does the daytona wing and skirts really work?

[tmoney]

does the rear wing on a daytona (88 specifically) really do anything other than make it look sporty? i know some factory wings are totally useless and just add weight and are just for looks. do they help downforce at all? what about the side skirts?

travis

[1983Rampage]

I would bet a little, if you look at the shape of them, they have an air foil shape that would act like a wing. That is IIRC. But I know they make the car look alot better. Prefer the look with then without.

[woodrow Z]

It actually does. I got a book off Amazon.com called Dodge Daytona and Chrysler Laser The Definitive History. Awesome book btw. Anyway, I'll have to find exactly where it is but it talked about drag coefficients. With the spoiler it made a few points better in the wind tunnel.

[tmoney]

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodrow Z It actually does. I got a book off Amazon.com called Dodge Daytona and Chrysler Laser The Definitive History. Awesome book btw. Anyway, I'll have to find exactly where it is but it talked about drag coefficients. With the spoiler it made a few points better in the wind tunnel.

oh wow I need to check that out thanks!

[woodrow Z]

Amazon.com: Dodge Daytona and Chrysler Laser the Definitive History 1984-1993: Greg McCausey, Pamela Stuber: Books

buy it!!

[PentastarTurbo]

I'd ditch the spoiler for areo gains.. but it'll look neutered..

side skirts are a keeper..

[tmoney]

i was reading in the mopar performance 2.2/2.5 fwd book. it says the spoilers dont even come into play til about 140mph anyways. so i think ill leave it off for now until i make it that fast lol

travis

[Reaper1]

IMHO looking at the true design of the rear spoiler on my own '88 I honestly don't think it does much for downforce. The reason? The "wing" part of it has a neutral lift design to it, meaning that neither side makse the air travel over it any faster than the other side. Add to it that the rear window angle is not exactly where it needs to be to keep the boundary layer from separating and I just don't think there's a lot of air that actually passes over or under that wing. On other thing to consider is how low it is and close to the body it is. *IF* it does see a significant amount of air, it will be turbulent. The best case scenario would be that it would help reduce a drag inducing vortex coming off the back of the car. Knowing how dirty the back of my car gets, I'd say this effect is minimal.

The '89-'93 wings are slightly higher and they DO have a lift inducing design to the airfoil. The same problems face these as do the older ones, so the only people that REALLY know if there is any effect is the guys that worked on it in the tunnels. BTW, the MOPAR Performance book is wong. Aerodynamic peices start helping a car right around the 100mph range if propperly designed.

Now, I WILL tesitfy to the fact that the rear wing design OVERALL helps with the stability of the rear of the car at high speed. This is coming from personal experience. My '90 does not have a wing. The rear of it would get squirly at about 115mph and *dance* giving the car a very uneasy feeling. This was even with 200# worth of "ballast" in the hatch area of the car. After driving my '88 it does not exibit that characteristic even at high speeds than that. If you look at the IROC cars(the real ones), they kept the overall shape of the rear wing. It was said that the side peices helped keep air from rolling off the top of the car and going up in to the rear wheel wells. This made the car more stable. Even today drivers that are still around from that era will tell you that those cars were some of the best mannered cars on the track.

The side gorund effects, unless you are talking about the Turbo Z aero package with the "garden molding" really doesn't do much. If you want to keep air from going under the car from a functionaltiy standpoint, just use the "garden molding" method (they are also known as air fences). I do like the looks of the factory side moldings, but from a functionality standpoint...eh, I doubt they do much if anything.

If you REALLY want to keep the car planted, then keep as much air from going under it as possible right up front. If I'm not mistaken you can use the trick with the Chevy S10 lower front bumper , flip it upside down and mount it. It supposedly looks almost exactly the same as the ones found on the Turbo Z aero cars. It will push as much air as possible around the car so it doesn't go under it.

[crusty shadow]

i remember when the daytona irocs were on the track for the iroc series ( i know im old, LOL) the drivers all commented on how well the rear wing helped with stability at speed compared to a standard nascar spoiler. the wings side channels helped to stabilize the car by acting as a rudder . it didnt create lift but helped keep the car from getting squirleydue to the side to side stability. plus the air that was going over the rear lip was directed there by the side skirts of the wing= more downforce with less drag.
i would definately put them all on, you'll notice the difference at about 80-85 mph, especially when you're driving thru a cross wind or next to a semi

