Rear Wings
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: CA
Rear Wings
By chance does anyone know of the manufacturer of the rear wings used on the Honda Civic Hatch Type R's that are running in the BTCC series? I thought someone was making the units but search results have netted me nothing. Most of the race hatches in Europe run them so I find it hard to imagine these are all custom units made by the race teams...but then again what do I know!?!?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,748
Likes: 0
From: Concord, CA, USA
I believe most of them are made by Thompson Composite. based in England. ICBW. But Thompson composite made lots of composite body, wing and aero stuff for race cars for different race tam in mid 90s.
Similat to Crawford Composite here in US.
I believe the cost of the wing is up of $1500
And that just the wing alone. Without end plates and any of the pedestals.
Usually each team make their own pedestals and mounts.
http://www.crawfordcomposites.com/
Similat to Crawford Composite here in US.
I believe the cost of the wing is up of $1500
And that just the wing alone. Without end plates and any of the pedestals.
Usually each team make their own pedestals and mounts.
http://www.crawfordcomposites.com/
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA
Re: (Andrie Hartanto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Andrie Hartanto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Similat to Crawford Composite here in US.
I believe the cost of the wing is up of $1500
And that just the wing alone. Without end plates and any of the pedestals.
Usually each team make their own pedestals and mounts.
http://www.crawfordcomposites.com/</TD></TR></TABLE>
That's rough on the club racer budget. Andrie, have you found and decent, lower cost alternatives? Seems like there ought to be a decent wing somewhere for less than the cost of a new surfboard...
I believe the cost of the wing is up of $1500
And that just the wing alone. Without end plates and any of the pedestals.
Usually each team make their own pedestals and mounts.
http://www.crawfordcomposites.com/</TD></TR></TABLE>
That's rough on the club racer budget. Andrie, have you found and decent, lower cost alternatives? Seems like there ought to be a decent wing somewhere for less than the cost of a new surfboard...
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,748
Likes: 0
From: Concord, CA, USA
There are lots of cheaper alternative. But I thought he asked the BTCC specific wing......
I used a generic 3-D design wing before and thought it worked great. Compared to HPM (World Challenge spec) wing which I have to run at significant angle.
I also have a Thompson built realtime wing that they ran in the NSX in the early days. They changed the wing the second year they ran the SC. But last time I saw their TSX, the profile seem the same. Only about 12" shorter.
Unfortunately, I don't own either. Just borrowed them. Hopefully I can test them sometime next year.
I used a generic 3-D design wing before and thought it worked great. Compared to HPM (World Challenge spec) wing which I have to run at significant angle.
I also have a Thompson built realtime wing that they ran in the NSX in the early days. They changed the wing the second year they ran the SC. But last time I saw their TSX, the profile seem the same. Only about 12" shorter.
Unfortunately, I don't own either. Just borrowed them. Hopefully I can test them sometime next year.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
From: www.SavOnTrafficSchool.com, usa
Re: (Andrie Hartanto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Andrie Hartanto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Unfortunately, I don't own either. Just borrowed them. Hopefully I can test them sometime next year.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Unfortunately, I don't own either. Just borrowed them. Hopefully I can test them sometime next year.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Trending Topics
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA
Re: (Andrie Hartanto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Andrie Hartanto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I used a generic 3-D design wing before and thought it worked great. Compared to HPM (World Challenge spec) wing which I have to run at significant angle.</TD></TR></TABLE>
You mean 3-D Carbon? These guys: http://3dcarbon.com Which one?
You mean 3-D Carbon? These guys: http://3dcarbon.com Which one?
H-T Order of Merit
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 96,416
Likes: 38
From: Siege Perilous
Re: Rear Wings (mrlegoman)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mrlegoman »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Not a clue, but would be interested to see some specs. Also would like to know how helpful the rear wing would be on a front wheel drive car.</TD></TR></TABLE>
A lot of our Honda hatches are designed as production cars with a lower speed in mind that the speeds at which many people race.
The little wing on the EP3 USDM car assumed a top speed of 125, and the EP3 CTR wing assumed that nobody was going to hit 140 except for maybe a brief stretch on the Autobahn or the M3 to see what top speed was.
