Bottom line is that Mitsu did not put the wing on for looks! Anybody that says it is not functional maybe should go tell the engineers at Mitsu they do not know how to do there job. If people do not like it okay that is there opinion.

At the risk of sounding argumentative, that's not a fact, it's an opinion. You've only had your car for a few weeks and have no idea how it compares to a wingless Evo on the track (ie. at high speed). I honesty don't mean to come-off as rude or confrontational. I just think that someone who cannot get effective control of his Evo to the point of being able to negotiate a steep, uphill drive in reverse should think twice about asserting matters out of his realm of personal experience. Good luck to you.

Some of us are atheists.

This whole thread seems to be heavy on opinions and light on factual data. Of course that doesn't mean the opinions are invalid - especially with regard to cosmetics which is obviously a matter of preference. But I do wish there was more hard data on exactly how the wing impacts performance (e.g. numeric measurements of increased downforce at high speeds, etc.)

The fact that Mitsubishi designed an EVO without a wing (the RS) suggests that the impact on performance probably isn't as dramatic as some people believe.

Wow FJF. I see you make a comment and then get offline. I guess you are not trying to be argumentative. If you want to make a comment like you did about him backing up a steep hill, than I guess I can make a comment that you do not know crap because you drive a VW (no offense to any VW folks, just making a point).

I agree with twlai. Again the bottom line is that the wing is functional. Period end of story. I do not know all of the physics involved, can somebody on this forumn show me in detail how it does not help the car at high speeds. Wow, I guess the vortex generator is also non functional and for looks, oh and so are the red brake calipers.

WING is better

don't worry about it. i enjoy a good rational argument. as long as no one start
to call names...

i have to admit, you have a very good point. i don't have personal experience
on this matter. Give me 30min to run outside, and i will come back with my
"personal answer". ( If the cop don't put me in jail)

i see clarfication is needed!! I can "effective control of my Evo to the point of being able to negotiate a steep, uphill drive in reverse". It is just the front lip will need the ground if i don't roll over it SLOWLY. And the engine don't have enough torque to pull up the hill at the speed. I can ride on my clutch and do it pretty easily, but i just want to baby the clutch and look for alternative.

Huh?

You're trying to equate a choice of vehicle with the ability to drive it. No, I don't see your point.

Ahhh...it's the all-encompassing proof by assertion. You don't know what's involved, you have no data to support your claim, yet you boldly declare that's it's functional. You're free to believe whatever you like, but that doesn't make the issue into a fact.


It's logically impossible to prove a negative. A better request would involve data that illustrates its functionality. I think it's safe to say that a lot of us would like to see it.

You lost me on the calipers. Are you saying that red stops better than other colors?

There is some data on the Vortex generator:

http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/cor...004/16E_03.pdf

Thanks for back me up

also i am trying to get pass the 50 post limit....

So what you are saying FJF is that Mitsubishi put on this wing for looks and there is no function to it whatsoever?

Figure 10 sure looks like the rear wing is functional. Doesn't it say
"CFD results in Fig. 10 also show that the velocity of the airflow along with the bottom surface of the REAR WING increases with the addition of vg's, which reveals that a decrease in lift (an increase in down-force) did occur".

Also why are all the tests done with a rear wing.

Even on Mitsubishi Motors site it says that the wing provides even more downforce with the vg and the wickerbill.

This entire thread is full of opinions that are said to be fact. Then there are those that state facts where others say it is an opinion. Wow!

I think we can all agree that a spoiler's function is to provide downforce to the rear of the vehicle. I think we can all agree that the Vortex Generator on the car is there to direct the airflow so that the spoiler can better do it's job.

As far as if YOU feel like it makes a difference performance-wise...well...that's subjective as can be. From my understanding about aerodynamics, a spoiler is merely a cosmetic feature until you reach speeds in excess of 100mph.

Is there any true data online about the spoiler on THIS particular vehicle? Because if not--we're all just tootin' our own horns...

OH...and for those people that say the wing is what causes them to get pulled over and/or get tickets...you need to re-evaluate your driving habits. I have a wing--and live in San Antonio. I see and pass numerous police officers on a daily basis when driving and have had no problems.

With the exception of the a-hole cop who is merely wanting to screw with you--only your driving habits will get you pulled over. The wing does make you more noticeable--but isn't the "cause" for you getting the ticket or getting pulled over in the first place.

MRevo2006

You should read the my posts! I am not saying there is a major difference in performance. If there is a performance, it is minor, but it is there. The only thing that I am saying is that FJF and other people have not agreed with is that the wing is functional. That is all!!!

And also with the tickets, I have also agreed that having a wing does not constitute a cop pulling you over. Like I said in my prior post I have been pulled over more times in my 07 C230 than all times in my EVO and STI!

Plus I do not know about you guys, but I travel from LA to Craptown alot and have done so for many years. I top out 130+ mph at least 4-5 times every trip. I also hit over 100+ mph at least once every week. Whether that is right, it is up for debate. Sorry I like to drive fast.

I feel the wing is functional and that is the only point I am trying to make.

No, I'm not saying that. I have no idea whether the wing is functional or not. I can say, however, that the wind tunnel tests weren't exactly encouraging.

You're asking for speculation based on a set of clues whose true meaning is yet to be defined. That's the polar opposite of a fact.

That very well may be. Please keep in mind that non-USDM cars are equipped with rear diffusers, which one has to assume help the design generate some downforce. If not, one has to question the whole exercise.

Given the wind tunnel results we have, one thing can be said with a degree of confidence. Mitsubishi released an Evo into the USDM whose rear sees lift at higher speeds. Someone more cynical would ask why Mitsu didn't implement a US-legal rear diffuser - if that's what's causing the lift - given your faith in the firm's aim toward automotive excellence.

Whatever. This is like drawing a circle. Bottom line is that the wing is functional.

Agreed on the wind tunnel results and USDM seeing lift at higher speeds due to no rear diffuser. And the lift would be sooner and greater if not for the rear wing

I like the wing!