What do you guys think? Are you going BIG WING, or keeping it more subtle? WHY?! Either way, with 10% Off Airlift suspension kits, you’re sure to achieve the fitment you’ve been dreaming of - bit.ly/2NGYoyb
I am actually thinking of making a custom big wind that looks "factoryish." Pick a Clark Y airfoil or maybe one that can go a bit slower, and mold it into the natural lines of my car, kind of like the Mk IV Supra wing. Going to take me a year or two to actually make it though, I have to learn carbon fiber & fiberglass layup first. But it's a plan.
@@saulekaravirs6585 You'd be surprised what kind of difference a simple lip on a factory spoiler can make. Looks pretty clean and won't break the bank either. Cheers mate.
Big spoilers are cool on race cars but I roll my eyes when I see them on street cars...same with cages and harnesses, I agree with Alex on that, they don't belong on street cars.
I've got an e36 with the ltw wing and having gotten it to 140 mph twice and seeing how stable and comfortable it was at that speed makes a huge difference. Awesome video going over the history of aerodynamics I like the educational style of it all.
@@chicanoman2999 it's super easy to ignore the hate of owning one. The FB group is amazing and has a lot of vendors there too. For the big wing though you got 2 options (all are 13-17 with unofficial but kinda works for 19+). They are Ark(expensive) or Socal Garage (cheaper). Both carbon and both good. I went socal. I'd offer pictures but don't have a way to send em
N owner here. I want one of those giant wings. I’ll wait for a hatch mounted one like the TCR cars have tho .. but $$$ Bryan Herta sells them I think (he runs the TCR Velosters here.. his team )
In the past I thought it was silly to add down force to the back of a FWD car. Then it was explained to me like this: to be fast around a track, a FWD car needs to have plenty of rotation on tap whenever you want in, especially for tight (slow) turns. While plenty of rotation is preferable for low speed turns, it translates to twitchiness at high speeds, exactly when a big old wang is doing its best work and when the driver will be less able to counteract oversteer with more throttle.
My personal opinion: putting aero that isn't functional and only for looks is litteraly what rice means, it's race inspired but doesn't do jack shit and only for looks, but if you're going for a little stance build and it isn't ment for track then yeah why not, they kinda look good
I used to agree with this but then the more deeper I thought about it means That I would have had to consider pretty much 80 percent of the car community rice and it was just too hard to stay consistent with it so now for me I just say if it looks good then it’s good
@@NatedoGP yeah bro people over use rice and don't even know what it means these days, I met a jdm kid that said the blower that pop out the hood of classic muscle cars were rice, and he thought rice ment ugly🤦♂️
@@samisamby8044 No. Werriam-webster also states that the improper contraction "ain't" is a word, when it damn sure isn't. If you can care less, then you can care less. If you couldn't care less, then it is a logical impossibility to care less. In their defense, they do state a reason as to why that those use the phrase with the word "could" would do so based on a lack of education.
@@The_Kirk_Lazarus It's been used for hundreds of years. Sometimes what you say isn't what you mean, it's simply how languages work. I think merriam webster sums it up pretty well: "If you are the kind of person who cries out against this abomination we must warn you that people who go through life expecting informal variant idioms in English to behave logically are setting themselves up for a lifetime of hurt."
If you disagree, you're wrong. I absolutely need the extra downforce especially for low speed corners like turns 3 and 4. By low speed, I mean 30 kph. And by turns 3 and 4, I mean the two turns I take that lead to the first red light on my commute to work every morning.
Like you said, it's about balance. If you have a large rear spoiler you need one in front too. Never seen anyone put a large front spoiler on a road car though so I'm gonna say that large rear spoilers are still dumb from a performance perspective. I mean, if someone is just into the look (and doesn't care about ruining their mpg with all that extra drag) then by all means. Just as long as they don't pretend like it's giving them some kind of performance benefit.
A rear wing on the back still works, downforce will push the rear tires into the ground whilst cornering and this will counteract oversteer. Front still works but that is mainly for understeer. A decent driver can counteract understeer in an RWD car by proper throttle management.
Fun fact: 69 Charger Daytona Mule had routinely run laps at the Chrysler Corporation Proving Ground in Chelsea Michigan at 235 miles an hour ultimately taken the mule to laps over 243 miles an hour.
