Well, with wings that are much bigger than the R1/R2 wing.

I don't think anyone will argue that the R1/R2 wing has much much smaller effects (positive or negative) than the massive sails on those autox cars you linked to.

 

Which is exactly why I said the comment needs to be put into context a little better. Simply saying "wings have no effect under 75mph" is blatantly false. Clarifying the statement and saying R1/R2 wings or specifying the exact wing in question for the statement will make it true.

It's like saying "all rotaries blow up at 10,000 miles". Some engines may loose it at 10k, but in general it's not true.

 

The website made two statements which I think are important - more important than the assumption you ascribed to the site

1) Spoilers work by building pressure in front of the wing

2) Wings are wings by nature of their actual design (to follow the Bernoulli principle)

So a twin flat blade "wing" angled in such a way to build pressure in front of it - whether or not the air passes underneath or in between the blades - would still technically be a spoiler by virtue of a) the mechanism by which it generates the downforce, and b) its inability to follow the Bernoulli principle secondary to not being a wing by design (teardrop shaped). See the diagram below.


Remember, I didn't say "no effect;" I said "significant effect" assuming they were true wings. But they're not; they're spoilers, so in that sense I'll agree w/ you

 

Is this true? I've never heard this before.

 

Now you are reaching. Inability to follow Bernoulli's principle? Which principle would that be? The principle has to do with establishing and keeping lift. If you want to compare airplane wings to automotive wings and say that it's not a wing unless it generates lift, then there are no "wings" for cars. Bernoulli principle doesn't "require" a tear drop shape. Airplanes require a tear drop shape to help sustain lift.

However, you better tell everyone in F1 and other parts of the automotive industry that they aren't making/using wings:

http://www.f1nutter.co.uk/tech/aero.php

You are confusing the shape of the wing with angle of attack:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_attack

Different concepts. A large angle of attack does not change "what it is", it just changes the results of the function (i.e. more lift point up, or more downforce pointed down). i.e. what those AutoX cars did was add an extra "wing" for a greater angle of attack.



You know, if you were to invert that wing, it would look like a plane with its flaps down. Hmmm, maybe... a wing!

 

Great stuff, guys! Who wants to talk about Gurney flaps and diffusers?


-s-

 

Getting back onto the thread title question..

My RX is an imported from Japan R1 model.
It has:

An oil cooler per each side of the front bar (never seen one that doesnt, and none of my other 10 FD's are any different, but they're all jap imports, except an Australian one I'll tell you about in a minute..)

Suede-finish front seats

horrible 'shiny' (not the grainy) interior trim pieces (which are going to go bye bye soon! )

Jap-only rear "seats" (only good to fit midgets into)

Rear speakers.

Front strut brace (honestly, dont all FD's have these??)

The jap spec cars have a tacho with a redline which extends 500rpm later than the tacho on export (US & Australian/wherever else) cars.

Front air lip under the front bar (makes towing really difficult)

Rear wing.

No cruise control.

No Bose stereo.

Mine is also badged as an Efini, & i found a water stained green Efini owners manual (in japanese) under the passenger's seat.

green, loop-pile front floor mats with a metal RX-7 logo on them.

Thats my black R1.

I've also got an Australian red FD with sunroof, Bose stereo, cruise control, pockets where the rear speakers should be, and shiny leather front seats. It doesnt have the front air dam or rear wing either. It does have two oil coolers and a front strut brace. It has a speedometer that is rated in only km/h, and goes up to 280. (I took that out & put it in my R1! ) The tacho on this Australian car has the redline set 500rpm lower than on all the other Jap import cars.
This red Aust car is generally what i would call the 'lowest performance' car out of all the FDs in the warehouse. It seems to be more luxury/touring orientated & i dont like it too much. The ride is softer too. It is mazda badged, as Efini was a jap only thing.

I hope this helps somehow.

 

Mahjik, I dunno why you aren't getting my point. It's pretty simply really.

I'm not confusing shape w/ angle of attack. Angle of attack changes the *amount* of lift/downforce the wing is generating. The *shape* determines whether or not the piece will generate downforce *on it's own*. If you take a flat blade (akin to many of the blades on the auto-x cars you linked to) and left it FLAT, because it is NOT a wing (the surface area on the top equals the surface area on the bottom), it would NOT generate downforce; it would merely cause drag. That is what a spoiler is. Thus, the *spoiler* MUST have a positive angle of attack to enable it to build pressure up in front of it. Why? Because a spoiler in it of itself does NOT fulfill the requirements of Bernoulli principle.

This is completely different than a wing, in which the surface area on the top is different from that on the bottom. From the link you provided me with, "A wing is so designed that air flows more rapidly over its upper surface than its lower one, leading to a decrease in pressure on the top surface as compared to the bottom. The resulting pressure difference provides the lift that sustains the aircraft in flight. If the wing is turned upside-down, the resultant force is downwards. This explains how performance cars corner at such high speeds. The 'downforce' produced pushes the tyres into the road giving more grip."