The problem is that our hatches do have a ball of turbulent air that forms right behind the hatch glass, at the top, and this serves to have the net effect of attempting to lift the rear of the car off the road.
The greater the chance that you will have to drive at 140+ speeds for more than a couple of seconds, and the greater the chance that you will have to be turning the car at high speeds, the more important it is to smooth out the air flow so that there is less tendency for the air turbulence to try to lift the rear wheels off the pavement.
I feel less sure about wanting to actually add down force at that point, but I am sure I would want to move that ball of turbulent air to a point a few feet behind the car instead of right at the hatch glass.
A lot of our Honda hatches are designed as production cars with a lower speed in mind that the speeds at which many people race.
The little wing on the EP3 USDM car assumed a top speed of 125, and the EP3 CTR wing assumed that nobody was going to hit 140 except for maybe a brief stretch on the Autobahn or the M3 to see what top speed was.
The problem is that our hatches do have a ball of turbulent air that forms right behind the hatch glass, at the top, and this serves to have the net effect of attempting to lift the rear of the car off the road.
The greater the chance that you will have to drive at 140+ speeds for more than a couple of seconds, and the greater the chance that you will have to be turning the car at high speeds, the more important it is to smooth out the air flow so that there is less tendency for the air turbulence to try to lift the rear wheels off the pavement.
I feel less sure about wanting to actually add down force at that point, but I am sure I would want to move that ball of turbulent air to a point a few feet behind the car instead of right at the hatch glass.
H-T Order of Merit
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 96,416
Likes: 38
From: Siege Perilous
Re: Rear Wings (madhatter07)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by madhatter07 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">isnt there a guy in a yellow civic that runs a wing that is pretty close to that? What is that one?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
You could be talking about anything. There's a yellow EM1 H1 car that has a wing like that.
We also played with a wing similar to that on an EP3 CTR at Summit Point, taking it off and putting it back to see what difference it made. That car was basically yellow.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
You could be talking about anything. There's a yellow EM1 H1 car that has a wing like that.
We also played with a wing similar to that on an EP3 CTR at Summit Point, taking it off and putting it back to see what difference it made. That car was basically yellow.
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,840
Likes: 0
From: SE, PA
Re: Rear Wings (madhatter07)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by madhatter07 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">isnt there a guy in a yellow civic that runs a wing that is pretty close to that? What is that one?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Do you mean this one?
I'll be messing around with a APR rear wing on my EK Honda Challenge car next season. I'll let you know what I think of it then....
It should look something like this..
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Do you mean this one?
I'll be messing around with a APR rear wing on my EK Honda Challenge car next season. I'll let you know what I think of it then....
It should look something like this..
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA
Re: Rear Wings (mrlegoman)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mrlegoman »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Not a clue, but would be interested to see some specs. Also would like to know how helpful the rear wing would be on a front wheel drive car.</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Outrun »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What's up with all the "rear wing is useless on a FWD"? Mythbusters needs to bust this myth!</TD></TR></TABLE>
Fwd has little if anything to do with it. Unless the car has so much torque that it is spinning the tires in medium to high speed corners (like a turbo time-attack car or whatever) the location of the drive wheels has virtually nothing to do with how the wing will affect the car.
Fwd cars have a push/understeer condition by nature. We induce a neutral to loose handling condition with springs, sway bars, tires & alignment to get the car to rotate in low speed bends. But that same low-speed condition can get harry in the high-speed stuff where you want a slight push/understeer condition.
The rear wing is used to balance the car in high-speed transitions and cornering. If we throw a front splitter into the mix (to add front end grip) then we need even more wing to balance the car.
Again, talking about normally aspirated touring/IT/club-racing type cars, front wheel drive has little or nothing to do with HOW the wing works. Only why we (fwd guys) might need it in the first place...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Outrun »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What's up with all the "rear wing is useless on a FWD"? Mythbusters needs to bust this myth!</TD></TR></TABLE>
Fwd has little if anything to do with it. Unless the car has so much torque that it is spinning the tires in medium to high speed corners (like a turbo time-attack car or whatever) the location of the drive wheels has virtually nothing to do with how the wing will affect the car.
