Stock vs. NSX-R wing vs. GT Wing vs. Hybrid? - On track

[jwmelvin]

Arron and I have a new idea that I like much better. We will make a replacement for the OEM wing that will have an improved airfoil design and be a best effort at efficient downforce while remaining essentially within the OEM envelope. We both greatly prefer the look of the OEM wing to the type-R wing and I also value my rear view for daily driving.

But the key will be that our wing will have anchor points embedded in it and an attachment system so that an additional element may be mounted above the wing. This will allow a second element to be added for track use, which will give more downforce than ryneen's spoiler above, or a Gurney flap.

The attachment system also allows the addition of a variety of aero elements, which could potentially include a large GT-style wing. It would just maintain the OEM wing (and brake lights) below it. When no additional element is mounted above the base wing, cover plates would fill the attachment points.

We discussed a design that would be roughly type-R height with a interchangeable Gurney flap for tuning aero balance, but the second element will improve performance more than a Gurney flap and the design then allows us to stick with an OEM wing as the base.

I'm currently looking for a used OEM wing to send to Arron for the CAD model. We also would like a car in the Ann Arbor area that could go in to Pratt & Miller for white-light scanning so that we have the base shape. (It would be great to scan the front section too for a future underwing design.) I have a couple leads on used OEM wings from the marketplace but I prefer not to spend much since it's really just for measurement.

The thoughts in this thread have been extremely useful and I look forward to further ideas. Let me know how you guys feel about our new direction but I'm currently convinced that it will offer the performance and flexibility that we all seek. I think it will be the best-looking solution and will also be the quickest for changeover. The only downside perhaps is that when you run the base wing only, you would have an additional aero element to store. For me that's a nonissue but it is something to consider.

Best,
Jason

 

[NSXonwheels]

I'm just now jumping into this, but i do like the idea of a better performing oem height rear wing. I think it opens up your customer base considerably too, I'm not one to like a huge wing, but if I have what looks like an oem wing and get more downforce then that would be great, and if one day I feel like I need even more at the track or something then I don't have to buy a new wing, I would just get one of the attachments for it. Gives the customer more alternatives.

 

[Rope]

I know little to nothing about designing the air foil, but the top surface will need to be nearly flat unless it is extended past the existing trailing end of the wing. The body line of the car should be considered into the profile of the car if possible. Because of the interchangeable end cap design the wing between the two uprights can be almost any shape and work.

The end caps will use two long rods per cap to slide into the wing body and lock in place. There should be no issue with strength as these rods and inserts can be made of AL tubing. The width of the track wing can be made any width we would want and would be the same profile or different than the center section.

Dave

The top has a slight curvature to it and I made the wing roughly the same size as the R wing so when raised and adding the end caps more down force will be netted. How much is down force is lost due to the wing being close and over the deck lid is beyond my scope. I am just throwing ideas out there. I do like the ability to have the OEM height as well as raising it up to the R height.

 

[NSXcitement]

I'm currently looking for a used OEM wing to send to Arron for the CAD model.

You pickin up the one from gotTURBO?

 

[jwmelvin]

You pickin up the one from gotTURBO?

Thanks for the tip. There appear to be a few available.

 

[DDozier]

The OEM height can be used with my design the uprights would be made shorter. This would cause the max height when raised to be shorter. If I had to guess the advantage the R has over the stock wing is most likely due to the height above the deck lid being higher. I have no idea if that is true or not or if it is does the advantage hold true the higher the wing goes. I just do not know.

If you look at the OEM wings leading edge it is highly stylized to mate to the fender body surfaces. I think if you choose to do the OEM height your air foil shape will be compromised. One advantage to the R height is the end caps make the changes needed to flow with the fender shape.

The add on wing idea you guys have is interesting but I am having a hard time seeing how this could look good. I like my parts functional and good looking. Can you draw out what you have in mind so we can visualize your idea.

Dave

 

[jwmelvin]

Yes I am in the process of having a wing sent to Arron to measure and once the weather improves in Michigan we have a volunteer car to scan too. So eventually we will have a model to share. If it turns out that a height above the OEM wing works better (visually as well as functionally) then that's where we may end up.

I'm also not ruling out a vertical translation but I suspect that to make it look the way I want, it would be too expensive. It's a bit like the adjustable angle-of-attack: when I discussed that with Arron, he said he could make it look nice but that it would be very expensive. Perhaps the vertical translation could be different but I'm not convinced changeable end caps is the right solution.

 

[A.S. Motorsport]

RFY makes front under tray's,

I have some better pictures some where on my computer, i'll need to look those up.

 

[Valhalla]

I think this topic has gotten off track (pun intended) a little bit. The original question by Billy is what would be a great compromise wing that would look kind of OEM'ish, but more NSX-R in style all while proving most of the down force of the GT Wing. Next thing we know we're talking about splitters, underpans, diffusers and big ass wings.

But some people have offered up some good ideas and thoughts. Here is what I would like to see;

I like Dave Dozier's idea of the sliding side supports. But why not make them the height of an NSX-R wing in the fully retracted state and then once extended up, will sit sufficiently high enough to have clean air.