I call bs on that one. You see even the Ford GT40 MkIV was clocked at 213.13mph in the 1967 Le Mans 24 hour race. First of all you don't have to be an aerodynamicist to see that the low-slung GT40 will cut through air easier than the Charger Daytona. The aerodynamic drag is ultimately the frontal area times the drag coefficient. Here's the nasty part too - the power needed to overcome wind resistance increases cubely with speed. This means that unless you have an insane amount of power the only way to deal with that is too dramatically decrease drag - i.e. building a low, slippery car. The GT40 certainly was designed for this in mind, the Dodge Charger not so much. Adding a few aerodynamic parts won't make the frontal area smaller or fundamentally change the body. The Mulsanne straight at LeMans was undoubtedly the longest straight in motor racing in those days - before they ever rising speeds forced them to add two chicanes. 3,8 miles of straight means seriously high speeds are reached in a powerful racing car with an aerodynamic body. Two things were common in those days: 1) Exaggerating speeds for bragging rights. Usually it was rounded up to the nearest "even number". This is why Ford themselves claimed 220mph and later sources exaggerated that further to 230mph. It has been repeated so many times many take it as a fact. I'm therefore fairly certain your "sources" are equally exaggerated. 2) Difficulties measuring the actual top speed by the drivers themselves. In the days without advanced inboard telemetry this was solely down to driver to assess, usually using nothing more than the rev counter as the only measure, add final gearing to the calculation and making a crude mathematic estimation. Given the realities this often leads to a 5-10% error rate. The bottom line is that race officials were the only one clocking the top speeds of the cars and while the GT40 MkIV was the fastest they saw 213.13 mph by the fastest car. The MkIV has a 427 engine developed for racing and Shelby were given pretty much limitless resources by Ford to make it deliver the required power and reliably. Would you kindly explain to me how the Chrysler/Dodge engine of virtually an identical displacement produced so much more power? For 240mph you'd need at least 800hp, probably even more with a high drag factor. "ultimately taken the mule to laps over 243 miles an hour." No, utter nonsense. You said LAPS. From the "sources" I read this was a *momentary top speed* . Even that is clearly an exaggeration. Here's what you need to explain. How did Mark Donohue manage to go slower in the Can-Am (limitless Group 7 racing with no upper displacement limit or other limitations) Porsche 917-30 at Talladega in 1975? You see the 917-30 had turbocharged flat-12 producing 1100+ hp in race trim but a reported 1540hp in qualifying trim. 40 psi of turbo boost made this possible. This racing car was feather light too weighing only 1822 Ib's. This resulted in an acceleration of 0-200mph in 10,9 seconds. Mark Donohue won the 1973 Can-Am title driving the 917-30 but since the regulations for 1974 banned all turbo-cars Porsche decided to attempt the speed record on a closed track. On August 9, 1975, Donohue drove the 917-30 to a world closed-course speed record at the Talladega Superspeedway in Talladega, Alabama. His average speed around the 2.66-mile (4.28 km) high-banked oval was 221.120 mph (355.858 km/h). Donohue held the record for 11 years, until it was broken by Rick Mears at Michigan International Speedway. So you're telling me that Mark Donohue, a driver who raced in Sportscars, Indycars, Nascar, Can-Am, Trans-Am, IROC and Formula One. Who won the 1972 Indy 500, was Can-Am champion (with the Porsche 917-30) and was IROC champion. Managed to take a 1500hp Can-Am monster to 221mph at Talladega whereas somebody managed to take a 550hp Dodge Charger to 243mph?? Sorry, the numbers just don't add up. Gil de Ferran holds the all-time closed circuit average speed record. On October 28, 2000, during CART qualifying at California Speedway, de Ferran set both the track record and closed course record for fastest lap at 241.428 mph. That's with the ultra-low drag superspeedway setting and an engine producing over 1000hp. This are Gil de Ferran's own words from Motorsport magazine: “Leading up to the race Penske did a lot of work on the aerodynamics to make sure our Speedway car was the best it could be and Honda came up with this stonker of an engine! It made over 1000bhp. It was a qualifying engine with very little mileage. I recall its limit was 50 miles. So basically you could do two runs in the morning and then your qualifying run." Yes, so de Ferran needed over 1000hp for his 2000 closed circuit record at 241.428 mph which still stands but they went faster in 1969 with a Nascar? Right. I reiterate. The numbers just don't add up. When far more aerodynamically superior cars having way more horsepower can't reach 243mph on a high-speed track then you'd better believe those claims from 1969 should be taken very lightly indeed. Like I said, the Ford GT40 MkIV reached 213mph on the 3,8 mile long straight at LeMans in 1967. Bold claims are no match for a realistic comparison from several sources - all of which were independently verified and proven.