Fwd cars have a push/understeer condition by nature. We induce a neutral to loose handling condition with springs, sway bars, tires & alignment to get the car to rotate in low speed bends. But that same low-speed condition can get harry in the high-speed stuff where you want a slight push/understeer condition.
The rear wing is used to balance the car in high-speed transitions and cornering. If we throw a front splitter into the mix (to add front end grip) then we need even more wing to balance the car.
Again, talking about normally aspirated touring/IT/club-racing type cars, front wheel drive has little or nothing to do with HOW the wing works. Only why we (fwd guys) might need it in the first place...
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,748
Likes: 0
From: Concord, CA, USA
Re: (thawley)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thawley »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You mean 3-D Carbon? These guys: http://3dcarbon.com Which one?</TD></TR></TABLE>
No that's not the one. To tell you the truth, I have no idea what brand I had. I bought it from craigslist. It was cheap enough and I thought I'd give it a try. And it worked great.
You mean 3-D Carbon? These guys: http://3dcarbon.com Which one?</TD></TR></TABLE>
No that's not the one. To tell you the truth, I have no idea what brand I had. I bought it from craigslist. It was cheap enough and I thought I'd give it a try. And it worked great.
Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
From: Birmingham, Al.
Re: (Andrie Hartanto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thawley »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Fwd has little if anything to do with it. Unless the car has so much torque that it is spinning the tires in medium to high speed corners (like a turbo time-attack car or whatever) the location of the drive wheels has virtually nothing to do with how the wing will affect the car.
Fwd cars have a push/understeer condition by nature. We induce a neutral to loose handling condition with springs, sway bars, tires & alignment to get the car to rotate in low speed bends. But that same low-speed condition can get harry in the high-speed stuff where you want a slight push/understeer condition.
The rear wing is used to balance the car in high-speed transitions and cornering. If we throw a front splitter into the mix (to add front end grip) then we need even more wing to balance the car.
Again, talking about normally aspirated touring/IT/club-racing type cars, front wheel drive has little or nothing to do with HOW the wing works. Only why we (fwd guys) might need it in the first place...</TD></TR></TABLE>
I am looking into a wing option when and if I can finally get the front splitter built for the car. Someone on here talked about having a pretty efficient front splitter and how at higher speeds it made the handling of their car (maybe at Buttonwillow?) not pleasant. They put on a rear wing and got some "aero balance" to the car at higher speeds and it was better.
In that I have a hybrid track car that is light, I have wanted to explore the option of the splitter and rear wing to get some more stick at places like Road Atlanta where turns like T12 are in excess of 100mph and T1 you hit low 90s mph at the apex. Plus it would be nice to have a little less lift (or more downforce, whatever you want to call it) as I crest the hill going down to T10a at 135mph+ and stand on the brakes (reduced death wiggle as the goal).
For the CRX the body/roof profile is not wide and I don't want wing sticking out from the profile of the car (increased drag) when viewed from the front. I have found a 44in. wide inch single element wing at APR that bolts to the hatchback roofs with maybe an inch of height. What I want to do is take that wing and then put a regular pedestal of say 7inches (about one inch below the roofline profile) onto the rear trunk lid of my car instead. Basically combining the hatch wing with hardware from a "regular" wing set up I am hoping to achieve a wing that is high enough to get good air to work but narrow enough and just low enough to not create too much drag.
Barry H.
Fwd has little if anything to do with it. Unless the car has so much torque that it is spinning the tires in medium to high speed corners (like a turbo time-attack car or whatever) the location of the drive wheels has virtually nothing to do with how the wing will affect the car.
Fwd cars have a push/understeer condition by nature. We induce a neutral to loose handling condition with springs, sway bars, tires & alignment to get the car to rotate in low speed bends. But that same low-speed condition can get harry in the high-speed stuff where you want a slight push/understeer condition.
The rear wing is used to balance the car in high-speed transitions and cornering. If we throw a front splitter into the mix (to add front end grip) then we need even more wing to balance the car.
Again, talking about normally aspirated touring/IT/club-racing type cars, front wheel drive has little or nothing to do with HOW the wing works. Only why we (fwd guys) might need it in the first place...</TD></TR></TABLE>
I am looking into a wing option when and if I can finally get the front splitter built for the car. Someone on here talked about having a pretty efficient front splitter and how at higher speeds it made the handling of their car (maybe at Buttonwillow?) not pleasant. They put on a rear wing and got some "aero balance" to the car at higher speeds and it was better.
