CTR wing removal / deletion solution

[J o n]

Thank you for the feedback and conversation so far. Appreciated. Looking forward to more members to vote and comment

Sponsored

 

[BABY NSX]

Hi J o n,

imo personally I think the plates even without the vertical pedal sections would look bad. Looks like putting a band aid on a boo boo, the boo boo being the wing you might not like.

When I was interested in this car I too was concerned with the looks of the wing...until I saw the infamous small wing Type R, then I fell in love with the big wing. It’s just completes the look of the car. It’s a Type R after all. Not a sleeper car.

To each their own. some people like sleeper look while some like the way the car looks, the way it was designed. Yeah it has some aero purpose and such but as far as just looks go, I think the wing completes the look especially since it’s a hatchback. Without the wing the hatchback looks like its missing something imo.

 

[BABY NSX]

Subie STi cars have big wing too. I’ve met one person who took it off and put a small lip spoiler from a WRX. Don’t know if a Civic Sport spoiler might suite your needs.

 

[BABY NSX]

I am like you, I think the wing is a little much. I think if you want to take it off then take it off. But you might want to consider the sport hatch like @Iilac was suggesting. Yes the wing is supposed to be functional but I think if you keep it under 120 you wouldn’t even notice. Plus it might shave some weight off the car. It kinda reminds me of the Plymouth roadrunner. You had the regular roadrunner which was fast and then the superbird that had euro on it and a huge wing so it was better on a track. Honestly I thing the regular roadrunner looks better. Here’s a picture of both if you don’t know what I’m referring to

A lot of people were turned of by the nose of the Superbird/Daytona Chargers such that dealerships had them sitting on the dealer lots as people didn’t care for the crazy looks and a car that was close to 19 feet long.

Some dealerships went as far as to remove the nose and wing on these cars to convert them to regular looking Road Runners and Chargers. If they only knew how much these cars are worth today with the nose and wing...

I used to know a guy who was a Mopar specialist and he said over 90mph the Superbird wing started to generate downforce and made the car very stable vs a Road Runner at anything over 100mph.

 

[MonkeyConQueso]

A lot of people were turned of by the nose of the Superbird/Daytona Chargers such that dealerships had them sitting on the dealer lots as people didn’t care for the crazy looks and a car that was close to 19 feet long.

Some dealerships went as far as to remove the nose and wing on these cars to convert them to regular looking Road Runners and Chargers. If they only knew how much these cars are worth today with the nose and wing...

I used to know a guy who was a Mopar specialist and he said over 90mph the Superbird wing started to generate downforce and made the car very stable vs a Road Runner at anything over 100mph.

The story on the Daytona/Superbird is awesome, and I love that wing and nose because of it. It's ugly, and it's great history.

The CTR's wing doesn't exactly have that history, but I understand that it has a technical reason of being there, debatable or not. Also, I've been conditioned by the WRX & Evo over the years, so it doesn't really look bad to me. If it had obscured my view, I would have hated it.

Removing something functional always seems sketchy to me, but I don't think it's a risk unless you're on track. All in all... do what you want. Someone else's opinions shouldn't drive your decisions (Flip side: Facts should).

 

[wildbilly32]

It kinda reminds me of the Plymouth roadrunner. You had the regular roadrunner which was fast and then the superbird that had euro on it and a huge wing so it was better on a track. Honestly I thing the regular roadrunner looks better. Here’s a picture of both if you don’t know what I’m referring to

Wasn't the winged and front modified Roadrunner built in limited quantities so it would qualify to run in NASCAR?

 

[OneSickFK8]

This reminds of all the dudes on US27 who were taking the wings off their SRT4s. Only to crash them at like 120mph when it would lose it's ass.

 

[6starwars]

I would absolutely never remove the wing. Not even considering the wing’s functionality, the CTR looks like it’s missing something (because it is) without it.

 

[BABY NSX]

Wasn't the winged and front modified Roadrunner built in limited quantities so it would qualify to run in NASCAR?