So a wing, EVEN WITH NO ANGLE OF ATTACK will generate downforce because it - in it of itself (due to it's shape) - fulfills the requirements of the Bernoulli principle. A flat blade will NOT, and thus MUST be angled to generate that downforce. They're NOT one in the same; they're two *very* different ways to bring about the same result (despite the results of each being better for very different situations - high vs low speed).

~Ramy

 

lol wow. i never even meant to ask a question about wings and/or spoilers and look at the responses i got well anywho i learn more than ill ever need to about wings. thanks for that but back to the question at hand, i think it was ramy? who said,



i can see where your going with the stand still traffic thing. i'll definitly look up dual oil cooler upgrades. anybody know a good write up and/or a site that will let me buy the parts ill need?

 

If you search, there are 1001 threads about dual oil cooler upgrades. And also, we're about to release our dual oil cooler kit, which IMO, is better than any other kit on the market (that was our exact aim when designing it). https://www.rx7club.com/fdnewbie-archive-forum-190/fdnewbie-dual-oil-coolers-697734/

~Ramy

 

So, by your logic: An airplane wing with it's flaps down is no longer a wing?

 

enough with this WING/ SPOILER debate.

R1 and R2 is what we were discussing.

 

LOL! a newb who doesn't know their passenger side cooler is for auto trans cooler is telling 2 x vets to STFU!! This thread is classic!

kaisar1, let them go at it.. you might learn something new

 

Ok, let's spell this out.

An airplane wing is designed so that pressure over the top is less than underneath. So, the way the airflow over the top is just as important as how it flows underneath. This concept generates lift and is the principle of how airplanes stay in the air (along with thrust).

Airplanes also use Flaps which incease the amount of lift produced (also the amount of drag). These still retain the characteristics of the air passing over and under the wing. Now, airplanes also have "spoilers". These do change the shape of the wing per say. i.e., the air does NOT flow "under" the spoiler. It similar to adding a lip on the rear deck of a car; the air does NOT go under the lip (thus a spoiler).

Now, to generate downforce, you can invert the design of the wing. This inverts the forces so lift is not produced, but downforce instead. Automobiles use this technology. So, take the shape of an airplane wing with the flaps down, and then compare it to the picture of what those AutoX RX-7's are using.

Now, if you say that to generate downforce, you invert the design of the wing, and if that using flaps on a airplane still makes it a "wing"; then what those AutoX cars have is an inverted airplane wing with its flaps fixed down; thus a "wing".

 

You do make a point there Kyle!

 

thanks for the tip off. haha subscribed and you can count +1 to the order list

 

do you always do this? first you give a piece of advice to someone who needs it and then insult him?

 

More or less, yes.

Well there are several different types of flaps, so it's hard to generalize.

- Some flaps are essentially contiguous with the shape of the wing, and thus can be seen as a part of the wing itself, but merely increasing the angle of attack of the wing (which will increase lift at the expense of increased drag). Fowler flaps and Slotted flaps are two examples of flaps which merely increase the area of the wing.

- Other flaps are completely separate structures that disrupt & distort the planform & shape of the wing when fully extended (eg. a Split flap).

I'm with you thus far. That's exactly what we do.

They look like flat blades to me - but then again those pics are so small, it's hard to tell. But that's my entire point: it looks like those auto-xed FDs are using spoilers to generate their downforce, which would make 100% sense, given that they won't reach the speeds at which the drag caused by the wing is so great that it would actually hinder their performance, rather than enhance it.

Like I said, almost.

1) You're assuming the design of the BLADE on the auto-x FDs is actually a teardrop shape, and thus is actually a wing. If it's a flat blade, it's a spoiler. The *shape* determines its aerodynamic properties, and thus how it is labeled (wing vs. spoiler). And from what I see, those FDs look to have spoilers. If they're not, I got news for ya. Do a back-to-back time attack, and I can pretty much *guarantee you* they'll see better #s with spoilers than wings. They'll get more downforce and their low speeds w/ less drag.

2) You're also making generalized assumptions about flaps, when there are various kinds that work in different ways.

~Ramy

 

That statement works well if its pointed back at you and the word "flaps" is exchanged with "wings".

I'm done. It's like arguing that the sky is blue. The rest of the planet can see that its blue, but if you still want to believe its green, be my guest.

 

LOL Majik, I'll let it be, that's fine by me, but keep in mind you're seeing it only the way you want to see. Almost every *scientific* writing I've seen has differentiated between wings and spoilers, but you seem quite content with supporting your view of blurring the two into one with some random aftermarket marketing company lol. To each his own I guess...