You could also pin the aft section of the wing on pivots and by having some adjustment points at the front of the wing, on the side supports, you could dial in your AOA to what ever you wanted. You could even drill a couple of small holes on the trailing edge of the spoiler/airfoil and attach a gurney flap. This could be removed after the track session, the spoiler could be reset to a moderate AOA and lowered to the NSX-R height.

I'll bet with this set up you would probably have better visibility out the back as well. Regan, I'm trying to help you out here! Does this sound like a reasonable compromise?

 

[jwmelvin]

...I like Dave Dozier's idea of the sliding side supports. But why not make them the height of an NSX-R wing in the fully retracted state and then once extended up will sit sufficiently high enough to have clean air.

I'm curious why you like this more than the modular design I am proposing? Is it because you prefer the look of the type-R wing to the OEM wing? Or is it because you think that the performance would be different?

...I'll bet with this set up you would probably have better visibility out the back as well.

You mean in the elevated position, correct? I see that as one of the biggest advantages of the vertical-translation design. But that would also be true of a modular design where the second element is spaced far from the base wing, so it would be like your pictures above with the addition of a better-performing OEM wing under the raised wing shown.

 

[Valhalla]

I'm curious why you like this more than the modular design I am proposing? Is it because you prefer the look of the type-R wing to the OEM wing? Or is it because you think that the performance would be different?/QUOTE]

I really don't care for the NSX-R wing and don't own one. I think they look funny and added on. Almost ricer. But they do offer better aerodynamics than the stock wing. Part of that is design/shape and the other part is because it sits higher off the deck lid and gets cleaner air. But it doesn't offer the down force we are all looking to increase. The design I am proposing is more function than form. It's clean, it's adjustable, by being adjustable I think you will have better vision regardless if it's up or down. And look wise it won't have that "hey look at me I'm a big ass added on wing so I must be fast" look. Depending on the shape of the wing, I believe it could look pretty much like Honda would have designed it.

 

[jwmelvin]

I really don't care for the NSX-R wing and don't own one. I think they look funny and added on. Almost ricer. But they do offer better aerodynamics than the stock wing. Part of that is design/shape and the other part is because it sits higher off the deck lid and gets cleaner air.

What if the design I am proposing gives you the same (or better) improved performance when an additional element is attached, and better-than-OEM performance with an OEM-size base wing? I'm trying to figure out why you prefer a wing that goes no lower than type-R height and is adjustable. My proposal is that the base wing plus second element would be no bigger than a type-R-size wing and would outperform it. And when one does not care about downforce, the base wing would preserve the looks of the car. Maximum downforce would not be limited by the type-R width constraint or the maximum height of something considerably less than 2x type-R height.

Like I said, we may still go through the exercise of designing a system for vertical translation of the base wing. But I plan to retain the modular design for adding elements. As Dave said, it will depend on how things look once accurately modeled in CAD and priced for production.

 

[9doors]

To valhalla's point, we might be going askew from Billy's intent, but in the end it's up to him and not us to say that. I'll keep a strong interest here, but it's seeming more like I should just buy the Voltex and swap it out with the OEM wing between street and track yielding no compromises and the best of both worlds. I do have the luxury of trailering my NSX so I don't have the issue of driving around town with a BAW.

 

[Valhalla]

What if the design I am proposing gives you the same (or better) improved performance when an additional element is attached, and better-than-OEM performance with an OEM-size base wing? I'm trying to figure out why you prefer a wing that goes no lower than type-R height and is adjustable. My proposal is that the base wing plus second element would be no bigger than a type-R-size wing and would outperform it. And when one does not care about downforce, the base wing would preserve the looks of the car. Maximum downforce would not be limited by the type-R width constraint or the maximum height of something considerably less than 2x type-R height.

Like I said, we may still go through the exercise of designing a system for vertical translation of the base wing. But I plan to retain the modular design for adding elements. As Dave said, it will depend on how things look once accurately modeled in CAD and priced for production.

I'm having a hard time conceptualizing your design. I'm probably not alone. Could you sketch something out so we can see what you are proposing? I like efficiency, simplicity and something that looks like Honda would have made. But that's just me. I can't speak for Billy, Nick or Regan.

 

[DDozier]

I like Dave Dozier's idea of the sliding side supports. But why not make them the height of an NSX-R wing in the fully retracted state and then once extended up, will sit sufficiently high enough to have clean air.

You could also pin the aft section of the wing on pivots and by having some adjustment points at the front of the wing, on the side supports, you could dial in your AOA to what ever you wanted. You could even drill a couple of small holes on the trailing edge of the spoiler/airfoil and attach a gurney flap. This could be removed after the track session, the spoiler could be reset to a moderate AOA and lowered to the NSX-R height

You just described my design with the addition of a removable gurney flap

These were the design goals:
http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showt...rid-On-track?p=1757329&viewfull=1#post1757329

Dave

 

[Valhalla]

You just described my design with the addition of a removable gurney flap

These were the design goals:
http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showt...rid-On-track?p=1757329&viewfull=1#post1757329

Dave

Pretty much Dave but without the winglets on the ends of the spoiler. Also your illustrations show your spoiler at stock height and I was looking for the lowest setting at the NSX-R height.