@@paulallen8109Chrysler recognized Nascar magic 200 mph barrier was being broken by their winged cars, but they needed to set an "official" record in order to claim it in the record books for good. So on March 24, 1970, Chrysler put their factory driver, Buddy Baker, picked from their factory-backed Cotton Owens Garage race team, behind the wheel of the specially-prepared Chrysler Engineering #88 test mule, and set out to officially claim the record at Talladega Super Speedway. Where things got confusing is that Chrysler and NASCAR did not want to promote the #88 test mule car as having set the record, because it was not a real race car and therefore had little to no PR value to the racing fans and community at large. So Chrysler, NASCAR and the media promoted their factory team, the Cotton Owens Garage #6 Daytona, along with their driver, Buddy Baker, along with the 200.447 mph record. Unofficially it (and other winged cars) had exceeded 200 mph before anyway, so that's how it was promoted. There are various publications from this time depicting this. They simply wanted to maximize the publicity value from their racing efforts with a known driver and team. There were other Chrysler teams that had hovered around the 200 mph mark too, but Buddy Baker ("leadfoot") was the most recognized factory driver who had a reputation for flat out driving, and he drove for Cotton Owens Garage, who was also one of the top factory Chrysler teams of the day Chrysler did what it set out to do, just as all the examples you illustrated. Their sole mission was to take down Ford and dominate Nascar.... which they did. 69 the Daytona winning the Talladega 500, its first race, and becoming the first stock car clocked at over 200 mph, and the follow up winning 38 out of 48 races in 1970. To quote Buddy Baker on the Dodge Charger Daytona "It'd be hard for race fans today to understand just how well the Charger stuck to the ground with that big wing on it. Even without the wing, the old Dodge with the Hemi ran well over 200 mph at Daytona and Talladega. It was a time in the sport when you looked at the car and knew you wanted one of 'em.
All depends on the wing/spoiler being added. Some are unfortunately just for cosmetic purposes (cool factor) and sadly just create added drag and others actually aid in downforce, but at a certain speed.
Why unforunately? All spoilers will have somewhat of an aero effect, it can be more or less and better managed or destabilizing. So if people with a road car are aiming for a big spoiler just because they like how it looks with it - it might be better if it has less effect than if it destabilizes the car too much
While there are some wing designs that arent particularly efficient, as long as AoA and placement in the airstream are thought out when installing you should always be able to get some amount of noticeable downforce out of one
Downforce works at any speed, at low speeds it is just less powerfull. So even a relatively slow corner (40-50kph) can be taken faster with a big wing.
What about that Miata that only got faster because of better wheels, tyres and chassis mods while still rocking that stock 1.8 NA with a straight pipe and nothing else?
@@Prestiged_peck Because it's all in theory. Sure, that Miata might not have 200whp, let alone 500, but I'm sure the wing will help the stability in some way. Or maybe he puts it on because it looks badass, it's none of my business
lol i guess you havent seen the video with the honda civic on a track with a wing vs without. you dont need power at all. you only need air speed. did you even pay attention to the video lmfao
I wanna put a mid size spoiler on my 18 civic lx nothing too big. I use it as my commuter car, but I think it looks good, and it'll stands out a bit. Should I go for it?
The only time i like big wings is when they are factory and fit in with the body lines of the car, like the subaru STI for example. I think those cars (especially the older ones) look wrong without the wing
I think any sport oriented coupe or sedan can easily rock a massive wing and look good doing it. It's the compact cars and hatchbacks that make me cringe.
I'm so glad I watched this a have a camry 99 I've google jdm camry and camry with spoiler something small not huge and fancy I love the look and how this guys cars seem to be handle better but my brother was like "don't do it it's going to look stupid people will make fun of you" when we past a camry with a wing and his like oh that's different your cars a front wheel his is a 4 cylinder camry
I just got a big wing on my coupe. I’m from a small town and I was scared about that rice hate. But I did an all blacked out look with Coilovers , side skirts and front lip splitter and carbon fiber big wing and carbon fiber fenders with an all black rim combo and tinted windows. I have tire stickers too
Wrong wheel drive cars have this fun thing called lift-off oversteer. A rear wing helped plant my FWD in corners... and yes, you need a balanced downforce on the front wheels too.
