• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

Stock vs. NSX-R wing vs. GT Wing vs. Hybrid? - On track

Billy, awesome topic!! I was just about to post to this forum asking for aero help....I know nothing about aero and need recommendations on what is next for me. I'll be completely flat underneath (except for exposed front bank headers, oil pan and tyranny housing for cooling) with a Difflow diffuser. I was going to ask...Type-R wing, GT-Wing (Voltex)? Size of front splitter for appropriate aero balance. (I will not be running canards). So I could be TOTALLY down for the hybrid...all depends in what-in-the-heck I should be doing.
 
Last edited:
Billy, awesome topic!! I was just about to post to this forum asking for aero help....I know nothing about aero and need recommendations on what is next for me. I'll be completely flat underneath (except for exposed front bank headers, oil pan and tyranny housing for cooling) with a Difflow diffuser. I was going to ask...Type-R wing, GT-Wing (Voltex)? Size of front splitter for appropriate aero balance. (I will not be running canards). So I could be TOTALLY down for the hybrid...all depends in what-in-the-heck I should be doing.

FYI: A typical GT wing is 1700mm (67"). The Porsche GT3 RS is 57" and my proposed Hybrid wing is looking like it will be 45" wide (a few inches wider than NSX-R and MUCH more efficient with less drag and a lot more downforce.

At 45", the Hybrid design is 67% the width of the GT wing, and 79% as wide as the GT3 RS. Depending on the profile, it is much closer to the GT & GT3RS wing's downforce level than the NSX-R's but since it's adjustable, it could make more downforce than what's needed (for aero balance, even with a front splitter).

*The Goal of the Hybrid is ~ OEM/NSXR width, looks, but close to (or as much as) GT wing downforce without the extreme look of a GT wing.


To answer your question, it depends on what you're looking for. Aero balance is a...balance. If you have an NSX-R wing, any splitter might be too much. If you have a GT wing, you can go pretty big on a front splitter and increase the overall downforce/grip of the car which = speed. If you like the idea of the Hybrid, then stay tuned and keep posting! If you are okay with the looks of the GT wing, then go for it.
 
...my proposed Hybrid wing is looking like it will be 45" wide (a few inches wider than NSX-R and MUCH more efficient with less drag and a lot more downforce.

...Depending on the profile, it is much closer to the GT & GT3RS wing's downforce level than the NSX-R's...

It's entirely unclear to me how you can make these statements. As far as I am informed, they lack a sound basis. That said, it seems you will come up with something you are happy with. I think the current designs can be obviously improved but wouldn't want to make unsupported statements about relative performance. I also want an optimized design if going to the trouble so will wait for that.

I like what you said about aero balance and that is why I will be pursuing a front underwing before a rear wing.
 
I'll follow this thread carefully as I'm always on the lookout for NSX improvements.
When I bought my NSX in 1998 it came with the full Mugen kit comprising a rear wing that I thought looked very nice.
How effective was it I can't say but I do believe that my current configuration with an NSX R type wing feels more planted.
I rode with both at the Le Mans "Bugatti" track where there is a very fast right hander after the pits straight line that one enters at 125 mph.
Here's what the Mugen wing looked like.
LeMans2009014_zpsa55060b5.jpg

NSXrearwing010_zpsed7fe638.jpg
 
So, what are the thoughts on the hardware to make this height adjustable? Having the ability to go down to stock height is going to compromise the height ability of the track option, won't it?
 
It's entirely unclear to me how you can make these statements. As far as I am informed, they lack a sound basis. That said, it seems you will come up with something you are happy with. I think the current designs can be obviously improved but wouldn't want to make unsupported statements about relative performance. I also want an optimized design if going to the trouble so will wait for that.

I like what you said about aero balance and that is why I will be pursuing a front underwing before a rear wing.
A true airfoil will make more downforce and less drag than the compromised design of the NSX-R wing. With the ability to change the angle of attack due to multiple mounting holes in the uprights, it will make significantly more df than at 0* AOA (a street setting). With its width relative to a GT3RS or a GT style wing and having driven NSXs on track with varying wing combinations, the 45" width with an AOA below stall should be more than enough to balance the car out even with a big splitter. I don't think these claims and goals are unsupported.

