wingless/kitless
03-24-09, 10:33 PM
#51
¿¿What are pistons??
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 1,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the subject though, I love wingless stock RX7s but when you do anything to the exterior I think a wing is a must to balance everything out. I love the 99 wing but thats about the only one I like. And I hate all aftermarket sideskirts except for the FEED sidesteps, I hate all rear bumpers, and I dont like many front bumpers except for the FEED Type II R and a couple of others. I really love the stock front bumper with the 99 lip the best, I should've went with that look instead of my FEED Type II R front.
?
03-24-09, 10:56 PM
#54
03-24-09, 11:05 PM
#55
Sir Braps A lot
i think as long as it has a great fit and gives the car a aggressive look it can be pulled off. for example on my car I have a 99 spec front end a spoiler and i think it only makes the car look better. sure i love stock FD's and ones with kits as long as there not ridiculous.
03-25-09, 01:05 AM
#56
I'm not hot on wings myself, but if it's needed then go for it.
As for kits, I'm not too stoked on the 99' Spec. front bumper. It's either the 95 bumper it came with, or the GTC bumper I have sitting in the garage.
The best thing for our cars is a nice wash and wax, drop it a little and some nice wheels.
As for this thread, it kind of feels like an attack on us younger guys. (I'm 25)
There is a lot of hostility, reguarding people modifying THEIR personal cars.
As for kits, I'm not too stoked on the 99' Spec. front bumper. It's either the 95 bumper it came with, or the GTC bumper I have sitting in the garage.
The best thing for our cars is a nice wash and wax, drop it a little and some nice wheels.
As for this thread, it kind of feels like an attack on us younger guys. (I'm 25)
There is a lot of hostility, reguarding people modifying THEIR personal cars.
03-25-09, 08:24 AM
#58
Well....I've driven mine with & without my wing. Speedwise I noticed nothing. But I did notice the amount of grip gained having it on...For that reason its not only staying...Its getting bigger 
. Then again..My FD is tracked often.
Looks wise both can look great with the right wheels & kit imo.
If you are a law abiding citizen that is constantly monitoring mpg and sitting at 1.5k revs...Go wingless!
. Then again..My FD is tracked often. Looks wise both can look great with the right wheels & kit imo.
If you are a law abiding citizen that is constantly monitoring mpg and sitting at 1.5k revs...Go wingless!
03-25-09, 03:32 PM
#60
I used to like 99 spoiler back in 2002. So i got one when the CF sections were available (2004). I had it installed in 2008 only to remove it 9 months later because I didn't like the look anymore 
I guess I wanted something classier/more adult/less street racer
I guess I wanted something classier/more adult/less street racer
04-01-09, 06:13 PM
#61
One reason why I took my GT Wing off was because you can feel the drag on highway speeds, as soon as I took it of it was like taking 500 lbs off the car, I am still undecided, I like the with and without the wing, I am leaning towards keeping it off though since I have the Esprit wing now which I like a lot.
Hooray for 7 year old thread revival...LOL..
Hooray for 7 year old thread revival...LOL..
04-01-09, 10:40 PM
#63
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 655
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I contribute in a boring way?
From a designer stand point (which is what I am):
1) If the wing is needed and therefore functional, I believe that there is no arguing about how good it looks on the car. It wasn't designed to look good, but to work. So, it does its job and it doesn't look good. You might look at the car with the functional wing and feel that it's "more aggressive" or "cooler" or "sportier" or "more original", and this feeling will make you like the car. But that's just a misinterpretation of feelings that little or nothing have to do with how well the design of the car flows with that wing. Whoever made the wing, like I said, didn't have this issue in mind.
2) If the wing is designed to make the car look good, then it's hardly needed or functional, but has to work with the lines of this car. And sorry, but it won't. Reason is very simple: the RX7 looks very good around the rear section because of the round area of the rear fender that bumps out and creates a rather wide and horizontal area over the top of itself, on both sides of the rear bubble. The "flatness" contributes to give the car a wider appearance than what really is. Muscular car lines share this type of characteristic. When there is a wing sitting in the back, it ends up covering some of this area and also blocking the straight view to it, making it impossible to appreciate that design feature and overpowering the slight curve of the middle section occupied by the rear lights garnish.
