required to over come drag.
Some other terms to search for more info are "airfoil" and "Bernoulli Principle"
Ever wonder why top end super cars all have relatively the same side profile shape (a reverse tear drop)? These light weight, high horsepower, super cars don't need a wing, so why would a 3500+ lb slug Mustang?
11/26/06, 10:32 AM
#96
I lust for a M24
Join Date: November 6, 2004
Location: Football HOF, Canton OH
Posts: 7,045
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
With all the prepoduction photos, and all of the knowledge on this site - does anyone know how much R&D Ford put in to the design of the spoiler? I mean, did FoMoCo actually test the spoiler for it's aerodynamic principals, or did they design a wing that they thought looked good and bolt it to the trunk? Anyone have HTT's email address?
11/26/06, 01:40 PM
#97
Bullitt Member
Join Date: June 17, 2004
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its interesting that the three vehicle's used all incorporate airfoil principles in there rear end design and one the Ferrari is a mid engine set-up with a totally different weight distribution factor! thanks for helping prove how weight on the rear end of a vehicle helps handling! down force equals weight! thats! one of the reasons F1, IRL,Cart and almost all of exotic high speed cars are mid-rear end powered cars! A 3500 to 4000 pound car doesn't need! a lot of things but can spoilers and or ground effects enhance! there handling ask anyone who actually drives one at a competitive level you bet! The GT's spoiler-airfoil is designed to at lower speeds create minimal drag! but as the car approaches high speeds to create down force! to enhance rear end stability! down force is drag! and does have be compensated with more power! but the sad fact is on this Planet! both are needed to create a fast responsive vehicle! Do most GT owners use their cars in the manner to utilize the rear spoiler capability's probably not! Can a driver at triple digit speeds have enhanced handling from the GT spoiler yes he can and will! any automobile design that has had the airfoil principle compromised for acetic purposes when wanting to run high speeds has compensated for lack of design! with add on's, spoilers or ground effects and that is our beloved Mustang! looks first!. enhanced preformace comes from the had on's spoilers, Drag packages and handling packages !!!
If you want to believe that your 3500+ lb street car benefits from a spolier that can deflect under the force of a blow dryer, then by all means keep believing. Go to your car and press down on the center of the spoiler. Does it flex? Then imagine what REAL downforce (enough to be beneficial in stabilizing a heavy car) would do to our silly spoilers.
You are right that downforce creates drag, but so does neutral and that is what our spoilers are. Sorry to burst your race car dreams, but spoilers and wings on street cars are just for looks.
Do you really think auto manufacturers give a rats @#@$% about creating downforce on a street car? You've said it yourself that downforce = drag, but what does drag equal? Drag eqauls requiring more power to overcome. More power means worse gas mileage. In the realm of auto manufacturers (especially American V8) gas mileage is a huge concern, downforce on a 3500+ lb street car that will most likely never see triple digits is not.
Spoilers/wings on race cars = useful
Spoilers/wings on street care = looks
A street car driven on a race track != a race car
11/26/06, 01:57 PM
#98
GT Member
Join Date: November 1, 2006
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You missed the point entirely. Does the Z06 need downforce? Why isn't there a spoiler or wing on the back of it? Answer: because it is unecessary even for a lighter car with more power. Let me know at what speed the rear end of a slug street Mustang becomes light enough to require downforce. Mixing race car talk and street car talk is silly.
If you want to believe that your 3500+ lb street car benefits from a spolier that can deflect under the force of a blow dryer, then by all means keep believing. Go to your car and press down on the center of the spoiler. Does it flex? Then imagine what REAL downforce (enough to be beneficial in stabilizing a heavy car) would do to our silly spoilers.
You are right that downforce creates drag, but so does neutral and that is what our spoilers are. Sorry to burst your race car dreams, but spoilers and wings on street cars are just for looks.
Do you really think auto manufacturers give a rats @#@$% about creating downforce on a street car? You've said it yourself that downforce = drag, but what does drag equal? Drag eqauls requiring more power to overcome. More power means worse gas mileage. In the realm of auto manufacturers (especially American V8) gas mileage is a huge concern, downforce on a 3500+ lb street car that will most likely never see triple digits is not.
Spoilers/wings on race cars = useful
Spoilers/wings on street care = looks
A street car driven on a race track != a race car
If you want to believe that your 3500+ lb street car benefits from a spolier that can deflect under the force of a blow dryer, then by all means keep believing. Go to your car and press down on the center of the spoiler. Does it flex? Then imagine what REAL downforce (enough to be beneficial in stabilizing a heavy car) would do to our silly spoilers.
You are right that downforce creates drag, but so does neutral and that is what our spoilers are. Sorry to burst your race car dreams, but spoilers and wings on street cars are just for looks.