I was looking forward to your involvement in this. Why would you wait for a front underwing/diffuser before a rear wing when cars almost always need more rear df than front (and the NSX not really requiring a front splitter even with a big GT style wing, especially if it has a vented hood)?

So, what are the thoughts on the hardware to make this height adjustable? Having the ability to go down to stock height is going to compromise the height ability of the track option, won't it?
I'm thinking that the 2pc upright design (half bolted to the wing while the lower half bolted to the trunk) overlapping the entire height for the low setting, then unbolting it and raising to almost double the height -which would be the limit without replacing the wing mounted uprights to a taller one. I can post some crappy drawings of the idea in my mind and get others feedback to refine it.
 
Last edited:
A true airfoil will make more downforce and less drag than the compromised design of the NSX-R wing. With the ability to change the angle of attack due to multiple mounting holes in the uprights, it will make significantly more df than at 0* AOA (a street setting). With its width relative to a GT3RS or a GT style wing and having driven NSXs on track with varying wing combinations, the 45" width with an AOA below stall should be more than enough to balance the car out even with a big splitter. I don't think these claims and goals are unsupported.

I was looking forward to your involvement in this. Why would you wait for a front underwing/diffuser before a rear wing when cars almost always need more rear df than front (and the NSX not really requiring a front splitter even with a big GT style wing, especially if it has a vented hood)?

Another (of many to come) aero-newbie question. Wouldn't a big GT wing and no front splitter apply enough rear DF to induce understeer even with a ducted hood?


I'm thinking that the 2pc upright design (half bolted to the wing while the lower half bolted to the trunk) overlapping the entire height for the low setting, then unbolting it and raising to almost double the height -which would be the limit without replacing the wing mounted uprights to a taller one. I can post some crappy drawings of the idea in my mind and get others feedback to refine it.

Fire away with the crappy drawings! ;) It sounds like I may be right and you'd have to swap the wing-mounted uprights in order to go full height??
 
A true airfoil will make more downforce and less drag than the compromised design of the NSX-R wing. With the ability to change the angle of attack due to multiple mounting holes in the uprights, it will make significantly more df than at 0* AOA (a street setting). With its width relative to a GT3RS or a GT style wing and having driven NSXs on track with varying wing combinations, the 45" width with an AOA below stall should be more than enough to balance the car out even with a big splitter.

Here's my issue: all aero parts have a L/D ratio, and we obviously want that to be as high as possible. But it is not infinite and adding downforce will generally add drag. Of course, as you have pointed out, a more-efficient design has a better L/D ratio and may therefore be able to provide more downforce with the same drag as a less-efficient design. There are several parameters with the NSX-R wing that we could criticize as impairing its efficiency, namely those related to its profile and position.

Since I don't know the profiles of the NSX-R wings (each of the aftermarket manufacturers seem to have their own profile) I find them hard to comment on (or, more accurately, allow my brother to do so). From the pictures I find online, some seem to have a Gurney flap of sorts (which increases efficiency and power). This implies to me that they are at least considering the wing's profile. Without a proper set of photographs or (better yet) a cross-sectional drawing, it is difficult to characterize the profile of existing wings. That said, having talked to my brother, it is nearly certain that he could design an improved wing. One thing I'd like to know in this regard is whether rules are a concern? If not, for example, the wing could incorporate aspects to improve it's L/D ratio at high speeds. Also, is there an objection to a multielement wing?

Regarding the wing's position, you proposed the height as the second major design driver here. My brother pointed out that a much bigger improvement in efficiency comes from moving the wing back off the edge of the decklid, so that the pressure reduction under the wing does not create a corresponding lift on the car. As I understand it, you are not interested in that idea. This could be for compliance with some set of rules, but if not then I still think the idea is sound. It wouldn't at all preclude moving the wing up; in fact, I envisioned a movement in both directions, to gain both separation and at least some degree of nonoverlap with the decklid. If efficiency and power is our purpose, the I don't see why we would ignore one of the most significant ways to get that.

Why would you wait for a front underwing/diffuser before a rear wing when cars almost always need more rear df than front (and the NSX not really requiring a front splitter even with a big GT style wing, especially if it has a vented hood)?