[GLHNSLHT2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper1 IMHO looking at the true design of the rear spoiler on my own '88 I honestly don't think it does much for downforce. The reason? The "wing" part of it has a neutral lift design to it, meaning that neither side makse the air travel over it any faster than the other side. Add to it that the rear window angle is not exactly where it needs to be to keep the boundary layer from separating and I just don't think there's a lot of air that actually passes over or under that wing. On other thing to consider is how low it is and close to the body it is. *IF* it does see a significant amount of air, it will be turbulent. The best case scenario would be that it would help reduce a drag inducing vortex coming off the back of the car. Knowing how dirty the back of my car gets, I'd say this effect is minimal. The '89-'93 wings are slightly higher and they DO have a lift inducing design to the airfoil. The same problems face these as do the older ones, so the only people that REALLY know if there is any effect is the guys that worked on it in the tunnels. BTW, the MOPAR Performance book is wong. Aerodynamic peices start helping a car right around the 100mph range if propperly designed. Now, I WILL tesitfy to the fact that the rear wing design OVERALL helps with the stability of the rear of the car at high speed. This is coming from personal experience. My '90 does not have a wing. The rear of it would get squirly at about 115mph and *dance* giving the car a very uneasy feeling. This was even with 200# worth of "ballast" in the hatch area of the car. After driving my '88 it does not exibit that characteristic even at high speeds than that. If you look at the IROC cars(the real ones), they kept the overall shape of the rear wing. It was said that the side peices helped keep air from rolling off the top of the car and going up in to the rear wheel wells. This made the car more stable. Even today drivers that are still around from that era will tell you that those cars were some of the best mannered cars on the track. The side gorund effects, unless you are talking about the Turbo Z aero package with the "garden molding" really doesn't do much. If you want to keep air from going under the car from a functionaltiy standpoint, just use the "garden molding" method (they are also known as air fences). I do like the looks of the factory side moldings, but from a functionality standpoint...eh, I doubt they do much if anything. If you REALLY want to keep the car planted, then keep as much air from going under it as possible right up front. If I'm not mistaken you can use the trick with the Chevy S10 lower front bumper , flip it upside down and mount it. It supposedly looks almost exactly the same as the ones found on the Turbo Z aero cars. It will push as much air as possible around the car so it doesn't go under it.

I know my 87 hunker's down to the road at 85MPH. The rear end is stable as all get out. You don't need a lot of d'force on the rear end with FWD. Just enough to negate the lift. I wouldn't remove it. 1st you need a little in the back. 2nd Daytona's without rear wings we call Gaytona's.

As for the S10 airdam you don't flip it, just take it off the truck and bolt it right up. Pics S10 Airdam pics

[woodrow Z]

^^ I second both of you. Mine really likes the 85-90 range. And anything over 110mph it feels like a totally different car. It just glides, almost as if it handles twice as well. I'm positive it has to do with the front/rear spoilers and side skirts. No other car that I've owned has felt close to that. Even my 1G DSM that had the same type of wrap-around spoiler didn't feel that good over 110. I'm sure that was in the design.

Edit. I love that S10 spoiler idea!

[chilort]

I do know it blocks the rear view like hell. I had an '88 w/o and now an '86 w/ and that thing is really in the way.

[EvilcowRoland]

The spoiler doesn't bother me really. But I've never driven a Daytona without one, so maybe I'm just used to seeing it in the rearview.

I forget exactly where it was now, but I read an article on air flow over a car at speed and its relation to fuel economy. For the most part, a rear spoiler is supposed to increase fuel economy at highway speeds (and greater). And the effect is supposed to be even better if you're "drafting" another car (and you have a spoiler). Of course, I don't know how well that principle applies on the highway since you can't get but so close to the car in front of you, but the principle seemed solid. So take that for what it's worth I guess.

[Reaper1]

GLHNSLHT2...while I agree that 'Tona's don't look as good without the rear wing, I can't agree the "Gaytona" thing. Reason? I own one!! I LOVE that car. Now, I DO have a wing to put on it, but that's besides the point....

Anyways...I looked at the S10 pics...there's NO WAY I could use that on my car! LOL My car is simply TOO LOW!! I'd smack it on EVERYTHING!! LOL That's too bad too. I suppose I'll jsut stick with my origional idea and make my own fiberglass unit.

As for the rear wing blocking the rear spoiler....NAH!! It doesn't block anything important! It's nowhere NEAR a tall DSM or Integra Type R wing! I think it's fine...but that's me. YMMV.

The only way a rear spoiler could effect fuel economy is to reduce drag. Inhearantly this is NOT what spoilers are known for, BUT, if it is designed to to what I described as far as reduce the eddy behind the car, then I agreet hat it *could* have some effect, but it would be small. The whole thing is that I just don't think our stock wings are high enough to catch any good air for anything like that to happen, and I'm fairly certain that the rear windo angle is too great and causes boundary layer seperation LONG before it gets anywhere near the rear wing....

[tmoney]

well i think the little side wings alone and what they do have more effect on the aerodynamics than the center part of the wing anyways. i agree with reaper1 ^^^. if the center wing was like 10in higher, THEN it might have a positive effect (new mod idea in process).

and also the gaytona comment was enough for me to search for another rear wing set. anyone gots one laying around? im gonna also look for the s10 dam also

is there a link to read more about the aerodynamics on these cars?