So when is a wing legal in IT?

interesting...

So the 92-95 civic SI/EX (as they come with a factory installed lip) is screwed in the splitter design arena. But the 92-95 civic DX/CX (no factory installed lip) get to reap the benefits of a well designed splitter.

The ITA integra (94-01) and ITS integra 94-01 get have a good splitter while the 97-01 ITR integra ITR doesn't.

Actually, the net result is that they all have exactly the same opportunity under the current rule - just like all of the other cars in the category. They just have to arrive at it from a different place.

K
 
Only if it came from the factory as a no-option item...e.g., Acura Integra GS-R or Mazda RX-7 GTU....

If it was optional, it ain't legal. If it was dealer installed, it ain't legal. If it came on *all* cars regardless of trim....it's legal.

(Personally, I'd love the option to NOT run the GS-R rear wing in ITS, 'cause I know it's all-show, no-go, as most factory "option" wings are....)

Greg,

I know you're allowed to take "side moldings" off, but what if that side moldings extend around to the front and back?:rolleyes:
 
Actually, the net result is that they all have exactly the same opportunity under the current rule - just like all of the other cars in the category. They just have to arrive at it from a different place.

K

I'd disagree, with those cars you can't get the effectiveness with the OE lip.

The lip is in the way
 
You can get exactly the same "effectiveness" - at least to the degree that can be measured. It just might be more difficult.

Look - I'd personally LOVE to be able to remove the stock lip on the Golf. It would open up a range of aftermarket parts that attach to the stock location and - like with the non-lip'd Hondas - I'd have an easier time attaching something built from scratch...

K
 
Kirk - thanks, and I do in fact understand. I just never found 'that rule' that bugged me enough to not understand how others don't see it the same way before. Now I have. Just because I don't understand how you can't see it the same doesn't mean you have to.

Chris, both of those are really nice. Where is the splitter?? It looks as though you have at least room for a 1in splitter.
Both are too low tho. well under the wheel rim,IMHo, eyeball opinion.
Any air kept from under the car is a good thing,lowers the under hood pressure, wait, that lowers my HP...
The front fender plastic inners helps also. MM


Because both of these were Saturday afternoon projects to try something new. Like I said - take a look at the Rabbit. That is where I am headed with my setup, with a tray back to the wheel well openings that includes a diffuser. In the end I may end up deciding the direction based on other factors, like standing on a scale with both setups in hand, to see if the deletion of the facia panel with the big bumper makes up for the added weight of the setup. I already know that the big bumper has a negative impact on airflow over the oil cooler/radiator, which may suggest a bit less drag.

(BTW - Both are less than 1/4 inch above the rim - though the small bumper one ended the weekend 1/4 high on one side and 1/4 low on the other - it is just the perspective of the picture that makes the 2nd one look too low. Obviously the orange car has no restriction in that area.)
 
Last edited:
Any air kept from under the car is a good thing,lowers the under hood pressure, wait, that lowers my HP...
Underhood pressure is not intake pressure on these cars. I use the stock headlight 'scoop' intake point. Using the stock fender well intake point should also have a bit of pressure to it, since the fenders are not vented at all.
 
I can confirm that your request has worked its way to the ITAC board for consideration, Chris. Thanks for doing that! The GOOD news is that it's something we can look at as a distinct issue, unlike all of the weight specification requests that are hung up waiting on bigger process or procedure questions.

K
 
You can get exactly the same "effectiveness" - at least to the degree that can be measured. It just might be more difficult.
.

K

No you can't. Have you looked at these OE 'lips' up close, and inspected how to build a airdamn/spliter on one?

Maybe you can on your golf, great for you, but the models i listed can't.

The models listed must have the air damn set back to get any splitter blade, with the OE lip and the restriction on the height of the airdam/splitter, the lip keeps you from being able to do what you can with the lip removed.

Sure you could build a air damn over the OE lip, but then you have no spliter blade, you can still put the splitter there but it isn't much of one.

Greg Amy has posted a good link that describes what a good effective airdam/spliter, i haven't seen too many good examples of spliters in IT...

Here is a great one for the 92-95 civic and wont be as effective with the OEM lip in place.
EGGenII.jpg
 
Any car with a one-piece front bumper that comes close to the ground has the same limitation. You can't look at just Hondas.

It's pretty hard to get a real splitter out of this car (forgive the dirt, it hasn't been washed since the last enduro.)
 

Attachments

  • P1010594 (Small).JPG
    P1010594 (Small).JPG
    63.8 KB · Views: 26
Last edited:
I'm sorry, Jimmy - it sounds like you want a particular design that the rules are going to make difficult to the point of being impossible, equating "how it looks" (e.g., the depth of the splitter blade) with "effectiveness."

But that was probably a poor choice of words on my part, so I'll take it back, since any suggestions here about what's effective and what's not are just guesses, absent any data.

Suffice to say that whatever the rule, there will always be some cars that are better suited in some respects, and others who end up stuck with a design challenge or compromise. Whatever the rule, we all have the same opportunity.

Sorry for overstating my case.

K
 
Any car with a one-piece front bumper that comes close to the ground has the same limitation. You can't look at just Hondas.

It's pretty hard to get a real splitter out of this car (forgive the dirt, it hasn't been washed since the last enduro.)

It looks like you could do the same thing as the car posted above.
 
I'm sorry, Jimmy - it sounds like you want a particular design that the rules are going to make difficult to the point of being impossible, equating "how it looks" (e.g., the depth of the splitter blade) with "effectiveness."


K


Again read the article that greg has posted it talks all about effectiveness.

If you do some research you will see that what is pictured is a effective splitter design. And you can't do it on those cars with the OE lip.


I have no problem that the rules are written the way the are, i was simply stating that leaving the lip on does change things.

I was thinking out loud...
 
Back
Top