My own car, which is entirely stock, understeers. Obviously I need to address that to the extent possible before throwing aero parts on the car, and changing the suspension seems like a good candidate. Moreover, a stiffer suspension is likely required when adding well-designed aero parts to the car. Adding a vented hood would be a good way to start with front aero, no doubt. I suppose my thought was that adding rear downforce is going to unbalance my car more, so I'd rather at least have a plan for front downforce first. But I'm willing to continue on with this wing anyhow, since I like the idea of something that doesn't look like a GT wing. I also looked forward to working with my brother on a project. He is too busy to follow threads on Prime, but remains interested in the project.

This project will require a fairly substantial investment for tooling and other costs. And, while I'm confident in my brother's work, it will not be a windtunnel-tested design. I asked Arron about that and he estimated that a shoestring-budget approach to windtunnel testing would start around $100k. That was after pushing him on his initial figures. So, no windtunnel.

I'm thinking that the 2pc upright design (half bolted to the wing while the lower half bolted to the trunk) overlapping the entire height for the low setting, then unbolting it and raising to almost double the height -which would be the limit without replacing the wing mounted uprights to a taller one. I can post some crappy drawings of the idea in my mind and get others feedback to refine it.


It seems like if we are disconnecting two pieces, then it wouldn't be any more difficult to simply replace the uprights with different ones. This would allow more flexibility in position. And if a drawerslide-like mechanism (to simply move the wing back a chord) would give equivalent performance but wouldn't require any unbolting, then I would still prefer that. The difficulty, as I have tried to point out above, is that we don't know what will give equivalent performance. So interchangeable uprights would obviously permit the greatest postfabrication adjustability (and would allow your system of overlapping uprights if that is what you prefer).
 
Another (of many to come) aero-newbie question. Wouldn't a big GT wing and no front splitter apply enough rear DF to induce understeer even with a ducted hood?

Fire away with the crappy drawings! ;) It sounds like I may be right and you'd have to swap the wing-mounted uprights in order to go full height??
a GT wing is fine w.o a splitter, you just can't run as aggressive of an AOA and total df as you could by stacking front df with a splitter. So with a narrower Hybrid, you'd run more angle to get the same df level as a wider GT wing.

Let's say the OEM wing is 4" off the trunk. If the Hybrid is mounted in the low position at OEM height, it could only be raised to just under 8". Let's say the NSXR is 6" off the deck, if the Hybrids low position is at 6", its high position would be just under 12" high. You can go higher if you swap out the wing mounted endplates for longer ones. Let's say you want it 24" high, then it could only be lowered to 12" if the trunk mounted upright is 12". If the trunk mounted upright is at OEM 4" high, your 24" upright could only be lowered 4". Did I lose you yet?
 
I wonder if we are not trying to solve the impossible dream?
No drag, lots of downforce and street frendly?
I once raced against a race only NSX and the guy was able to pull away from me in the corners despite both of us on slicks.
His suspension setting and lower weight must have played a big role but most probably the aero aswell.
The car was very close to the original Hondas raced at Le Mans.
My point is: is there much to gain without going to a wing at least the size of the one on the pictures?
When I was let to drive the car, I thought it understeered quite a bit but maybe I wasn't going fast enough?
Here's what it looked like.
G0616_NSX_0544_zps2eb63e95.jpg


100_3089_zpse939c1e3.jpg
 
Here's my issue: all aero parts have a L/D ratio, and we obviously want that to be as high as possible. But it is not infinite and adding downforce will generally add drag. Of course, as you have pointed out, a more-efficient design has a better L/D ratio and may therefore be able to provide more downforce with the same drag as a less-efficient design. There are several parameters with the NSX-R wing that we could criticize as impairing its efficiency, namely those related to its profile and position.

