http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LnmD7kxHUw

NO NEED TO SAY MORE

 

damn. def need wing for those types of speeds

 

on the track (road course) at 100-120 you can feel the difference. the back end gets real loose which is a bad feeling to have. back to back test confirmed that even with the added cop attention, I was keeping the wing on. AutoX no difference from the butt dyno.

the other cars you listed have other ways to eliminate lift, something our econo box ecos arent great at.

you also have to remember that by adding a big front splitter to aid in front end downforce you need to have a wing in the back to balance it out otherwise the nose will dive, the rear will lift and become squirly. just my 02 cents tho

 

another example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phf_sLQ000I

he wouldn't have lost rear wheel traction and spun if he had the factory STi spoiler.

yes, the spoiler adds drag and decreases your top speed, but in increases rear grip in proportion to your speed. the rear part of the car is light and needs help to maintain grip. trying to increase top speed at the cost of decreased rear wheel grip is a VERY bad idea!

and damn you for posting the VIR wreck. I'm going to be there in a couple days and my one of my goals was to improve my entry into the upper esses so I can hit them all flat out. I know I'm going to lift a bit when this pops in my mind

 

HAHA just make sure you have a wing now

 

he was doing pretty good until that last turn

 

I think the shape of the vehicle plays a big part in downforce...

since the evo has such a short rear end the wing is necessary to create more downforce at the rear.

 

Im not sure those videos prove anything to me. Was there any post crash analysys that proved a wing or not caused the crash?

I used to run events in my old stock WRX that didnt have a wing. My top speeds were 139 amd 143 in the twisties and straights. No crash.

But that proves nothing.

This data from a previous post is telling:
Without wing - 1:25.99
With wing - 1:25.84
Not a huge difference, but a difference. That's apples-apples with no other changes. The Evo's fastest lap of the day (1:25.31) was set with the wing in place and the tires two psi lower vis a vis the runs above.

Its not very scientific. Buts the closest thing Ive seen yet to data for Wing vs No Wing.

Again, Im not debating whether wings work or not. We all know they do.

Too bad C and D or somebody hasnt done true track, drag strip, and skidpad tests to truly see either way.

Thanks guys for all the input. I was trying to put together a thread devoid of the emotional component these cars bring to the table in any debate. We got pretty close.

 

this definitely is going to make me more cautious while being on a track at these speeds

 

nobody has done any "real" test of wing vs no wing because lets face it, aerodynamics is an inexact science. look at F1 for example. 13 teams, 13 different aero packages.

for the evo specifically, it was designed with the wing in mind imo. they only took the wing off to LOOK more toned down. likewise, the GSR used to come with the small wing to look less ricey and also to sell you the big wing in the SSS package. how big a difference the wing makes, no one really knows. you can compare lap times but how much of that is driver confidence with a more planted rear end? how much of that is actual real world aerodynamic downforce?

i think the bottomline is that the evo is not an inherently aerodynamic car. it uses the huge wing because it kinda has to. does that mean wingless is death on a road course? of course not, but everyone agrees the wing adds downforce and controls the rear end better. and that's the take away message i think we can all agree on. if you're gonna go fast often, you best have the wing for peace of mind.

 

Not just peace of mind, but it really does add downforce.

Laptimes aside, the evo x was engineered with aerodynamics in mind from the very beginning. They didn't just slap some parts on they kinda tested. When I get home I can post the entire engineering documentation on it. They have data on everything from the front, under, and back of the car for aerodynamics.

If you're daily driving (or even canyon carving), you aren't going to notice a difference... But if you go to the track, I definitely suggest one. It's going to plant the *** end more down high speed straights, and entry in the corners.

 

If I recall correctly, they didn't even use the large wing, but the lancer wing in those tests. I hate to say I'm skeptical of those tests for that very reason. They need to test no wing, lip, and large wing imo.

 

LOL at the first page.. This thread wasn't meant to compare high-end luxury performance cars to the evo; it was simply to find out if the wing is really necassary or not.

What I do know is that if anyone IS using this car for the track EVERYDAY, or at least driving it about 90mph every day then yes the wing is probably for you. For the people who DON'T race everyday and drive there car around for fun I don't see the wing being 100% necassary.

But to make this a little more confusing, why do some evo's come with low spoilers and others with high ones? I was at a meet the other day and saw my exact car (GSR) with a low wing and I just don't get it.. thought all evo spoilers were supposed to be the same.

Thanks!

 

the 08 gsr's came standard with the low wing. The big wing was part of the SSS package, and many people opted not to get it. Me included :-)

 

my opinion is that mitsu uses the wing more of a handling aid than a traction aid. its not as if the stock evo makes so much power it needs to generate tons of downforce to put the power on the ground. so the wing is functional. it generates just enough downforce to plant the rear, but not enough to allow the evo to drive upsidedown or anything like that...

so if you find yourself needing a more planted rear, such as in road racing, then get a wing. if you dont go fast enough, often enough, then maybe the rear wing is just cosmetic for you...