Wings and things...

C

cmaclean

New member
What's the collective thought regarding petitioning the ITAC to allow IT cars to run rear spoilers? It makes no sense to me that we're allowed to run big old airdams and splitters and yet the cars can't balance the aero with a wing/spoiler on the rear trunk lid.

Here is an excerpt from the Honda Challenge rules:

2) Any rear deck spoiler that attaches to bodywork is allowed.
Rear spoiler may not protrude beyond the overall outline of the body when viewed
perpendicular to the ground above the part.

Apparently this simple rule does the trick. I would like to hear everyone's opinion on allowing this in IT. I don't see how this falls outside the intent of the class and these parts are obviously very functional while being CHEAP (please note the Scotsman highlighting the most important part here)

Thoughts?

Cheers,
...Colin
 
hfdsc_0056.sized.jpg
 
I remember hearing a story about a competitor calling the chief steward about the size limit on a rear wing in the prototype class for the Nelson Longest Day, the chief steward paused for a second and said well the bridge is 11’…..
 
Colin-

Who needs a rear wing when we can just change the pick-up points for our rear suspension and get better mechanical grip? :P
 
Eh. The thought has occurred to me but we are ALLOWED to put on a splitter, not REQUIRED to do so. If a car gets all oversteery-scary at speed, take it off. Cost/benefit math isn't clear, to my mind.

K
 
Cheap speed. I know a guy, former IT competitor, took his ITS BMW over to NASA, bolted on one of those cheap AEM or whatever spoilers offa eBay, and got a second or two at Mid-O.

Then again, is this really adding something we need to the class? Are we not going fast enough? I can't say that I'm feeling left out...
 
My reasoning:

1. It's a standard "race car" part that we're not running.
2. It's cheap.
3. It makes you go faster round the track. (proven)
4. It can make the car handle better.
5. It makes the cars look better/worse/more like real race cars.
6. It can help attract a younger/tuner type to the class.

Honda Challenge has basically stolen a LOT of IT's thunder with the very active tuner crowd. The rules are very similar to IT so why are people running HC and not IT? Engine swaps, spoilers etc. It all adds up to the perception that in HC you get to build a "cool" car and in IT you build an old showroom stock car. Personally I want to see the class grow.

Does that make the class better? I think so, but I don't make the decisions :)
 
I don't know much about REAL aero stuff but I bet you a set of tires that if this sort of thing is allowed, it will get REAL expensive. I bet you don't just bolt it on and nail the settings. Testing, testing and more testing. Then equipment changes/upgrades to compensate for the 'new' dynamics you have created. The guys with the know-how and the bucks will make these things sing and the average guy may even slow his car down. Seperation between the haves and the have-nots is what I see.
 
Pimped out ideeea playa!! The Z has no Butt so it would look better. I'm writing my letter.....I'm also goin' for DUBS, Boomin' Systems, those windshield washer light up things, and Fart Cans. IT is gonna be tight yo'

Bro
 
I dont see how it can help in some cases, FWD I think it would do more harm then good, and what if they show up with this

ricer.jpg



sorry couldnt resist.
 
Honda Challenge has basically stolen a LOT of IT's thunder with the very active tuner crowd. The rules are very similar to IT so why are people running HC and not IT? Engine swaps, spoilers etc. It all adds up to the perception that in HC you get to build a "cool" car and in IT you build an old showroom stock car. Personally I want to see the class grow.
[/b]
Click to expand...
Colin-

Not sure what part of the country you live in but I'd suggest that you take a look at NASA Mid-Atlantic's HC participation numbers every year since HC was created in 2002 and tell me if it's really stolen a LOT of IT's thunder. I can guarantee that the MARRS series has picked up and maintained far more IT cars than ECHC. In fact, I think you'll find that most of the IT cars that originally filled the non-H1 ranks (and made up the majority of the entries) have found their way back to IT and have left the series. Things may be different on the west coast, but you'll find only small pockets around the rest of the country.

As for your other arguments:

1. I think we can find many a race car where it isn't a standard part.
2. It's cheap if you don't have to engineer a custom mount for your car, because until you put the car in a windtunnel you'll never know if the cheap stantions that you get off ebay are the right height for your car or if they position the wing in a place where it makes the wing very ineffective
3. If angled incorrectly, it can make you much, much slower (proven)
4. If angled incorrectly, it can make your car handle much, much worse (proven)
5. My car has numbers on the side, is wrinkled and has a crappy paint job--therefore it already looks like a race car.
6. Inexpensive racing can keep drivers in a class. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find HC drivers who stick it out for more than a year. In addition, most of them have come up thru NASA's HPDE ranks. Hopefully our PDX programs will have the same effect.
 