In that I have a hybrid track car that is light, I have wanted to explore the option of the splitter and rear wing to get some more stick at places like Road Atlanta where turns like T12 are in excess of 100mph and T1 you hit low 90s mph at the apex. Plus it would be nice to have a little less lift (or more downforce, whatever you want to call it) as I crest the hill going down to T10a at 135mph+ and stand on the brakes (reduced death wiggle as the goal).
For the CRX the body/roof profile is not wide and I don't want wing sticking out from the profile of the car (increased drag) when viewed from the front. I have found a 44in. wide inch single element wing at APR that bolts to the hatchback roofs with maybe an inch of height. What I want to do is take that wing and then put a regular pedestal of say 7inches (about one inch below the roofline profile) onto the rear trunk lid of my car instead. Basically combining the hatch wing with hardware from a "regular" wing set up I am hoping to achieve a wing that is high enough to get good air to work but narrow enough and just low enough to not create too much drag.
Barry H.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
From: www.SavOnTrafficSchool.com, usa
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,748
Likes: 0
From: Concord, CA, USA
Barry,
While wing create drag, a most effective wing is when it get clear air.
What I'm trying to say is, if you put the wing that it doesn't get clear air or minimal clear air, the effectiveness of the wing is reduced, but you still get the drag.
Sometime wing sticking out from the profile of the car is better. In fact most of the time it is better, as long as the profile of the car doesn't disturb the air flow. The higher the aspect ratio of the wing, the more efficient the wing, the less air resistance created by the vortex at the wing tips. The aspect ratio is the span of the airfoil divided by its chord.
Most of the race car don't have wing potruding out of the profile of the car because the rule doesn't allow them too.
Like in BTCC, the way the hatch back mount their wing is because the rule doesn't allow the wing to be higher than the roof line.
In Speed World Challenge, we have to run the wing at least 6" below the roof line. And the wing has to be 48" long.
While wing create drag, a most effective wing is when it get clear air.
What I'm trying to say is, if you put the wing that it doesn't get clear air or minimal clear air, the effectiveness of the wing is reduced, but you still get the drag.
Sometime wing sticking out from the profile of the car is better. In fact most of the time it is better, as long as the profile of the car doesn't disturb the air flow. The higher the aspect ratio of the wing, the more efficient the wing, the less air resistance created by the vortex at the wing tips. The aspect ratio is the span of the airfoil divided by its chord.
Most of the race car don't have wing potruding out of the profile of the car because the rule doesn't allow them too.
Like in BTCC, the way the hatch back mount their wing is because the rule doesn't allow the wing to be higher than the roof line.
In Speed World Challenge, we have to run the wing at least 6" below the roof line. And the wing has to be 48" long.
Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
From: Birmingham, Al.
Re: (Andrie Hartanto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Andrie Hartanto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Barry,
While wing create drag, a most effective wing is when it get clear air.
What I'm trying to say is, if you put the wing that it doesn't get clear air or minimal clear air, the effectiveness of the wing is reduced, but you still get the drag.
Sometime wing sticking out from the profile of the car is better. In fact most of the time it is better, as long as the profile of the car doesn't disturb the air flow. The higher the aspect ratio of the wing, the more efficient the wing, the less air resistance created by the vortex at the wing tips. The aspect ratio is the span of the airfoil divided by its chord.
Most of the race car don't have wing potruding out of the profile of the car because the rule doesn't allow them too.
Like in BTCC, the way the hatch back mount their wing is because the rule doesn't allow the wing to be higher than the roof line.
In Speed World Challenge, we have to run the wing at least 6" below the roof line. And the wing has to be 48" long.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Thanks for your thoughts. Don't we all wish we had access to a wind tunnel and the gee whiz technology that comes with it. Yeah, I know the higher the wing sticks up out into the clean air the better it is. I guess I am trying to get some compromise and maybe that is not smart. Looking at the roofline of the CRX it has a very nice gradual taper down that I am hoping allows for some decent laminar air flow (is that the right word?) or low turbulence than most rooflines. If it was just one inch below the roofline I am hoping it gets good enough air to give me the downforce/less lift I seek in balance to the splitter. Let me ask this, how well do the SWC wings work being 6in. below the roof? I know this is all SWAG or maybe un-SWAG on my part anyhow.
