Need your opinion on look of wing...

[Sean Roe]

Hello All,
Please click on the photo album link below and look at the wing design I'm working on for the GTS. Let me know what you think. Right now, I can make suggested changes before sending the prototype to a manufacturer. The fit will be as though it was an original part as I'm going to send them the back decklid of a GTS. This is an actual wing intended for downforce, low drag and visual appeal. I want to build something that looks nice, is functional and appeals to most people. Your input is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Sean http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=926328&a=10118251
P.S.
If this goes well, I can build an appealing design for the RT/10 also.

<FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by Sean Roe on November 24, 2000 at 15:01</font>

 

[John Johns]

Great wing Sean! It reminds me of a junior size of my Hennessey wing. How about a front splitter too?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sean Roe:
Hello All,
Please click on the photo album link below and look at the wing design I'm working on for the GTS. Let me know what you think. Right now, I can make suggested changes before sending the prototype to a manufacturer. The fit will be as though it was an original part as I'm going to send them the back decklid of a GTS. This is an actual wing intended for downforce, low drag and visual appeal. I want to build something that looks nice, is functional and appeals to most people. Your input is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Sean http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=926328&a=10118251
P.S.
If this goes well, I can build an appealing design for the RT/10 also.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

 

[Sean Roe]

Thanks John,
Though it is not a copy of a Hennessey wing, it does look somewhat similar because of where I chose to mount it. Ours is lower, has less angle of attack (less drag), is a true airfoil design and should be available for somewhere between $399 and $449 in primer with mounting hardware.
I don't know if I'll try to do something on the front. We reduced the front lift with our duct kit and can now use the added downforce in the back. The idea is to be able to put the power down harder and have the car be more stable in high speed turns (over 70mph).
Keep the comments coming, I want to get this thing right for as many people as possible. Have to spread that tooling cost you know

You must be registered for see images

Sean

<FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by Sean Roe on November 24, 2000 at 15:43</font>

 

[Rich Detert]

Sean,
The Wing looks Great! I like the shape and height of your wing. It looks good from all angles.

You must be registered for see images

I always thought that the Hennessey Wing was a little too tall.
No Flames, that's just my opinion.

You must be registered for see images

(I couldn't resist, hahaha).

 

[Sean Roe]

Thanks Rich,
Take a look at the album again. I just moved the wing back 1/2" at the suggestion of one member who thought it may look better.
If you guys think it looks better this way, let me know. I have to change the contour of the bottom slightly to keep the same wing angle.

Sean

<FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by Sean Roe on November 24, 2000 at 17:42</font>

 

[Sean Roe]

Though I'm sure I won't be able to please everyone's tastes, I'm going to get as close as I can. I too like the design of the factory GT2 and Multi-Axis wings, but am leaning more toward the design on the GTS-R concept car with this one. Right now, this is in the prototyping stage and I will try any suggestions I get. Once "the look" is achieved, I'll focus on the subtle changes necessary to ensure that it works as intended.
I'll get a shot on the photo album Saturday showing what the mirror view looks like currently.
Anyone have an opinion on how it may look better, or is this close enough? Keep in mind I've been working on it for a little while and today it became close enough to seek outside input.

Sean

 

[speedshftr]

i think it makes the gts look like a supra.im not really into the ricey look,no harm intended,nice for a homebuilt product.im sure youll sell many ,it seems people are going towards that look .

 

[Sean Roe]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by speedshftr:
i think it makes the gts look like a supra.im not really into the ricey look,no harm intended,nice for a homebuilt product.im sure youll sell many ,it seems people are going towards that look .
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think there's anything you could do to make a Viper look like a Supra, I don't care if people are going toward that look or not and it's not my intention to sell many. You missed the intention of the original post. (sorry if that sounded a little crass, but speedshftr's comments rubbed me the wrong way last night when I read it)

The idea is to make a great handling car even better and do it in a way that's pleasing to the eye. I have a lot of experience with bodywork changes, wings and ground effects. The wing on the back of my car now is a PROTOTYPE. The design is not set in stone. The people who've said they DON'T like it have given no suggestions on what it may take for them TO like it. If I can make some changes that will bring them around some without putting off other people, I'll be making progress.