All excellent points. So I have to ask this...

Why then are airdams and splitters allowed? Every point made so far, while 100% valid, can be applied to airdam/splitters also. If the IT ruleset deems them allowable then the precedent is already set and there is no reason why a rear spoiler allowance would be any different.

Andy, 5 degree wing angle is the sweet spot on a Miata :)
 
I think the allowance of wings has the potential to get pricy but then again it could be a great recruiting tool for the tuner crowd. I swear the two most common things i hear when i tell people i race is.. how fast do you go?? and, do you drive a car with like a big wing and decals and stuff??

I for one choose IT soley because it is what i considered to be a "tuner" class, meaning that i could choose which parts and which brands to run on my car. -personalize it in a way, as opposed to a spec class where there is a lot less fun to have under the hood.

the "tuner crowd" has the same mentality, and there are a lot of potential racers who just need to get hooked. Personally when i made it out to the track the first time and saw the flashy cars flying around i needed to get a piece of it. Younger car enthusiasts these days place a very heavy weight on appearance especially after having watched the fast and the furious trilogy 100 times over. Where i dont think we should have quadruple deck 10 foot superstructures on the backs of our cars, I think we should consider that there might be something to gain from allowing something in the arena of a spoiler, canard, carbon fiber accent, or otherwise.
 
Why then are airdams and splitters allowed?[/b]
Click to expand...
Adding *any* aerodynamic downforce results in *significant* increase in expense. Proven.

Splitters were never "allowed" in IT; show me where they're explicitly addressed? We had this conversation on this forum a year or so ago, but splitters showing up in I.T. were as a result of the evolution of cars in the 70s and 80s from those with detached metal bumpers to those in the 90s incorporating integral bumper covers. Within the confines of your typical IT-legal car back when the rules were written, splitters were virtually impossible to make (and not thought of; I don't think I saw one on a pro race car until maybe early 90s in WTCC or BTCC?).

Enter the integral bumper cover and now you've scads of horizontal space to mess with behind the vertical nose, coupled to graphic examples in Pro racing to emulate and - voila! - splitters show up in Improved Touring.

Besides, adding a rear wing to a street car is just simply gay. Or ricer, though in some cases I fail to understand the differences...

And what of the FWD disadvantage? Adding a rear wing to a FWD car is PAINFUL, especially if you can't install the mega-buck remote reservoir shocks you're going to need to control the springs you're going to need to setup the car stiff enough that you're going to need to take advantage of the wing.

However, I can be convinced: I propose that we allow unlimited wings in Improved Touring, with an automatic 10% weight penalty. That should even it out. Maybe.
 
More speed = more $$$

More brakes, more tires, etc...........


Just becasue some mistakes were made when setting up the rules years ago doesn't mean we should continue with the trend.

- Anybody up for using SIRs for adjustments??
- What GM product was allowed to upgrade to rear discs? Should everyone be allowed better brakes?? It would make us faster........And those big red calipers would certainly be cool looking!!

OK, so I can't think of any other examples off the top of my head, but you get the point.

I've seen ITE cars with wings. And SPU and SPO cars. Maybe you should make your Miata an SPU car?? :D
 
I'm not sure I'd call IT a tuner class. Although with the impending ECU rule change it will be more so. :pokestick: Wings would just add another element for people to have to spend money on to tune correctly. And, as Greg said, I think splitters are technically bumper covers that just happen to be really, really thin.

Sure, we like our cars to look good, but it ain't a priority. The first time you bust up that nice carbon fiber hood and tear off those side skirts going over a curb you're going to regret it.

David
 
Testify to it Brother Dave.

Wings seem like high dollar trouble to me. Hell, I just spent a LOT of time fabricating something that works up front.

I want no part of that stuff.
 
Two thoughts (more serious than my last post);

1. If it doesn't provide downforce (or lift conversely) then it provides drag. Aero(hydro)dynamics 101. You must have enough forward speed to realize the gain and not the loss (ie drag). An aereeeoplane traveling at sixty miles per hour (on land) will take less work to propel without the wings than with.

2. Why do we always bring up the "tuner crowd" segment? Wings are not keeping them away from sports car racing...access to it is, be it money or time or information or distance.

R
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top