MX-3.com

Those cars have nothing on this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vDq__TYO0U

Flyer wrote: I would like to hear Inodoro Pereyra's take on this Civic...

Short of a wind tunnel test, there's not much to say, actually. But if you're gonna judge just by what you can see, the wing on the civic seems to be set up more like a spoiler than a wing (yo can see the drastic difference on the angle of attack on both wings, besides the fact that the wing in the civic is installed very close to the rear of the car, pretty much as an extension to the roof, pretty much denying the Bernoulli effect on it). If that's the case, it does make sense, as a spoiler is not meant to provide downforce, but to decrease drag.

Sleeper6 wrote:I think its sick, and theres nothing wrong with a rear wing on a fwd if you plan on doing more than a straight line, not only that the increased pressure on the rear could help stabilize the car under hard braking.

Hmmm... Opinions, opinions... Everybody has one...

This has been explained several times already, by myself and others. But here we go...

The purpose of the wing is to provide downforce on the corresponding axle AT SPEED, to increase the grip on that axle. Increasing the grip on one axle automatically decreases the grip on the other one.
FWD cars are naturally understeering (and the MX-3 is no exception), meaning that under extreme cornering they tend to lose grip of the front tires, not the rear ones , due to the engine power being applied to the front wheels.
So, for a car that already has a grip problem in the front, there's everything wrong with artificially increasing that grip imbalance by adding a rear wing.

And about stabilizing the car "under hard braking", actually, at the beginning, the wing does exactly the opposite, as braking is done primarily with the front wheels, and, later on during the braking, it does absolutely nothing, once the airflow over it decreases.

I know that rear wings look good, for the "Fast and the Furious" crowd. But even on that movie, you see the guy who "knows what he's doing" driving only RWD cars with a wing (an RX-7, and a Supra), and all the wannabes driving FWD's. That should tell you something...

http://www.motormavens.com/2010/03/cove ... tonwillow/

Explain than why one of the fastest FWD racers in the states has a wing on the back too? Guess your right its just a F&F thing afterall...

Pretty sure If your after more than just straight line performance, I cant see having a wing for increased down force on the rear hurting, especially our cars that are so unbalance with the majority of the weight on the front axles (worse when theyre gutted). Afterall look at how much moons car doglegs in his autoX pics for proof of that one.

Sleeper6 wrote:http://www.motormavens.com/2010/03/cove ... tonwillow/

Explain than why one of the fastest FWD racers in the states has a wing on the back too? Guess your right its just a F&F thing afterall...

Can you link a picture of the actual car you're talking about?

Sleeper6 wrote:Pretty sure If your after more than just straight line performance, I cant see having a wing for increased down force on the rear hurting, especially our cars that are so unbalance with the majority of the weight on the front axles (worse when theyre gutted). Afterall look at how much moons car doglegs in his autoX pics for proof of that one.

You're not paying attention: it is WHEN CORNERING that a rear wing hurts a FWD car.
I don't know what "doglegging" is, but now that you mentioned Moon's autoX car: have you ever seen his car losing the tail on a curve? You didn't, right? That's because FWD's don't lose the tail, they just overshoot the curve. Actually, if Moon reads this thread, he will probably tell you racers tend to use the E-brake to help their FWD car go through curves faster.

Dog legging as we refer to it here is when under hard cornering the rear inside wheel looses traction, resulting in a loss of grip. Granted a rear wing will only help at high speeds without a significant amount of rake but it would still help.


Chris rado's FWD time attack scion, with, A rear wing!


This is his current incarnation

Im sorry Inodoro, but theres a practical application for everything even if we dont know it yet. And ya I know that mx3 probably isnt a big track monster, but I bet that wing was atleast good for getting a phone number or two

Can I safely post this picture, or will it open up the argument about backpressure again

Sleeper6 wrote:
Dog legging as we refer to it here is when under hard cornering the rear inside wheel looses traction, resulting in a loss of grip. Granted a rear wing will only help at high speeds without a significant amount of rake but it would still help.

You mean when the inside rear lifts off the ground? That is PRECISELY an indicative of too much grip on the rear wheels, and no, a wing would not help at all, as it would create more downforce on the outside wheel than on the inside one.

Sleeper6 wrote:
Chris rado's FWD time attack scion, with, A rear wing!


This is his current incarnation

Makes you wonder why did he put that big wing on the front, doesn't it? Your own pictures are making my point!

Sleeper6 wrote:Im sorry Inodoro, but theres a practical application for everything even if we dont know it yet.

We know exactly the practical application of a rear wing, and it's NOT on a FWD car. You can argue all you want, but, like it or not, this subject is no mystery. Rear wings do not belong on FWD cars.

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:The wing can be made of solid gold, FWIW. It's still stupid. It's not about being expensive, it's about making sense.

A wing is meant to increase downward pressure on the end it's installed. Rear wings are for RWD cars ONLY.

Not at all. If he tracks his car, a wing has it's place on RWD, AWD and even FWD cars. It's all about the car's setup.

Inodoro Pereyra wrote: Makes you wonder why did he put that big wing on the front, doesn't it? Your own pictures are making my point!

I give up. Im sorry I tried to promote some forward thinking and the fact that I think its pretty cool that the import culture has spawned some serious developments and interest in racing to revitalize the culture for a new generation. After all if Rado hadn't campaigned his FWD scion successfully with the rear wing I doubt he would have ever tried installing the front wing like he did. Personally, Im glad his idea made it past a forum board before it got bashed.

Nd4SpdSe wrote: It's all about the car's setup.

Yes, it is. That's the reason rear wings are not good for FWD cars. Because they don't help.
Now, if you use the wing as a SPOILER (which is NOT how the wing in the MX-3 shown here is set up), then yes, a wing can help the car's performance, but that's because you're not using the wing to produce downforce, but to delay the separation of the boundary layer, therefore reducing drag. Other than that, the last thing FWD cars need is extra downforce in the rear.

I'd say I'd use it if it increases your lap times.

You can force the car into more traction. If you can corner at 60 mph before you understeer, maybe you can corner at 61 mph with more trail braking and a touch of left foot braking.

If it just causes worse understeer that you can't correct or turn into an advantage... dump the wing.

Could be different for every car. Personally I wouldn't throw it on my MX-3, because its pretty much exactly neutral as it is if I'm easy on the trailbraking and easy on the throttle on the track out... like you'd expect.

And I don't race enough to justify looking like a douche with a wing on a basically DD.

Ryan wrote:
If it just causes worse understeer that you can't correct or turn into an advantage... dump the wing.

Yup.
I knew, if somebody was gonna get it, it'd be you.

so is it the same for mudflaps...?

if you dont do rally in the mud you cant have mudflaps?