 

[jwmelvin]

Could you sketch something out so we can see what you are proposing?

As soon as we have a real design to share, I will do so. Until then, if I sketch something, it may not be exactly what the aerodynamicist has in mind. So I will let him do the designing.

If our design can incorporate vertical translation like some have proposed (and like DDozier has sketched), I think that's all the better. As I understand Billy's original proposal, it was for a wing that looks reasonable (no more aggressive than type-R) for daily driving but is configurable for improved performance at the track. As 9doors points out, one way to do this is to swap in a BAW. My intent is to make the swap easier. Vertical translation obviously provides some benefit, but so does adding elements such as a second wing or a Gurney flap. While it is trivial to speculate on the relative benefits of each of these changes, I trust very few people to get the answer right.

 

[A.S. Motorsport]

The add-on idea is a nice one, i had a look here at it, this would require quite some molding to have that all sit nicely.
Idea it self isn't new E36 M3 GT's had this OEM installed (a insert that would raise the wing for more downforce)

 

[DDozier]

Pretty much Dave but without the winglets on the ends of the spoiler. Also your illustrations show your spoiler at stock height and I was looking for the lowest setting at the NSX-R height.

The drawing has the wing at half the distance between the OEM wing and the Type-R wing, this allows for the top of the wing element to be much closer to the fender height. The thing I do not like about the Type-R wing is how the higher vertical support meets the fender, this is what makes it look like an add-on as the flow of the fender body line is not followed. They did it to get the height since it was a fixed wing and a fixed mounting possition they made the compromise in form to meet function. From most of the posts here guys seem to like the OEM wing height over the Type-R's add on look. We need the height to allow for more extension when the wing is in the full up possition (this is an assumption as I have no idea what the ideal height will be as that will most likely be determined by the airfoil shape). In order to make the new wing meet the fender with some sort of OEM astetic feel you will have to be very carefull on the down height, my thinking on the height I have drawn is it will allow for the wing in the down possition to cover up most of the supports and the area where the support meets the fender, this is the area that the OEM wing is highly stylized to meet the fenders contours. If the removable endplane is the only part that needs to be stylized to match the fenders profile then the center airfoil will be much easier to make.

We need to look at how the wing will look in relation to the rest of the bodywork, otherwise there is no need for an "all-purpose" wing. Just have a second BAW to swap out for track days. If we are looking at swapping out wings then maybe we just design a quick change mounting system for the stock wing and a BAW, but in all honesty the 6 nuts holding the current wing is about as simple as one can have. Changing the wings is an option but one that could lead to paint damage and wing damage during the swap.

Dave

 

[Rope]

The reason why I am hesitant on the OEM height wing with add on wings/elements is I feel that it will look sort of like cheap civic 2 Fast 2 Furious looking. I think that is why people are asking for a sketch to get an idea of what you are envisioning. We all know that the design will change when the aero dynamists really gets working on the wing but getting an idea would be nice like DDozier did.

 

[jwmelvin]

I completely understand what you are saying. I agree that a multielement wing has a good chance of looking overdone. But the whole point of the design is that it is close to OEM when just the base wing is in place. I don't think the vertical-translation design with a type-R base height looks all that desirable for daily driving when in the raised position. And with that design, like mine, the point is to be able to return the wing to a base position for normal use.

Perhaps the difference is how difficult it is to return any given design to the base position, and how the design looks in the base position. The latter concern has been pushing me to an OEM-height base wing. But it may be possible to find a type-R look that makes me happy. I also understand that the way the wing looks when set up for the track may matter to some/many people too.

In any event, the details of any design will make all the difference. I will share ours as soon as I can.

 

[Rope]

Thank you

 

[CB72]

What if we changed the design objectives as follows:
1) wing must be a straight bolt-on replacement for the OEM wing ( std or NSX-R)
2) wing must be storable in the trunk when not in use ( to head to the track!)
3) wing must produce maximum downforce.
4) ideally it should look nice on the car
Designers to your drawing boards!
In the end we could maybe end up with a big-ass wing divided in two for transportation just like the wings used on gliders:smile:

 

[jwmelvin]

...2) wing must be storable in the trunk when not in use ( to head to the track!)

Why wouldn't you put it on the car before heading to the track? That seems like a much better idea to me unless you are highly concerned about rear visibility that is reduced by a particular design.

...4) ideally it should look nice on the car

Do you mean when configured for street use or track use? I agree as to the former but would let function control as to the latter.

 

[CB72]

Why wouldn't you put it on the car before heading to the track? That seems like a much better idea to me unless you are highly concerned about rear visibility that is reduced by a particular design.


Do you mean when configured for street use or track use? I agree as to the former but would let function control as to the latter.

Sometimes the track can be 1000 km away and a large wing will attract even more attention from the cops on a red car...
I mean that even the "track" wing needs to look good.