Sure, to each their own, but this is one of the few cars that truly reflects one definition of perfection, when it comes to the quality of the design: there is nothing you can add or subtract that will make it better.
As far as wheels go, that's a different story. Aesthetically, bigger wheels look better, but only for one reason (I read about this stuff): the black areas within the fender wells are detrimental to the look of the car. So, everyone "drops" it to reduce the black visible between the fenderwell and the tire, then -by putting a larger rim- further reduces the unpleasing black area generated by the large sidewall tire.
Which however brings me to a bit of a controversial conclusion: black rims are a bit of an oxymoron. They actually make the black area bigger, which in cars' aesthetics, is a "no-no".
Once again, what you like is not necessarily something that looks good, but something that "inspires" you, which is where "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" comes from. But real beauty is not subjective, it responds to precise "numbers", colour combinations and subtle communication with the viewer.
Think about race cars, which I'm sure most of us like (whether it is an F1, or Nascar, or Le Man or whatever rocks your boat): there was not one shred of concern for aesthetics when the engineers designed them. We find them "attractive" because of what they mean, represent and make us feel. Which doesn't make them beautiful, although we think they are.
My 2,000 $ (given the length).
Everyone, please don't hate me...
Have a good time enjoying your car whichever way you like it
1) If the wing is needed and therefore functional, I believe that there is no arguing about how good it looks on the car. It wasn't designed to look good, but to work. So, it does its job and it doesn't look good. You might look at the car with the functional wing and feel that it's "more aggressive" or "cooler" or "sportier" or "more original", and this feeling will make you like the car. But that's just a misinterpretation of feelings that little or nothing have to do with how well the design of the car flows with that wing. Whoever made the wing, like I said, didn't have this issue in mind.
2) If the wing is designed to make the car look good, then it's hardly needed or functional, but has to work with the lines of this car. And sorry, but it won't. Reason is very simple: the RX7 looks very good around the rear section because of the round area of the rear fender that bumps out and creates a rather wide and horizontal area over the top of itself, on both sides of the rear bubble. The "flatness" contributes to give the car a wider appearance than what really is. Muscular car lines share this type of characteristic. When there is a wing sitting in the back, it ends up covering some of this area and also blocking the straight view to it, making it impossible to appreciate that design feature and overpowering the slight curve of the middle section occupied by the rear lights garnish.
Sure, to each their own, but this is one of the few cars that truly reflects one definition of perfection, when it comes to the quality of the design: there is nothing you can add or subtract that will make it better.
As far as wheels go, that's a different story. Aesthetically, bigger wheels look better, but only for one reason (I read about this stuff): the black areas within the fender wells are detrimental to the look of the car. So, everyone "drops" it to reduce the black visible between the fenderwell and the tire, then -by putting a larger rim- further reduces the unpleasing black area generated by the large sidewall tire.
Which however brings me to a bit of a controversial conclusion: black rims are a bit of an oxymoron. They actually make the black area bigger, which in cars' aesthetics, is a "no-no".
Once again, what you like is not necessarily something that looks good, but something that "inspires" you, which is where "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" comes from. But real beauty is not subjective, it responds to precise "numbers", colour combinations and subtle communication with the viewer.
Think about race cars, which I'm sure most of us like (whether it is an F1, or Nascar, or Le Man or whatever rocks your boat): there was not one shred of concern for aesthetics when the engineers designed them. We find them "attractive" because of what they mean, represent and make us feel. Which doesn't make them beautiful, although we think they are.
My 2,000 $ (given the length).
Everyone, please don't hate me...
Have a good time enjoying your car whichever way you like it
04-02-09, 01:17 AM
#64
Im 23, and i have grown up with a good head on my shoulders.
I have learned that the better looking cars are the ones that are tastefully modified body wise, and that not all functional wings look good on car you drive on a daily basis.