Since I don't know the profiles of the NSX-R wings (each of the aftermarket manufacturers seem to have their own profile) I find them hard to comment on (or, more accurately, allow my brother to do so). From the pictures I find online, some seem to have a Gurney flap of sorts (which increases efficiency and power). This implies to me that they are at least considering the wing's profile. Without a proper set of photographs or (better yet) a cross-sectional drawing, it is difficult to characterize the profile of existing wings. That said, having talked to my brother, it is nearly certain that he could design an improved wing. One thing I'd like to know in this regard is whether rules are a concern? If not, for example, the wing could incorporate aspects to improve it's L/D ratio at high speeds. Also, is there an objection to a multielement wing?

Regarding the wing's position, you proposed the height as the second major design driver here. My brother pointed out that a much bigger improvement in efficiency comes from moving the wing back off the edge of the decklid, so that the pressure reduction under the wing does not create a corresponding lift on the car. As I understand it, you are not interested in that idea. This could be for compliance with some set of rules, but if not then I still think the idea is sound. It wouldn't at all preclude moving the wing up; in fact, I envisioned a movement in both directions, to gain both separation and at least some degree of nonoverlap with the decklid. If efficiency and power is our purpose, the I don't see why we would ignore one of the most significant ways to get that.
All of the NSX-R wings I have seen in person, from an OEM NSX-R from Japan, to the Spoon NSX-R GT that I drove, to the Seibon, Downforce (the wing I currently have on my car), and many others at meets which I don't know who made them are pretty much all different. However the Seibon and Dowforce are some of the best looking and closest to the Spoon NSX-R GT wing out there. The biggest issue with the NSX-R wing is the trailing edge. What looks like a 'gurney flap' is a little moulded 'lip', but the lower (and more important) side of the wing terminates with about a 1.5" almost vertical trailing edge. Don't get me wrong, the NSXR wing IS functional but I question if it acts/was designed more like a deflecting spoiler than a true airfoil which speeds up the air under the wing and creates a low pressure area for downforce.

Pretty much any airfoil design will be more efficient than the NSX-R, and depending on its cord, thickness, camber profile will dictate its characteristics for a targeted speed (which is usually 40-160mph for street cars, or more likely 40-120mph). I don't think anything exotic is necessary and my idea to bring the costs down so this 'Hybrid' isn't overly expensive, is to use a common pre-made profile and have it cut or made to the width of the trunk. However I am very intrigued and would love to see what your brother comes up with in terms of a new design.

I considered a multi-element wing and it could even be incorporated as an add-on with a bigger endplate/upright design to even be removable, but for me, a single element closer to OEM look was what I was personally aiming at first.

In regards to wing location, as I said before, the higher the wing is off of the trunk, the less the lifting effect on the trunklid.

While moving the wing rearward does accomplish the same thing, it greatly departs from my personal direction of this "hybrid" wing design -which is to look similar to OEM/NSXR. There's also a secondary effect to mounting the wing further back: It lifts and unloads the front of the car due to leverage and requires even more front downforce. If a wing is mounted right over the rear tires, it will have minimal lifting effect on the front wheels. Leverage can be a good and bad thing, while a smaller wing could make the same rear grip as a big wing when mounted far out the back of the car, it lifts up on the front of the car like a see-saw. We really noticed this in the most recent revision of the FXMD FX750 V6.1 that we set the BW track record with:



My own car, which is entirely stock, understeers. Obviously I need to address that to the extent possible before throwing aero parts on the car, and changing the suspension seems like a good candidate. Moreover, a stiffer suspension is likely required when adding well-designed aero parts to the car. Adding a vented hood would be a good way to start with front aero, no doubt. I suppose my thought was that adding rear downforce is going to unbalance my car more, so I'd rather at least have a plan for front downforce first. But I'm willing to continue on with this wing anyhow, since I like the idea of something that doesn't look like a GT wing. I also looked forward to working with my brother on a project. He is too busy to follow threads on Prime, but remains interested in the project.