Correct, certain numbers were made to satisfy homologation rules to compete in NASCAR. I believe it was the Daytona Charger that was the first vehicle in nascar history to go over 200mph. I think there were a hair over 500 Daytona Chargers made to meet homologation rules then the rule for 1970 with the Superbirds changed and there were a little over 1900 of those made.

They were very successful, so successful that other companies cried foul and I think NASCAR imposed an engine size limit on those cars to 305 cubic inches or something like that so those cars were not used/produced for racing vs knowing they were going to be at a severe horsepower disadvantage. The history is cool on these cars imo.

 

[Drake]

I'm surprised by how many here defend the wing as if we were insulting their first-born child's crooked nose. I've seen civic owners swap out front bumpers, rear bumpers, side skirts, wheels, exhausts, lights, shift knobs, badges, steering wheels, you name it, and no one bats an eye. Yet, for some reason, it's the "wing that makes the Type-R a Type-R". Give me a break, this car is much more than its rear spoiler. I don't think Honda started the design of the Type-R with the huge wing and then engineered a car to go under it. Yes, it may be functional, but as others have stated only really above 100+ mph, which I doubt everyone is doing.

However, OP, you have to realize that posting here you are speaking to a biased audience. Current Type-R owners either 1.) loved the boy-racer looks from the start, or 2.) bought the Type-R in-spite of the wing, and have learned to accept it because they own it now. Therefore, few Type-R owners will want to admit their car doesn't look amazing to everyone in the world just the way it is. Personally, I like the excitement and variety the wild look of the Type-R styling brings to the usually bland streets. But I would never buy one for myself because I don't have a "everyone look at me all the time!" personality.

 

[bbdave]

Just go black for the stealthy look and leave the wing on

 

[mvela]

Wasn't the winged and front modified Roadrunner built in limited quantities so it would qualify to run in NASCAR?

Yeah I believe so. I wasn’t around when they were made. But I do know they were limited and were used in nascar.

 

[tinyman392]

I'm surprised by how many here defend the wing as if we were insulting their first-born child's crooked nose. I've seen civic owners swap out front bumpers, rear bumpers, side skirts, wheels, exhausts, lights, shift knobs, badges, steering wheels, you name it, and no one bats an eye. Yet, for some reason, it's the "wing that makes the Type-R a Type-R". Give me a break, this car is much more than its rear spoiler. I don't think Honda started the design of the Type-R with the huge wing and then engineered a car to go under it. Yes, it may be functional, but as others have stated only really above 100+ mph, which I doubt everyone is doing.

However, OP, you have to realize that posting here you are speaking to a biased audience. Current Type-R owners either 1.) loved the boy-racer looks from the start, or 2.) bought the Type-R in-spite of the wing, and have learned to accept it because they own it now. Therefore, few Type-R owners will want to admit their car doesn't look amazing to everyone in the world just the way it is. Personally, I like the excitement and variety the wild look of the Type-R styling brings to the usually bland streets. But I would never buy one for myself because I don't have a "everyone look at me all the time!" personality.

I've done computations on this FYI (it's buried in another thread somewhere). The short notes is that the wing's effectiveness will be proportional to the square of the speed. So double the speed, you get 4x the downforce. Halve the speed, you get ¼ the downforce. Despite this, the wing will still produce about 21lbs of downforce at 70MPH. And to be honest, it's not much, but can be useful in helping keep the rear a little more stable.

However, under braking, you see things begin to kick off. Say the nose dips by about 7.5 degrees under braking, this will angle the wing a little more aggressively and the downforce will be increased as well. The increase of downforce is proportional to the cosine of the new angle over the cosine of the original angle. Assume the wing is angled at 15 degrees initially, then the act of braking would create about 36lbs of downforce at the same speed of 70MPH. If the car were to dip at a 15 degree angle, then we'd get about 40lbs of downforce. Under braking the car can still produce about 20 lbs of downforce at 55MPH. Though keep in mind that the downforce decreases substantially as you slow down though (proportional to the square).

