I keep reading on here that the Mugen adjustable wing was wind tunnel tested. Does anyone have a link to the CD and CL data from those tests, as well as the test conditions? The link for the DC5R body kit is here:
http://www.kingmotorsports.com/mugen_tech_rsx.asp

Now if we could just find the DC2 data. Additionally, does anyone have any data for the SiR body kit (non adjustable wing and round eye front end)?

This discussion is not intended to discuss the looks of the wings. I am also not looking for qualitative posts about increased braking feel at the end of high speed staights due to the wing. I want numerical data.

 

I'd like to see some data too dunno if we're gonna get it though

 

In the absence of digital data, it might be helpful to hear from track devotees who switched from the OEM DC2 ITR wing to the Mugen wing.

Did you subjectively notice a difference when going into threshold braking at the end of a long straight?

 

I understand that the feel under high speed braking is indeed better. I'm trying to quantify exactly why. As I said in the original post, many people claim that this wing was designed in a wind tunnel. If this is indeed true, I, and I'm sure many others, would like to see those data.

If these data are not available, perhaps someone could volunteer at the next ITR Expo to test several different wings on their car. This would be even better if several cars volunteered to test wings. This should even include one of those much hated aluminum wings. The braking feel (lift reduction) should be judged, as well as end of straight speed (drag).

 

didn't austrian R just do a mini write up on it?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dogginator &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I understand that the feel under high speed braking is indeed better. I'm trying to quantify exactly why.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Why? Because under high speed braking the the front squats and the rear actually rises and especially on an R with stock suspension. The Mugen wing is larger and produces more force than the stock wing, I'd guess mostly because of surface area and ability to pitch it more aggressively if need be.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">As I said in the original post, many people claim that this wing was designed in a wind tunnel. If this is indeed true, I, and I'm sure many others, would like to see those data.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Sign me up for that list of those who'd love to see the data.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If these data are not available, perhaps someone could volunteer at the next ITR Expo to test several different wings on their car. This would be even better if several cars volunteered to test wings. This should even include one of those much hated aluminum wings. The braking feel (lift reduction) should be judged, as well as end of straight speed (drag).</TD></TR></TABLE>

I think this has already been done to some degree, and I think George could elaborate more.

As per the stock wing compared to wingless, the car is more stable in my experience With the wing both, at speed and while braking. That's why I put mine back on.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dogginator &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I understand that the feel under high speed braking is indeed better. I'm trying to quantify exactly why. As I said in the original post, many people claim that this wing was designed in a wind tunnel. If this is indeed true, I, and I'm sure many others, would like to see those data.

If these data are not available, perhaps someone could volunteer at the next ITR Expo to test several different wings on their car. This would be even better if several cars volunteered to test wings. This should even include one of those much hated aluminum wings. The braking feel (lift reduction) should be judged, as well as end of straight speed (drag).</TD></TR></TABLE>why dont you just call King, or maybe someone here has a connection to Mugen and possibly find the "numerical" data you are looking for?. tell them there is a good interest in the wing here on honda-tech, which might generate sales.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1GreyTeg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Why? Because under high speed braking the the front squats and the rear actually rises and especially on an R with stock suspension. The Mugen wing is larger and produces more force than the stock wing, I'd guess mostly because of surface area and ability to pitch it more aggressively if need be.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Perhaps. It could also be a reduction in turbulence.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dogginator &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I want numerical data.</TD></TR></TABLE>

wtf for?

i think the only people with this information is Mugen

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dogginator &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Perhaps. It could also be a reduction in turbulence.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Did you follow this post? https://honda-tech.com/zero...age=1

If not, or even if you did read this: http://autozine.kyul.net/techn...o.htm

 

I have read both. The honda-tech link is filled with qualitative insight. The second link is good reading. My knowledge of aerodynamics is pretty solid. (You'd hope so after 22 years of school.) That's why I'm asking for the numerical data, as the concepts are not in question.

 

The money couldnt be used for something to better help your car, rather than aerodynamics?

 

This thread is not about money. It is about functionality. Perhaps the functionality discussion will aid people when they are spending their money.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dogginator &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This thread is not about money. It is about functionality. Perhaps the functionality discussion will aid people when they are spending their money. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Wasnt asking about money, only saying that is the functionality going to show enuff on the track, where its meant for? Just a question, no need to justify

 

Dogginator- I can definately agree with your reasons for wanting the data and facts.

Just like you expect improvement numbers over stock on a dyno for say a header, you should want some good proof that a wing that comes highly acclaimed actually performs better in certain regards than the OE wing.