This project will require a fairly substantial investment for tooling and other costs. And, while I'm confident in my brother's work, it will not be a windtunnel-tested design. I asked Arron about that and he estimated that a shoestring-budget approach to windtunnel testing would start around $100k. That was after pushing him on his initial figures. So, no windtunnel.
Do you have the stock alignment? What if you trail-brake? -would it understeer then? Short of an S2000 or Miata, the NSX is one of the most neutral balanced chassis out there. If you give the car inputs to understeer, it will understeer. If you give it inputs to rotate or oversteer, it will kick the rear end out. Either way, I'd suggest getting your alignment in order before packing aero onto a car, especially front aero -since cars need much more rear than front downforce. Just adding a wing alone will not unbalance your car. You might not have much angle in the wing, but there's nothing wrong with running just a wing without a splitter. Many race series don't allow very big splitters and the cars run massive rear wings. As far as stiffness goes, I doubt any of the wings (even most GT wings) we are talking about will be making more than 4-500lbs of downforce, so increasing the springs probably isn't necessary or that crucial unless you still have stock springs. I look forward to hearing more updates from you and your brother.

It seems like if we are disconnecting two pieces, then it wouldn't be any more difficult to simply replace the uprights with different ones. This would allow more flexibility in position. And if a drawerslide-like mechanism (to simply move the wing back a chord) would give equivalent performance but wouldn't require any unbolting, then I would still prefer that. The difficulty, as I have tried to point out above, is that we don't know what will give equivalent performance. So interchangeable uprights would obviously permit the greatest postfabrication adjustability (and would allow your system of overlapping uprights if that is what you prefer).
My 2pc upright/endplate design is still a work (or a thought) in progress. Nothing has been fabbed up yet, just sketched out and discussed -which is why hearing input from others on what they want, or how it could work is helpful and nice to involve the community, especially those who are looking to have one made for themselves. My first idea was simply 2 bolts on the upright, unbolting them, and bolting them in a different higher location. I didn't think about a sliding mechanism -which would be easier than completely unbolting the wing from the base plate but I am still looking for a height change design with a peak height and look similar to the red ADAC NSX:



One more thing: should this wing have a brake light?
I thought about this many times and for me, i'd say no -if it changes the underside of the wing and affects it's efficiency. I thought about a strip of LED lights mounted within a gurney flap which would 1 - utilize a gurney flap and 2 - have minimal affect on the wing's performance.

I wonder if we are not trying to solve the impossible dream?
No drag, lots of downforce and street frendly?
I once raced against a race only NSX and the guy was able to pull away from me in the corners despite both of us on slicks.
His suspension setting and lower weight must have played a big role but most probably the aero aswell.
The car was very close to the original Hondas raced at Le Mans.
My point is: is there much to gain without going to a wing at least the size of the one on the pictures?
When I was let to drive the car, I thought it understeered quite a bit but maybe I wasn't going fast enough?
Pretty much anytime you add downforce via a wing you inherently add drag. The biggest thing that stands out between his car and yours is a much larger wing (I've never seen your wing in person so I don't know if its a true airfoil or similar to stock or the NSX-R in profile) as well as a pretty big front splitter. I think if you had a real wing on the rear of your car (without or especially with a front splitter), you'd be able to hang with him in the corners -or be much closer to it.

The splitter, side skirts, roof inlet, and rear of the car looks a bit different from the LeMans NSXs. Do you have any more pics of that car?

To answer your question: I'm not sure if you would get a gain by going to an NSX-R, however with my goal of a "Hybrid" wing with a real wing element mounted the width of the trunk, you could get as much downforce as a full size GT wing. Disclaimer: Due to the narrower width of the "Hybrid", you would need more wing angle to create the same downforce as a wider wing -which increases drag to a degree. So while you would have the same downforce with the Hybrid as you would with a full-size GT wing, you would have slightly more drag. Ideally, you want the widest wing possible with the least amount of angle of attack (for reduced drag) -but the goal of the Hybrid is to have full-size downforce capability (far more than the NSXR) while remaining as wide as the trunk and accepting a slight drag penalty for the reduced width.
 
a GT wing is fine w.o a splitter, you just can't run as aggressive of an AOA and total df as you could by stacking front df with a splitter. So with a narrower Hybrid, you'd run more angle to get the same df level as a wider GT wing.

Got it. Splitter it is then. Just have to wait to see how this hybrid idea goes, or just go big.