Keep in mind this effect would be similar to tossing a XX bag of sand/salt/whatever over your rear axle (a lot of drivers do this in the winter to keep the rear down a little better for traction and stability).

I believe when @TypeSiR put his wing back on, he commented in the "What did you do thread" about how much of a difference he actually felt after he put the wing back on (mainly about the stability the car had in the rear with the wing vs without), even in everyday driving. So saying the wing doesn't do anything until you hit that magical number of 100MPH is a bit of a hyperbole to be honest.

Edit: added link to the original post with math/physics behind the subject.

 

[Drake]

I've done computations on this FYI (it's buried in another thread somewhere). The short notes is that the wing's effectiveness will be proportional to the square of the speed. So double the speed, you get 4x the downforce. Halve the speed, you get ¼ the downforce. Despite this, the wing will still produce about 21lbs of downforce at 70MPH. And to be honest, it's not much.

However, under braking, you see things begin to kick off. Say the nose dips by about 7.5 degrees under braking, this will angle the wing a little more aggressively and the downforce will be increased as well. The increase of downforce is proportional to the cosine of the new angle over the cosine of the original angle. Assume the wing is angled at 15 degrees initially, then the act of braking would create about 36lbs of downforce at the same speed of 70MPH. If the car were to dip at a 15 degree angle, then we'd get about 40lbs of downforce. Under braking the car can still produce about 20 lbs of downforce at 55MPH. Though keep in mind that the downforce decreases substantially as you slow down though (proportional to the square).

Keep in mind this effect would be similar to tossing a XX bag of sand/salt/whatever over your rear axle (a lot of drivers do this in the winter to keep the rear down a little better for traction and stability).

I believe when @TypeSiR put his wing back on, he commented in the "What did you do thread" about how much of a difference he actually felt after he put the wing back on (mainly about the stability the car had in the rear with the wing vs without), even in everyday driving. So saying the wing doesn't do anything until you hit that magical number of 100MPH is a bit of a hyperbole to be honest.

The wing being useful is a fine argument for why Honda put it on there in the first place, but I don't see why it should be used against someone willing to sacrifice its use in order to have better enjoyment of the car. Surely, a huge wing on any car would add downforce, correct? So should every car have one? It's a balance of styling, cost, and performance. I think Honda knew the type of person who was likely to buy the new Civic Type-R, and that they wouldn't mind having hood scoops, side vents, underskirts, and huge spoilers on their cars. Hell, they'd probably love all those things, so they styled the Type-R accordingly. However, there are a group of people that respect the engineering and performance of the Type-R, but aren't crazy about the looks. And I can see where those people are coming from.

 

[tinyman392]

The wing being useful is a fine argument for why Honda put it on there in the first place, but I don't see why it should be used against someone willing to sacrifice its use in order to have better enjoyment of the car. Surely, a huge wing on any car would add downforce, correct? So should every car have one? It's a balance of styling, cost, and performance. I think Honda knew the type of person who was likely to buy the new Civic Type-R, and that they wouldn't mind having hood scoops, side vents, underskirts, and huge spoilers on their cars. Hell, they'd probably love all those things, so they styled the Type-R accordingly. However, there are a group of people that respect the engineering and performance of the Type-R, but aren't crazy about the looks. And I can see where those people are coming from.

I wasn't disagreeing with anything else you said, just the statement that it's only effective after XX MPH (since it's a misconception of sorts on these forums). The wing design is very STI-ish in my mind, with a little bit more flare (they out STI'd the STI). I can understand why someone would want to take it off for aesthetic reasons. But saying they are taking it off because it isn't effective until they hit XX MPH and thus serves no use for the everyday drive is kind of a false statement.

I'm not the biggest fan of the Type R's looks, it's always been a little crazy and outlandish for me. A lot of the aero probably could have been done in a more subtle way without being straight up flashy. The design has grown on me, and I respect that a lot of it is functional (to a degree). The good thing is that when I'm driving the thing, I don't have to look at its crazy design. The wing isn't in my mirror (for the most part) and I don't see the crazy race-car looks.

Sponsored