looks like it'd be functional.... reminds me of this.

 

Anyone have an APR front splitter - or any flat splitter - attached to a stock Evo IX bumper? And I mean directly to the bumper w/o incorporating an air dam or lip of any kind or dropping the splitter down lower than the stock bumper. (Stupid NASA rules....)

I'm wondering what happens in the middle 3' or so where the bumper is notched up?

 

I'd assume it'd slow you down rather then create downforce, based on shape alone. My thinking is i'm taking the points for the splitter anyway, i'd build out a smooth transition with enough extension if I didn't want to use the OEM lips. Never seen any race car with a "_\" always a "_/"

 

That's what they make aero tape for...

l8r)

 

Are you referring to the overhang/air dam between the front fascia and the splitter? There are a lot of cars (like vettes) that have a pointy nose that have quite a large overhang when using a splitter ( < ) . The opposite would be like the old Audi rally cars that had a wedge shaped front end ( / ).

The overhang detracts from the function of the splitter - the overall effectiveness of the splitter has more to do with how far it sticks out in front of the forwardmost part of the bumper rather than how far it extends from the bottom of the fascia where it mates up. If a vette has a splitter that sticks out 12" from the bottom of the fascia and 4" from the forwardmost part of the fascia - the splitter will not make the same DF as sticking a 12" splitter on the front of an EVO. . .

 

I see what we're talking about. If you add any vertical panel you have to add +3 points as well as the +3 points for the splitter element. After reading through the exact rules it seems as if the APR splitter will force you to have to take the +3 points for both the splitter and the +3 for "extending the vertical reach of the OEM front fascia" since it sits below the front fascia. . .

Before going with the APR or DHP unit you had better ask for a rules clarification so you don't get dinged with +6 points. Based on my interpretation of the rules I think the best way to make the most downforce while only adding +3 points is to run a vertical Nascar style (pre-COT) air dam as low to the ground as possible, with a flat front undertray that does not stick out the front or the sides but does have diffuser/venturi tunnels . . .

 

Already been there. Here's a reply directly from NASA:
So it needs to be connected directly to the bumper/fasica (whatever you call it) w/o a gap to be just the 3pts. It's possible.

 

Does the APR splitter work? Good/bad reviews on whether or not it really creates downforce? Nate, id say that depends on who you ask, how they have mounted/reinforced their splitter, and what sort of data youre looking for.

Im sure someone whos an aero expert can illustrate the math behind why certain designs/features are better than APR. Im not an expert, but i dont see how the APR splitter doesnt work/create downforce. Then again, im not sure what it actually means to say that a splitter works or not. Furthermore, i dont have the knowledge, nor do i have the ability to illustrate that it works. What i can say is what i feel with it on my car when im driving. Given my experience, what i can feel is that my front end is more planted in the high speed transitions. Does that mean that it works, or that it creates downforce? Im going to go out on a limb and say yes. Is there a splitter out there thats better than APR? Im going to go out on another limb and say yes again. But at this juncture, i dont think having a different splitter with other features/designs is actually going to make any difference for me.

Something else i want to note is how people mount their splitter. The way you support/reinforce your splitter and how you mount it will obviously effect how it functions. Again, im not an expert on any of this, but i dont think it takes an expert to realize that. Because if you dont support/reinforce it well enough it will flex/deflect more at speed. When we were getting ready to work on my splitter, we didnt feel like i would need any sort of supporting rods/wiring in the front because of the approach we were planning to take. Rather loosely speaking, i think my APR splitter, given the way we reinforced/mounted it, is pretty dang solid.

There are guys who also entertain the idea of running a splitter that has the ability to have its angle and length adjusted. While im sure there is a benefit in being able to adjust your splitters angle and length, it just feels like way too much more work. I can probably spend the next 10 years fine tuning my setup from one race to the next, and we will probably still continue to find different combinations of spring rates, alignments, and tire pressures to use. However, i suspect that driver improvement will play a major factor in how those setup combinations are adjusted from one race to the next. If you ask me, id say i already have enough to think about with varying combinations of spring rates, compression/rebound settings, alignments, and tire pressures to work with. Therefore, i think i would go crazy trying to figure out how much more/less length, or how much more/less angle my splitter will benefit me from one track to the next. Maybe someday ill take that step, but for now im content with a fixed length and angle for my splitter. Besides, on top of everything else i think about, trying to play with different angles for my wing is already more than enough for me right now.

 

According to his reply - the splitter must not hang below the bottom of the bumper or else you need to take the points for an air dam. Reading his reply it seems to me that since the APR splitter sits BELOW the bottom of the bumper, it therefore extends vertically below the bumper, and therfore must incur the +3 for an air dam. . .

To be sure on the rule you need to get it clarified further I think. Do they mean it can be attached directly to the bottom/underside of the fascia? Or do they mean that if it sits below the fascia at all that you have to take the points?

 

Here's a pic of a NASA 3pt splitter in it's simplest form. It's an APR splitter that's completely flat, connects directly to the oem bumper, extends < 5" and does not go back past the axle. (confirmed by NASA as 3pts)

 

You sent them that picture and they said it was only +3 for splitter even though it mounts under the front fascia? If so, then disregard everything I've been talking about over the past few posts. By reading the rules I thought that would not be legal. . .

 

What about the gap in the middle between the splitter and lower bumper lip. If you cover that gap up, whould that consider air dam.

 

Correct, that would be an airdam/front fascia modification and be hit with another +3.

 

race TT-S or TT-U and don't worry about the points anymore then you can run unlimited aero mods

i'm very confident that nothing aero-wise can provide any benefit compared to other components available for equal points. since our cars usually are going to fall into the TT-A catagory, use your points for more beneficial mods. Our TT-A evo X doesn't have anything aero on it. his points were maxed out off suspension, tires and power alone. we brought the weight down to the absolute minimum allowed for the car, maximized tire size, running coilovers and sway bars, and the rest power mods (intake + pipes, intercooler, exhaust, fuel system).

 

Ya know it looks like a gap, but I examined my oem bumper the other night and you can mount the APR directly to the bumper/fascia. Their would be no air gap.