I can change to an entirely different design. This design (mounting point) lends itself well to the Viper with ease. The design we did on my old racecar Corvette pictured here during a run up Pikes Peak (Speedshftr, this is one of my homebuilts that I won the Grand Prix of Long Beach in that went over 220MPH)

You must be registered for see images

works well and also could be adapted to the Viper.

Bottom line, I want to bring the kind of performance that comes from proper aerodynamics to the Viper. Constructive criticism regarding looks is appreciated. E-mail me privately if you like.

Sean



<FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by Sean Roe on November 25, 2000 at 11:36</font>

 

[speedshftr]

like i said i know alot of people will go for it and i dont think people are going to care about price. im just not into it.the car from a few shots does in fact look like a supra,but i know you cant compare the two.good luck with your project,you were looking for feedback and i thought i would give you some. sorry if i offended you.keep up the great work.

 

[Sean Roe]

Ok guys, now we can make some progress

You must be registered for see images

Let's call that "wing design #1" and I will work on the contour of the rear today to bring it farther back, helping to blend it in more.

Just for grins, let me throw a few more design possibilities at you. Using the same mounting points, I can also make a wing that is adjustable. Here are a couple of pictures with different style mounts. If you think this may look better or worse than design #1, let me know.

This one can be mounted the same, with the sides verticle at the top with the wing running between the two mounting posts (more like the GTS-R concept car design).

You must be registered for see images

In these two, the wing would overhang its mounting posts on the Viper. Could be adjustable, or non adjustable.

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Please keep the constructive comments comming.

Sean


<FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by Sean Roe on November 25, 2000 at 08:25</font>

 

[Sean Roe]

Here are two shots comparing the wing at full height and lower height moved farther back. Which do you think looks better of the two?

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Sean

 

[Rich Detert]

I think I have to agree that the "Lower and farther back" would be the way to go.

You must be registered for see images

 

[Wing King]

Ahhh! This is great! It just does my heart good to see all the design work going into more aero things for Vipers, and all the corresponding discussion. It triggers memories of constructing my styrofoam, and then wood mockups of what would soon become the Multi-Axis wing, now sold by Dan Vargas at the PartsRack.

Sean, I say go for it. The only suggestion I might offer is that if your ARE going to make it a functional piece, then I hope you will also offer some type of your own version of a front splitter. I do speak from experience when I say if your wing is going to work at designed high speeds, then I strongly recommend additional front downforce.

In the meantime, I've also been letting people know that I also have a new wing design on the drawing board, that as of just this weekend, now exists in mockup form. I hope to unveil it at the 2nd Annual Texas Motorsports Triathlon in February. However, as before, I'm not really building it as a planned product. I'm doing it for ME. If others like it as much as I do, then I suppose I'll try to make a few more.

For now, I'm really glad you're jumping on the bandwagon. Remember the motto that adorns my front splitter..........

NO WING...

You must be registered for see images

...NO PRAYER

You must be registered for see images

 

[GTS Dean]

Here's a real-world question:

Which one gives the best view from the mirror? I think I like the wider, lower design a little better than the first one, but not at too much expense of view. Could you incorporate removable endplates to that design?

 

[Supercharged Vipermad]

Sean,
I like the wing lower and back,This is the first wing I like next to the GT2 wing. My Wife and I have been Fighting about a wing ever sivce we 've had the car( hope She likes this one}

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

 

[Sean Roe]

Regarding the rear window, view, I'll take a picture and post it. It's not reduced too much as the profile height is a trim 1.75". But you do see it in the mirror.

