Vortex W/ no wing still functional?
May 20, 2005, 10:34 PM
#32
Evolved Member
iTrader: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 3,120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wEstSidE
I don't think the money's worth it, but I'm gonna test that shark fin thing.
hey ur right maybe VG will give you a .01 mph increase in top speed? maybe it will save you a few millliliter of gas per tank? hey i bet you a more effective way is to go on a diet and loose 15 lbs then to expect the VG to make any real difference.oh come on! lol i love the VG as much as the rest of you but lets just accept it as a 'cool' piece and move on hehe
May 21, 2005, 08:37 AM
#33
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tahoeacr
The Mitsi tests were at 110mph. Without a wing it will create no downforce. What it does in simple terms is by disturbing the air at the top of the roof, the air then goes down closer to the bottom of the glass/start of the trunck. This allows more air to flow more effective under/over the wing.
Without a wing it would create more drag at the top of the car but allow the air to close up better behind the car. Net effect would probably be a small reduction in overall drag coeffecient.
If you're looking to create some downforce, you could do a 60mm spoiler at 20 degree angle. This could actually reduce the cars drag while reducing rear lift. Steeper angles would create more downforce and start to create more drag. This is from CFD testing I've seen.
Without a wing it would create more drag at the top of the car but allow the air to close up better behind the car. Net effect would probably be a small reduction in overall drag coeffecient.
If you're looking to create some downforce, you could do a 60mm spoiler at 20 degree angle. This could actually reduce the cars drag while reducing rear lift. Steeper angles would create more downforce and start to create more drag. This is from CFD testing I've seen.
Aircraft use VG to hold the airlfow closer to the wing to make the airfoil more effeicient, the same must apply to car as fluid dynamics are laws of physics.
Thats my opinion
May 21, 2005, 11:06 AM
#34
the amount of air resistance it introduces could very well be offset by how much air it closes up behind. if you know your fluid dynamics you'll know that that it the most aerodynamic shape is an almond looking thing. this would be because as it goes through the fluid it seperates the fluid and when the fluid rejoins it "pushes" the object forward. that's the whole concept behind lowering drag coefficients and it shouldn't be ignored.
May 21, 2005, 11:14 AM
#35
I have one one mine (with the wing) and only notice a difference on the highway. Not sure why you'd install it if you don't have a wing (it breaks up the air to work WITH the wing), but at highway speeds if feels like your back end is planted to the road.
May 21, 2005, 07:06 PM
#36
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my evo is just a gsr model. i would agree that the benefits of having the VG are worth the money. It just makes sence aerodynamically. not surprising that another peice of aircraft hardware is making it to our cars.
May 21, 2005, 07:24 PM
#37
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: nor cal
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VG helps guide air to the wing to keep the *** down on high speeds. So it would be more affective if you have a wing...Plus it gives the evo more of an aggressive look! 
May 21, 2005, 07:40 PM
#38
Originally Posted by mifesto
oh come on! lol i love the VG as much as the rest of you but lets just accept it as a 'cool' piece and move on hehe
Originally Posted by Motor Trend
The vortex generators act as eight tiny spoons reaching beyond the boundary layer to scoop a bit of the fast-moving freestream's momentum, spinning it down into the sluggish boundary layer to give it a kick, delaying separation. Although such devices are considered Band-Aids in the extreme in aircraft circles, here we're told they bump the rear wing's downforce by about five percent--objectively useful. Subjectively, our ribbon-watching from the rear seat suggested the vortex generators also were keeping the airflow more evenly delivered across the wing.
May 22, 2005, 11:16 AM
#43
Evolved Member
iTrader: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 3,120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HxllxMan
VG will still improve the downforce without the CF wing
May 22, 2005, 11:50 AM
#45
Evolved Member
iTrader: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 3,120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by althemean
mifesto, where can i see this mitsu study? I agree with what youre saying. ive never come across anything from them on this though.
i read this back in january and i remember some people were laughing at it claiming its all BS. no its not B.S. but then i laugh at people who think this thing will help them drive like shumacher
now i laugh at the people who think this thing is still great without a spoiler... hey a 0.006 decrease in drag coefficient... in another words whatever lil gas you save, you loose once you go full boost for 1 second
Last edited by mifesto; May 22, 2005 at 11:54 AM.