I was thinking of removing my rear spoiler, but I am aware that I will end up losing downforce. Will a rear bumper** diffuser compensate for the loss of downforce?
Thanks

 

No. The VG assists the wings downforce.

 

Vg?

 

Vortex Generator.

STevo

 

Ohh. I understand that. By diffuser I meant a 1 that is installed beneath the bumper

 

I too wonder this as I am recently de-winged. bump for answers. This being valid as the stock spoiler does what 5lbs downforce( i think), and works above 100 mph. Will the rear diffuser help say on AX or sub 100mph?

 

**the spoiler gives 68*** lbs of downforce at speeds over 100mph according to motor trend

 

Thanks. I was recently told this by someone whom does TA. It didn't sound right to me. I guess everyone can be wrong, no matter how much money they put into their car. I didnt take it off because of him though. I had other reasons!

 

Downforce is actually a lot greater than you think using the stock wing and only increase the faster you go.
From the look, the diffuser should help a lot keeping the bumper from turning into a parachute at high speed. But I have yet to see data from any independent test.

 

Its my understanding that a rear diffuser will simply straighten out the air and keep the car tracking strait and true whereas a wing will actually create downforce. Therefore they are two different pieces with different purposes.

 

Yea i was thinking the same thing diffuser shouldn't create any downforce but the wing is. And i'm wondering stock wing give you 50 lbs I saw on youtube the voltex kit only give out 46 lbs at high speed .... i could be wrong

 

A rear diffuser can infact create downforce as well as "straigtening" out the airflow from underneath the car and reducing turbulence.

 

A well designed diffuser will certainly increase downforce (or reduce lift if you want to be nit picky). I doubt that it is as effective as the wing. Unless you're on the track, you won't be able to take advantage of either.

And for the record, a spoiler, or wing doesn't magically "start to work" at a certain speed. It is working at all speeds, the force produced being proportional to the square of the velocity. So it is by far more effective at high speeds than low speeds, as others have noted.

 

Am I missing something here? 50 pounds at 100 mph doesn't seem like hardly anything on a car that weights close to 3,000 lbs. I know every little bit helps but 50lbs doesn't seem like anything.

 

When I said 68***I was just quoting motor trend. I never implied it starts at 100. That was just a reference.