In the "lower and farther back" design, the cord area (top) is wider. I brought the height down by removing part of the side and moved the top to the front edge, left the front mounting point alone, matched the rear angle to the front, moved it farther back and added to the width of the top to match.

The lower design will be able to add about 300 to 325 lbs of downforce at 100 mph (an educated guess on my part, though I will test it with air pressure monitoring equipment). I don't think we will need a front aero aid because we reduced the lift in the nose by adding our duct kit. With the data acquisition system on and monitoring, my car always went 2+ mph faster on the front straight at Moroso when testing the duct (which we produced to help cool the car more), taking it from 139.**mph with the duct closed (stock) to 141.**mph. So, with the downforce in the rear for turns, we should still be balanced on the straights and not be "nose up". However, as usual, I will test.

Thank you all for the feedback. I may try a little more tweaking. The plan is to send the prototype and the back decklid / fenders to an overseas manufacturer I met at the SEMA show to make the molds. I'm still hopeful that with a little volume I can get the price per part down under $500.

Thanks again,
Sean

 

[Paul Fischer]

In responses to your just for grins post there is merit in an adjustable wing. Doing the high speed test runs at the Continental/General Tire Proving grounds in Uvalde there was no question my wing slowed me down. A lessened angle of attack or less surface area with smaller struts and canards would have resulted in faster acceleration and top speed. Smaller endplates also contribute to a smaller cross section making a difference in crosswind enviornments. As every track is different, and conditions at the same track can change rapidly, aero components must change as well.

I'd be interested in the difference in front end lift the combination of your under fascia ducting would make in conjunction with a center vented hood. Thanks for your designs Sean, your contributions are improving the breed.

 

[FikseGTS]

at first glance, it does look like a supra wing on a viper....

I like the GT2 wing... I heard it doesn't allow opening of the glass though... is this true?

maybe a modified version of the GT2 wing that allow this...


Brooks
http://viper.miamisci.org

 

[Frank 03SRT]

Top wing is best. Real nice. Can you open the glass?

 

[John Moore]

Sean,
Your wing looks about as good as any that I've seen. It's about the right height, width, angle, and pitch to blend very aesthetically with the lines of the car! In your third picture (from the rear) I was imagining the wing to have very subtle "bumps" mimicing the curves of the roof line. If you did this just right you would have one of the more distinct and unique wings out there and would immediately squelch any and all of the "it looks like a Supra" cracks- which I, by the way, disagree with. Your wing is not near as high, disproportionate, hoopy, and boy-racerish. I hope you consider my suggestion in your prototyping efforts as the only thing I saw missing from the design formula was some of the daringness of the Viper's lines.

 

[Supercharged Vipermad]

Here are some pictures of my '94 RT/10 with the Autoform bolt on wing, the TNT Dual Platform Wing and the Diablo wing. http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=855819&a=10216885

Just my $0.02, but I'm more for function than just looks. I'd like experimental data on downforce Vs. speed and movable / changeable components to meet the requirements of differing tracks / situations.

I think you can make a extremely functional / adjustable wing look really good, once you figure out all the functionality.

For me. I think I'll change my end pieces of the TNT wing and some day motorize the adjustments (after a few years just learning how to drive Road courses)

 

[Michael Martin]

Sean,

I like the Daytona/Superbird concept that your and John's wings have on the Viper. Being familiar with John's wing on Justin Bell's Vipers, I liked the higher profile giving one a straight-through field of vision out the rear. Though recalling from memory, seems like John's wing sets more on the seam of the quarter panel and rear deck... yours appears to set farther out over the quarter panel? How does this affect field of vision from the side mirrors? From the point of functionality as a daily driver, how is accessibility to the storage space? The GTS-R wing and your low-profile version would require lifting over the wing. A question of concern on John's was viability in the event of a flat tire, would the full-size tire/rim fit through the wing!?! Beyond real-world functionality, do the wings aerodynamically work? No criticism intended... just an engineer's prospective from another direction!?!