For me, I always loved a clean and simple stock bodied RX-7's either wingless or with the factory option.
the FD's spoiler is an actual functional piece. Im not sure how much downforce or the cars drag co-efficient is, but there has been video proof that the stock piece works to small degree. I prefer lowered on nice wide rims and wingless, it gives the FD the illusion that its body is wider than it actually is.
Here is video of RE-Amemiya testing wingless - stock - and their GT wing on Tsukuba http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6_MU...e=channel_page
I actually have a friend of mine who is also a member on here, that has the Origin GT wing and has notified me that at 80mph the GT wing gives between 400-800 pounds of downforce in the rear depending on its "angle of attack" and can feel the car squatting down into dips and holes in roads and the car does not 'bounce' back up, it just hunkers down
As far as body kits go, I choose function over form. And you cant get anymore functional than RE-Amemiya's kits which give the added pleasure of looking great. Which with the right suspension setup can easily look good enough to be driven on the daily with minimal scrape.
I have learned that the better looking cars are the ones that are tastefully modified body wise, and that not all functional wings look good on car you drive on a daily basis.
For me, I always loved a clean and simple stock bodied RX-7's either wingless or with the factory option.
the FD's spoiler is an actual functional piece. Im not sure how much downforce or the cars drag co-efficient is, but there has been video proof that the stock piece works to small degree. I prefer lowered on nice wide rims and wingless, it gives the FD the illusion that its body is wider than it actually is.
Here is video of RE-Amemiya testing wingless - stock - and their GT wing on Tsukuba http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6_MU...e=channel_page
I actually have a friend of mine who is also a member on here, that has the Origin GT wing and has notified me that at 80mph the GT wing gives between 400-800 pounds of downforce in the rear depending on its "angle of attack" and can feel the car squatting down into dips and holes in roads and the car does not 'bounce' back up, it just hunkers down
As far as body kits go, I choose function over form. And you cant get anymore functional than RE-Amemiya's kits which give the added pleasure of looking great. Which with the right suspension setup can easily look good enough to be driven on the daily with minimal scrape.
04-02-09, 11:24 AM
#65
Gone to the dark side
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Orleans, LA
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love stock wingless FD's. That being said I have the Feed Type II full body and love it. I think it's the only kit (IMO) that keeps the stock lines while adding an industrial agressiveness. I also have the RE stret diffuser in plain weave cf because I thought it was less gaudy than the feed one.
I had considered going wingless but most of us (here working on the car) thought it looked off balance so we decided togo back with it.
Not many people have the entire FEED kit, and even less have it with the stock wing. I like that it makes my car somewhat unique.
Now that I am racing the car more on the track I am considering a more functional wing... Though I'm not ready to change the look of the car.
one more note on the stock wing, it keeps the same angle as the rear lip of the car and I think is one of the sexiest parts on a stock fd.
I had considered going wingless but most of us (here working on the car) thought it looked off balance so we decided togo back with it.
Not many people have the entire FEED kit, and even less have it with the stock wing. I like that it makes my car somewhat unique.
Now that I am racing the car more on the track I am considering a more functional wing... Though I'm not ready to change the look of the car.
one more note on the stock wing, it keeps the same angle as the rear lip of the car and I think is one of the sexiest parts on a stock fd.
04-02-09, 12:04 PM
#66
Full Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Da Bay...St...Louis
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well guys i'm an exception. I'm only 19 and I love the way the car looks with out anything on it. I have a '96 R model(i think after 95 it just became r instead of r1 
... not sure though) I do have the wing but I think they look good with or with out the wing. But i do not like kits or big wings at all. Leave the car alone it looks good how the japanese intended it to.
... not sure though) I do have the wing but I think they look good with or with out the wing. But i do not like kits or big wings at all. Leave the car alone it looks good how the japanese intended it to.
07-26-09, 10:47 AM
#67
As far as wheels go, that's a different story. Aesthetically, bigger wheels look better, but only for one reason (I read about this stuff): the black areas within the fender wells are detrimental to the look of the car. So, everyone "drops" it to reduce the black visible between the fenderwell and the tire, then -by putting a larger rim- further reduces the unpleasing black area generated by the large sidewall tire.
Which however brings me to a bit of a controversial conclusion: black rims are a bit of an oxymoron. They actually make the black area bigger, which in cars' aesthetics, is a "no-no".