I have also heard the claims that it is "wind tunnel tested". Wind tunnel testing costs quite a bit, and if Mugen had the information on it I dont see why it would be so hard to produce it for the consumer. I'd like to see some data on this hyped up part.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Be &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Wasnt asking about money, only saying that is the functionality going to show enuff on the track, where its meant for? Just a question, no need to justify</TD></TR></TABLE>

Seems many of the track guys that do run the Mugen wing attest to it's functionality.

 

Rode in a car on the track with it. Maybe it was because i was passenger.

 

There are three Summit Point weekends left in the NASA Virginia calendar.

Perhaps Ross Rappoport (Group 2) or Mark Sayers (Group 4) could be persuaded to switch their wings for the sake of a test. There are usually enough OEM wings at a NASA event that it shouldn't be hard to arrange.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Perhaps Ross Rappoport (Group 2) or Mark Sayers (Group 4) could be persuaded to switch their wings for the sake of a test.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I would definitely be up for it, if someone had a stock wing and was willing to do the wrenching.

The only question is, does anyone put enough stock in the opinion of a group 2 driver? I'd imagine Mark's opinion would carry much more weight.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ross R &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I would definitely be up for it, if someone had a stock wing and was willing to do the wrenching.

The only question is, does anyone put enough stock in the opinion of a group 2 driver? I'd imagine Mark's opinion would carry much more weight.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well, I was kinda hoping we could talk somebody like Jason into using your wing in the practice session or something.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Well, I was kinda hoping we could talk somebody like Jason into using your wing in the practice session or something.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes, this would be interresting. I will keep an eye on this thread, as it has always been a wonder to me.

 

I sent an email to King Motorsports yesterday requesting these data. Hopefully they are available.

Regarding the testing, lap times should be more important than feel. I'm sure I could put a large, functional wing on the back to ensure stability, while inducing huge drag. Car & Driver commented that the Mugen adjustable wing most likely significantly limited the top speed on King Motorsports' ITR in their March 2000 issue. For the test, I recommend a stock ITR wing, a Mugen adjustable wing, a Mugen non-adjustable wing (I have this wing), and the much hated aluminum GT style wing.

 

I had a JDM integra Si-VTEC (1994 car) before my ITR and i had a mugen (gen1) wing, mugen skirts and mugen front lip....my ITR is stock (body wise) I can say without a doubt that the Si was way more planted at high speeds than the ITR...i dont have any figures to back that up, but here is some facts, a friend of mine also had an Si-VTEC at the same time with an OE ITR wing, same size rims/same tyres, same mugen exhaust and just an Si-VTEC lower lip (also incorrectly refered to as SiR-G lip) His car had Ohlins coilovers, i had Mugen sport fixed rate shocks and apex 35mm ITR springs... anywho both cars were identical in terms of speed in a straight line, i couldnt gain on him, he couldnt pull away from me, but on fast bends, (and one in partcular) i could pull big time on him, from him sitting about a car lenght or two behind me, i could easily gain 6 or 7 if not more car lenghts on him on that bend (its a long sweeping bend with excellent road camber approx 1/3 mile long) I dont have the same confidence in taking the same bend in my ITR at similar speeds, the car just doesnt sit as well on the road and i now have spoon N1 coilovers and it lowered quite a bit. I can only put it down to the aero effects of the mugen wing/front lip and possibly side skirts too...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mugenracer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I had a JDM integra Si-VTEC (1994 car) before my ITR and i had a mugen (gen1) wing, mugen skirts and mugen front lip....my ITR is stock (body wise) I can say without a doubt that the Si was way more planted at high speeds than the ITR...i dont have any figures to back that up, but here is some facts, a freind of mine also had an Si-VTEC with an OE ITR wing, same size rims/same tyres, same mugen exhaust and just an Si-VTEC lower lip (also incorrectly refered to as SiR-G lip) His car had ohlins coilovers, i had mugen sport fixed rate shocks and apex 35mm ITR springs... anywho both cars were identical in terms of speed in a straight line, i couldnt gain on him, he couldnt pull away from me, but on fast bends, (and on ein partcular) i could pull big time on him, from him sitting about a car lenght or tow behind me, i could easily gain 6 or 7 if not more car lenghts on him on that bend (its a long sweeping bend with excellent road camber approx 1/3 mile long) I dont have the same confidence in taking the same bend in my ITR at similar speeds, the car just doesnt sit as well on the road and i now have spoon N1 coilovers and it lowered quite a bit. i can only put it down to the aero effects of the mugen wing/front lip and possibly side skirts too...</TD></TR></TABLE>

I don't think the original question was about a splitter or ground effects or a Gen 1 wing though.

Don't be offended, I'm just confused how your statement pertains?

 

Ooops sorry i should have read the last line on the initial post...sorry.