Let's say the OEM wing is 4" off the trunk. If the Hybrid is mounted in the low position at OEM height, it could only be raised to just under 8". Let's say the NSXR is 6" off the deck, if the Hybrids low position is at 6", its high position would be just under 12" high. You can go higher if you swap out the wing mounted endplates for longer ones. Let's say you want it 24" high, then it could only be lowered to 12" if the trunk mounted upright is 12". If the trunk mounted upright is at OEM 4" high, your 24" upright could only be lowered 4". Did I lose you yet?

You'll only lose me on track! in about 10 seconds after a start that is. Then I'll see ya again each time you lap me. lol ;) Description makes perfect sense and could be just part of the "when ya get to the track setup" install the splitter, swap out the wing mounted endplates.
 
As for the risers on the hybrid design, will it look like the above picture where it is all function or will some style be added seeing as how this is a hybrid design. I am envisioning that at the R height it will retain some of the curvature in the risers and for the part that extends up will look similar to the picture.
 
Description makes perfect sense and could be just part of the "when ya get to the track setup" install the splitter, swap out the wing mounted endplates.
For me, i'd put the splitter and raise the wing before I head to the track. Then again, you could just bolt on a big wing back at home too...

As for the risers on the hybrid design, will it look like the above picture where it is all function or will some style be added seeing as how this is a hybrid design. I am envisioning that at the R height it will retain some of the curvature in the risers and for the part that extends up will look similar to the picture.
For ease of design and adjustability, i'm thinking it'll be 1/8" carbon like in the red car above. Then yes, the lower section would be more curved like the second picture of the white NSX in post #61. Here's another crappy photoshop from the rear thanks to the pic from CB72 :

 
Last edited:
For me, i'd put the splitter and raise the wing before I head to the track. Then again, you could just bolt on a big wing back at home too...

Doh! that makes sense. I'd do the wing at home and splitter at the track since, let's say with a 3" splitter I'll probably have issues loading and unloading from the trailer...

Full carbon sounds great. :)
 
For me, i'd put the splitter and raise the wing before I head to the track. Then again, you could just bolt on a big wing back at home too...


For ease of design and adjustability, i'm thinking it'll be 1/8" carbon like in the red car above. Then yes, the lower section would be more curved like the second picture of the white NSX in post #61. Here's another crappy photoshop from the rear thanks to the pic from CB72 :

I like the idea of reproducing a wing that looks like the original ADAC wing.
I suppose it could look like the one on this full race NSX that I'm chasing?
G1007_d148_zps7ffc6f58.jpg

And here some more detailed picks of the other "race only" NSX
PICT0008_zps337335c0.jpg

A view of the splitter
PICT0010_zpsb19bfe14.jpg

A view of the diffuser
PICT0007_zps59006467.jpg

A view of the bonnet
PICT0009_zps64ad82da.jpg
 
I like the idea of reproducing a wing that looks like the original ADAC wing.
I suppose it could look like the one on this full race NSX that I'm chasing?
G1007_d148_zps7ffc6f58.jpg

I think this is right on target for what Billy is proposing? It looks to flow perfectly with the design of the NSX and is high enough to get clean air and provide actual downforce. This would be the "top" setting of the hybrid. My vote is the "bottom" setting is the height of the Type-R wing. Heck with the OEM height... jmho. :)
 
the mechanism for height adjustment could be as simple as those metal pins on springs that click into holes on the posts...kinda like the sliding /locking rails or legs used on furniture ect...
 
I like the idea of reproducing a wing that looks like the original ADAC wing.
I suppose it could look like the one on this full race NSX that I'm chasing?
Exactly! You have way too many cool race NSXs out there. Any more pics of that 28 car? (is that #88 an NSX too?)

I think this is right on target for what Billy is proposing? It looks to flow perfectly with the design of the NSX and is high enough to get clean air and provide actual downforce. This would be the "top" setting of the hybrid. My vote is the "bottom" setting is the height of the Type-R wing. Heck with the OEM height... jmho. :)
Yup. I think at that height, it would not be able to be lowered to OEM height without bolting on a much shorter endplate to the wing. I agree and for me, i'd make it go from NSX-R to the above image height too but the 2pc design would enable any height possible with different end plates.

the mechanism for height adjustment could be as simple as those metal pins on springs that click into holes on the posts...kinda like the sliding /locking rails or legs used on furniture ect...
Please post pics/ideas :)
 