Do you really think auto manufacturers give a rats @#@$% about creating downforce on a street car? You've said it yourself that downforce = drag, but what does drag equal? Drag eqauls requiring more power to overcome. More power means worse gas mileage. In the realm of auto manufacturers (especially American V8) gas mileage is a huge concern, downforce on a 3500+ lb street car that will most likely never see triple digits is not.
Spoilers/wings on race cars = useful
Spoilers/wings on street care = looks
A street car driven on a race track != a race car
11/26/06, 02:01 PM
#99
Bullitt Member
Join Date: June 17, 2004
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess you have your own wind tunnel and SVT is incorrect. Another good example of a really functional spoiler would be the 00 Cobra R. I don't think anyone is saying the GT's spoiler is race engineered, but it works upon a simple design.
The supercars you posted have built in spoilers and ground effects.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...Top+Gear&hl=en
Watch and learn....
Also, read up on the 2001 Audi TT and high speed instability.
The supercars you posted have built in spoilers and ground effects.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...Top+Gear&hl=en
Watch and learn....
Also, read up on the 2001 Audi TT and high speed instability.
Maybe C&D knows better than I
Early Performance Tests
Car and Driver compared an early build 2007 Shelby GT500 with a 2006 Z51 package Chevrolet Corvette. The Shelby obtained a 12.9 second quarter-mile while the Corvette ran a 12.8. The Shelby had a 100 hp advantage over the Corvette, but a 616 lb weight disadvantage. Similar tests by the magazine Road & Track reported a 13.1 second quarter-mile for the Shelby GT500. Some critics have pointed out that the weight of the car is causing estimated ET's less than expected. The weight of the Shelby GT500 with a driver is nearly 4,100 lb. Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords (August 2006 issue) were able to coax low-12 second performances out of a pre-production version (best: 12.257s), with trap speeds of over 117mph.
The heavy iron block V8, with supercharger and water-to-air intercooler, shift the weight bias further forward than the standard Mustang GT (57/43%; front/rear), but the car is said to handle predictably and ride comfortably. According to Car & Driver, the Corvette was deemed to be a better performance vehicle based on the tests performed, but found the Shelby to be more practical, and to offer a more comfortable ride, and stated that the Shelby offered the "best [overall] bang for the buck around." One of the considerations for the for Car & Drivers statement was based on the top end speed test conducted at the same time. The Shelby attained 155 mph (Electronically limited) while the Corvette reached 186 mph. Even without the electronic limitation the Shelby is not expected to pass 170 mph according to Ford Engineers whose comments were based on wind tunnel experiments and drag co-efficient numbers
Car and Driver compared an early build 2007 Shelby GT500 with a 2006 Z51 package Chevrolet Corvette. The Shelby obtained a 12.9 second quarter-mile while the Corvette ran a 12.8. The Shelby had a 100 hp advantage over the Corvette, but a 616 lb weight disadvantage. Similar tests by the magazine Road & Track reported a 13.1 second quarter-mile for the Shelby GT500. Some critics have pointed out that the weight of the car is causing estimated ET's less than expected. The weight of the Shelby GT500 with a driver is nearly 4,100 lb. Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords (August 2006 issue) were able to coax low-12 second performances out of a pre-production version (best: 12.257s), with trap speeds of over 117mph.
The heavy iron block V8, with supercharger and water-to-air intercooler, shift the weight bias further forward than the standard Mustang GT (57/43%; front/rear), but the car is said to handle predictably and ride comfortably. According to Car & Driver, the Corvette was deemed to be a better performance vehicle based on the tests performed, but found the Shelby to be more practical, and to offer a more comfortable ride, and stated that the Shelby offered the "best [overall] bang for the buck around." One of the considerations for the for Car & Drivers statement was based on the top end speed test conducted at the same time. The Shelby attained 155 mph (Electronically limited) while the Corvette reached 186 mph. Even without the electronic limitation the Shelby is not expected to pass 170 mph according to Ford Engineers whose comments were based on wind tunnel experiments and drag co-efficient numbers
The cars I listed are all shaped to cut through the air, just as an airplane wing is. Meaning they can benefit from an aero device. Air flow around an S197 mustang can in no way be compared to a tuned airfoil. A protrusion is just going to create drag. downforce is not required.
11/26/06, 02:01 PM
#100
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you forget about the 00 Cobra R? Or even the well publicized high speed instability problems with the Audi TT?My car has been road raced and drag raced and it is a street car. I drive it daily to work and the car has 27K miles.
Edit: You also posted "Go to your car and press down on the center of the spoiler. Does it flex? Then imagine what REAL downforce (enough to be beneficial in stabilizing a heavy car) would do to our silly spoilers. "
That's a horrible example. A good friend of mine had a 97 Reynard IRL car and it would flex if you pushed down in the center. His Petite LeMans CF spoiler(very light) also does the same thing. Both are highly functional. You are placing load on one specific section, instead of the whole surface area.