Barry H
While wing create drag, a most effective wing is when it get clear air.
What I'm trying to say is, if you put the wing that it doesn't get clear air or minimal clear air, the effectiveness of the wing is reduced, but you still get the drag.
Sometime wing sticking out from the profile of the car is better. In fact most of the time it is better, as long as the profile of the car doesn't disturb the air flow. The higher the aspect ratio of the wing, the more efficient the wing, the less air resistance created by the vortex at the wing tips. The aspect ratio is the span of the airfoil divided by its chord.
Most of the race car don't have wing potruding out of the profile of the car because the rule doesn't allow them too.
Like in BTCC, the way the hatch back mount their wing is because the rule doesn't allow the wing to be higher than the roof line.
In Speed World Challenge, we have to run the wing at least 6" below the roof line. And the wing has to be 48" long.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Thanks for your thoughts. Don't we all wish we had access to a wind tunnel and the gee whiz technology that comes with it. Yeah, I know the higher the wing sticks up out into the clean air the better it is. I guess I am trying to get some compromise and maybe that is not smart. Looking at the roofline of the CRX it has a very nice gradual taper down that I am hoping allows for some decent laminar air flow (is that the right word?) or low turbulence than most rooflines. If it was just one inch below the roofline I am hoping it gets good enough air to give me the downforce/less lift I seek in balance to the splitter. Let me ask this, how well do the SWC wings work being 6in. below the roof? I know this is all SWAG or maybe un-SWAG on my part anyhow.
Barry H
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,572
Likes: 0
From: Lynchvegas, Va, USA
Re: Rear Wings (George Knighton)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I feel less sure about wanting to actually add down force at that point, but I am sure I would want to move that ball of turbulent air to a point a few feet behind the car instead of right at the hatch glass. </TD></TR></TABLE> 
This year I'm going to be hitting 150+ on the back straight of VIR. Aerodynamics is now somewhat of a concern for me. It would be nice to find some actual test data of some of the different types of wings.
</TD></TR></TABLE> This year I'm going to be hitting 150+ on the back straight of VIR. Aerodynamics is now somewhat of a concern for me. It would be nice to find some actual test data of some of the different types of wings.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Re: Rear Wings (mrlegoman)
R Crew Racing makes wing mounts for hatchbacks similar to the yellow EG. Contact them here:
http://www.rcrewracing.com
http://www.rcrewracing.com
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
From: Ancaster, Ontario, Canada
Re: Rear Wings (EauRouge)
I've been in touch with the chief engineer of one of the teams running CTR's in the BTCC and he told me that the rear wings on all the BTCC cars (including the mounting hardware) are provided by the BTCC as part of a cost-cutting measure (ie. to prevent teams from doing any aero testing and development). In the case of the CTR's, the wings are designed to produce 25kg of downforce at a specified speed (can't remember off-hand what the exact speed is). They are apparently allowed to reduce the angle of the wing, but they cannot add any angle of attack beyond the specified amount used to provide the 25kg of downforce at speed X, so these wings have a limited range of adjustability. And as mentioned by Andrie, the BTCC rules specify the mounting height and wing width, so this particular wing may not be ideal for the series you run in.
That being said, I think the BTCC method of mounting an airfoil on a hatchback is quite brilliant and I plan to rip off this design when mounting a rear airfoil on my EG road race hatchback (used in TGTC in Ontario).
That being said, I think the BTCC method of mounting an airfoil on a hatchback is quite brilliant and I plan to rip off this design when mounting a rear airfoil on my EG road race hatchback (used in TGTC in Ontario).
Trial User
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 4,264
Likes: 1
From: Jasma
Re: Rear Wings (Tyson)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">how about a HC "spec wing" to reduce costs? 
(ok, probably not funny in the current forum climate
)</TD></TR></TABLE>
I called TBS and was told it was "midly amusing"
(ok, probably not funny in the current forum climate
)</TD></TR></TABLE>I called TBS and was told it was "midly amusing"