Exactly! You have way too many cool race NSXs out there. Any more pics of that 28 car? (is that #88 an NSX too?)
Here's a good picture of the rear wing on the #28.
I'm also adding a picture of a wing of a Ferrari F40 that looks interesting.
Sorry but the #88 was not an NSX as far as I remember.
PICT0009_zps6c9dd9bb.jpg


PICT0032_zps49a404a2.jpg
 
Last edited:
There is also this rear wing if you are looking for something more modern LOL
novitec-torado_zps6e6e06eb.jpg
 
Just so everyone is aware... there are several NSX-R wing replicas out there. I use the word replica loosely since some are really bad replicas of the original. I'm not sure which Billy has on his car but I suspect he may have a Seibon which is really a poor airfoil design. The NRG replica (and maybe procar) is very close to the original Honda NSX-R wing and much closer resembles an "airfoil" design as depicted below. I have not inspected a DF NSX-R wing closely so I cannot comment on theirs. I believe they went thru a few different versions before they were actually able to secure an original NSX-R wing to copy from. This is based off my poor memory from a few years ago.

Perhaps Billy can chime in on why the NSX-R wing doesn't resemble a proper airfoil? I'm very interested in why since i'm not an aerodynamics expert but it looks pretty good to me (from an airfoil perspective). I do see the section where the shortened 3rd brake light doesn't quite have the trailing edge of a proper airfoil since they had to compromise placement of the LEDs, but the rest of the wing looks to have a similar cross-section as this below. I will take photos of my NSX-R wing to confirm this week.

I do agree that the true NSX-R wing was probably designed as a compromise between function and form by Honda.

hipomustang52.gif


A closer replica of a true NSX-R wing look like this from the trailing edge.
15.jpg



The bad replicas like the Seibon look like this. Notice how thick the trailing edge is. It's almost a 1-1.5" vertical block.
rear-wing-typer-seibon-installed-rear.jpg


Another bad one... I's Impact I believe..
p-40-5.jpg


Here's a Tommy Kaira "winglet" which I believe some aerodynamic experts claimed does not provide downforce but instead adds to drag.
nsx-rr-magnification-r-wing-new_800.jpg



Now back on topic.
Some more to ideas to get the creative juices flowing. I believe this is a Backyard Special Wing with an added gurney flap.
0510ht_06z+1992_Acura_NSX+Rear_Hatch_Wing_View.jpg
 
Post #62:

All of the NSX-R wings I have seen in person, from an OEM NSX-R from Japan, to the Spoon NSX-R GT that I drove, to the Seibon, Downforce (the wing I currently have on my car), and many others at meets which I don't know who made them are pretty much all different. However the Seibon and Dowforce are some of the best looking and closest to the Spoon NSX-R GT wing out there. The biggest issue with the NSX-R wing is the trailing edge. What looks like a 'gurney flap' is a little moulded 'lip', but the lower (and more important) side of the wing terminates with about a 1.5" almost vertical trailing edge. Don't get me wrong, the NSXR wing IS functional but I question if it acts/was designed more like a deflecting spoiler than a true airfoil which speeds up the air under the wing and creates a low pressure area for downforce.
This ~1.5" trailing edge on ALL of the NSX-R wings (including the Spoon NSX-R GT) is fairly close to vertical (without measuring it, i'd say 70-80*) where the 3rd brake light is, and even the sides still have this fairly vertical (~60-80*) trailing edge that's ~1.5" tall.

Either way, the sharp angle from the curved underside of the wing to the topside of the wing would cause the airflow to detach and create a fairly large pocket of drag between the lower and upper surfaces. The first pic of the white NSX-R rear wing looks to have a better trailing edge than this but it's just an illusion from the angle of the pic. It's in line with the Spoon and Downforce wings ive seen.



It appears the wing acts more like a deflector than greatly speeding up the air under it:


Here's another crappy drawing illustrating the profile of the NSX-R.
Notice the grey section with a very steep trailing edge (simulating the 3rd brake light section).
The trailing edge of the black outline would be the rest of the wing (thats not the 3rd brake light) -but its still at an overly steep angle. And the red line represents a true airfoil.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top