I've always cringed when people say "wHy diD tHeY pUt a SpoILer On fWd cAR haRhAr" Mostly because you can tell they are trying to look smart but in reality it shows that they couldn't pass a 3rd grade physics test and or they just repeat what other people say without actually processing the information and using very basic logic to come to their own conclusion.
There's nothing wrong if you want to make you car looks good.. its your car! Do whatever you wanna do about it for christ sake.. think about it, do you really need to be a legitimate skate boarder if you wanna buy a thrasher shirt or a vans/dc shoe? Hell no!
I’ve hesitated in the past to mount spoilers to cars but finally did a Mitsubishi Lancer wing on my 300. Now I’m looking at something for my 2010 Ford Fusion and I was almost thinking STI wing
I used to have one, great for suspension mods , braces, body kits, lights etc.. as for engine mods.. not to many and when you do find a engine mod you do want to do .. over priced for little hp gain. I have a LS400 now and restoring this 1st gen with a vip look.
that better not be the only mod on it and it better go fast enough that a wing actually does something or else you're playing yourself so hard and people laugh for a reason
@@Rory695 Such stupid logic, Most cars can be driven fast enough to utilize the effects of downforce. Having low power gives more reason to have downforce as you really want to make the most out of the corners on a track, given that you won't really be making any time up on the straights. Why don't you apply that same logic to coil overs? You sound like a sheep
If it's a well designed wing it will improve cornering at speed. Look up front wheel drive race cars race cars they all have big wings even though they don't have that much power and are fwd. Why assume his wing is badly designed just because its on a 350z? Do you know the brand of the wing or are you just hating?
weird video to put this weird question in but where and how do people get aero pieces like wings and where do they take em to install them and what stores are trusted to get pieces from performance i am new to cars and just wanna know all the mechanics near me only fix stuff but get offbrand/bad quality pieces. also im loking for bumbers and exausts at the moment but dont know what to trust
Some people are just all about talk to look big or like they know. I put a 100$ Amazon wing on my fwd sentra and i actually can tell the difference when im going over 60. My car swings less at higher speed and was able to turn without braking on some of the highway that i couldn't before without braking. So idk why some people say wings doesnt do anything, or unless you're on a race track. Try it out first yourself, every car is different...don't just go by whatever some car guy said.
Put a Mapisa spoiler on my corolla 2017 LE lol it looked dope 🔥 but then I regretted it and took it off and got a GT mustang 😅😬 I loved having it but ughhhhhhh it did feel kinda rice lol but to each their own!!
There are some cars that can wear a big ass wing, and there are shit loads of cars that can't, in my opinion. Usually they just make it seem like you're trying super hard to look fast, instead of actually being fast.
Something else that 'FWD dOesn'T nEEd rEar wiNGs' people don't think about when it comes to FWD cars is how their weight distribution affects braking from high speeds. There's absolutely a point in wings or spoilers on FWD, when talking about performance cars/builds.
How to solve it: are you a dedicated race car that’s track only and you have constant tire spin and there’s aero mods allowed in the class yes = go ahead just buy the proper wing if you’re rwd/AWD No= ricer
So I have a na6 miata and it has no spoiler. When I hit 165 kph (100mph) it feels extremely loose on the road, and I struggle to keep it in na straight line. Would an oem spoiler make a huge difference or would I need an aftermarket one?
Sounds more like you need a proper alignment and to check for worn suspension components. A Miata should be perfectly stable at 100mph even with the roof down.
Hey guys, been watching off and on over the years and I've had a question just waiting to be answered. I have a 1998 dodge grand caravan 3.8L v6 ( turbo ) that I'm having painted midnight blue with silver trim and custom pinstriped emblems. Ok here's my question for you, what would you put underneath to set it off?
Ducktail spoilers are good for looks & multi-purpose aero; drag spoilers work best for straight-line speed (obviously); & large wings specialize in maximizing cornering downforce. Pick the spoiler/wing that best suits the purpose your car is built for.