Which however brings me to a bit of a controversial conclusion: black rims are a bit of an oxymoron. They actually make the black area bigger, which in cars' aesthetics, is a "no-no".
07-26-09, 10:49 AM
#68
The king of the highway!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Home of the 305 Boyz(miami)
Posts: 2,988
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I JUST kept the spoiler & changed the bumper to give it that 2005 updated look on the front
is this the first thread ever in rx7club history? (THANKS TO raywu729)
is this the first thread ever in rx7club history? (THANKS TO raywu729)
07-26-09, 02:08 PM
#70
Scenario:
Two FDs are parked right next to each other and the owners are about 50 feet away. One owner is about 50 years old the other looks in his early 20's. You don't who owns which car. Fd#1 is a completely a riced out orange FD, full body kitted, neon lights, gauges up the wazhoo, and a wing that a 747 would be envious of. FD #2 is a PRISTINE, completely stock FD, that looks right out of the show room floor. Both cars look like the owners spent a good amount of $$ on. Now who is more likely to own which car? I'll tell you what if that 50 year old drives that riced out fd it would surprise the **** out of me.
Last edited by Montego; 07-26-09 at 02:11 PM.
07-27-09, 05:30 AM
#72
Full Member
07-27-09, 07:54 AM
#74
Age has everything to do with it. It's not a rule but it plays a huge factor on one's taste. When you look at a population as a whole, one notices certain common traits that are respective to a certain demographic.
Scenario:
Two FDs are parked right next to each other and the owners are about 50 feet away. One owner is about 50 years old the other looks in his early 20's. You don't who owns which car. Fd#1 is a completely a riced out orange FD, full body kitted, neon lights, gauges up the wazhoo, and a wing that a 747 would be envious of. FD #2 is a PRISTINE, completely stock FD, that looks right out of the show room floor. Both cars look like the owners spent a good amount of $$ on. Now who is more likely to own which car? I'll tell you what if that 50 year old drives that riced out fd it would surprise the **** out of me.
Scenario:
Two FDs are parked right next to each other and the owners are about 50 feet away. One owner is about 50 years old the other looks in his early 20's. You don't who owns which car. Fd#1 is a completely a riced out orange FD, full body kitted, neon lights, gauges up the wazhoo, and a wing that a 747 would be envious of. FD #2 is a PRISTINE, completely stock FD, that looks right out of the show room floor. Both cars look like the owners spent a good amount of $$ on. Now who is more likely to own which car? I'll tell you what if that 50 year old drives that riced out fd it would surprise the **** out of me.
i still don't think age is a determining factor in styling.
07-27-09, 08:05 AM
#75
Age has everything to do with it. It's not a rule but it plays a huge factor on one's taste. When you look at a population as a whole, one notices certain common traits that are respective to a certain demographic.
Scenario:
Two FDs are parked right next to each other and the owners are about 50 feet away. One owner is about 50 years old the other looks in his early 20's. You don't who owns which car. Fd#1 is a completely a riced out orange FD, full body kitted, neon lights, gauges up the wazhoo, and a wing that a 747 would be envious of. FD #2 is a PRISTINE, completely stock FD, that looks right out of the show room floor. Both cars look like the owners spent a good amount of $$ on. Now who is more likely to own which car? I'll tell you what if that 50 year old drives that riced out fd it would surprise the **** out of me.
Scenario:
Two FDs are parked right next to each other and the owners are about 50 feet away. One owner is about 50 years old the other looks in his early 20's. You don't who owns which car. Fd#1 is a completely a riced out orange FD, full body kitted, neon lights, gauges up the wazhoo, and a wing that a 747 would be envious of. FD #2 is a PRISTINE, completely stock FD, that looks right out of the show room floor. Both cars look like the owners spent a good amount of $$ on. Now who is more likely to own which car? I'll tell you what if that 50 year old drives that riced out fd it would surprise the **** out of me.
i still don't think age is a determining factor in styling. sure, in a situation like you described, maybe you can generalize and make an assumption, but i don't think you're going to be as right as often as you would suggest.