Advertisement



FACE LIFT TYPE R SPOTTED? Check out the pic. What do you think?

tinyman392

Senior Member
First Name
Marcus
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
2,019
Reaction score
1,143
Location
Illinois
Car(s)
'18 Civic Type R (RR)
Country flag
So I mean this as a serious question not stirring the pot :). What advantage does the CTR have with the wing in everyday life that the other 99% of cars on the road without wings don't? I'M not talking racing Im talking just DD. I just figure that everyday driving does little to nothing with a wing as there are what 2 cars in the US currently for sale with a oem wing? R and Subaru? If they help why wouldn't more cars have one?
I just computed those for you (roughly)... At around 70 MPH you get 21 lbs of downforce which is a little less than ⅓ of what you get at 124 MPH. Those are expressway speeds up where I am. I'd also add that the winglets on the side could theoretically create forces that keep the car "centered" and stable. Basically all the little added aero bits can add to a lot of stuff creating a less squirmy backend if you want to go fast. If you're just driving around on your commute home and you see a nice empty corner waiting to be carved in a rural road, you can take it at 70 and the aero should have an effect on the car (not only the wing).

If you just want to do a boring drive from A to B, then no, the wing will never play a role and you'll never notice the difference. But then again, you'll never use the 306 crank HP (probably actually higher than that), feel the difference the limited slip differential makes, feel the torque-steer-free suspension setup, or any of the other performance goodies the car offers. You probably won't even notice them either depending on how pedal happy you are as a driver.



Advertisement


 

aldo

Senior Member
First Name
Al
Joined
Mar 12, 2018
Messages
559
Reaction score
309
Location
Midwest
Car(s)
2018 Civic Si Coupe
Country flag
InB4 two Type R Options:

One offering 223 HP and one offering 306. (one 1.5L and one 2.0L)
I currently own the 1.5L turbo making 223 HP it’s called the Si, I have the TSP tune. The new stripped down Type R will have the same Type R engine guaranteed, maybe tuned down slightly. They’ll strip out those gigantic wheels, giant wing, velvet interior and some other bullshit and charge about $30K for the car. It’s becoming pretty obvious this is what’s coming around the corner.
 

Harlaquin

Senior Member
Joined
May 7, 2017
Messages
1,694
Reaction score
1,261
Location
USA
Car(s)
2017 Type R and a beater ford focus
Country flag
I just computed those for you (roughly)... At around 70 MPH you get 21 lbs of downforce which is a little less than ⅓ of what you get at 124 MPH. Those are expressway speeds up where I am. I'd also add that the winglets on the side could theoretically create forces that keep the car "centered" and stable. Basically all the little added aero bits can add to a lot of stuff creating a less squirmy backend if you want to go fast. If you're just driving around on your commute home and you see a nice empty corner waiting to be carved in a rural road, you can take it at 70 and the aero should have an effect on the car (not only the wing).

If you just want to do a boring drive from A to B, then no, the wing will never play a role and you'll never notice the difference. But then again, you'll never use the 306 crank HP (probably actually higher than that), feel the difference the limited slip differential makes, feel the torque-steer-free suspension setup, or any of the other performance goodies the car offers. You probably won't even notice them either depending on how pedal happy you are as a driver.
OK you seem to know this stuff so If I may ask, Now this might sound (probably will) dumb but, so with your math it is 24lbs at 75 miles an hour. So what's the difference if the wing produces it or the designers just added 24 lbs of weight in the rear instead of a wing? Is it to shed the physical weight so it is lighter at lower speeds? Plus instead of a fixed weight you have a speed variable virtual weight?

And na I drive, no one has ever complained about being bored as a passenger thats for sure LOL.
 

tinyman392

Senior Member
First Name
Marcus
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
2,019
Reaction score
1,143
Location
Illinois
Car(s)
'18 Civic Type R (RR)
Country flag
OK you seem to know this stuff so If I may ask, Now this might sound (probably will) dumb but, so with your math it is 24lbs at 75 miles an hour. So what's the difference if the wing produces it or the designers just added 24 lbs of weight in the rear instead of a wing? Is it to shed the physical weight so it is lighter at lower speeds? Plus instead of a fixed weight you have a speed variable virtual weight?
It'd be the equivalent of distributing 24 lbs where the wing is actually located if you want to get technical. Keep in mind the wing also technically has weight itself too. But that's at 75 MPH. The designers designed the wing for high-speed applications (with the formula I gave above the better a wing works at high speed the better it works at low[er] speed), it's actually designed to produce over 100 lbs at top speed or 40-80 lbs around a track without needing to add 40-80 lbs of weight.

Also, under braking the angle of attack also increases (downforce should increase linearly with the sine of the angle). I don't know the actual angle of attack for the wing, but let's assume we have a wing set at 15 degrees and under braking the car shifts 15-30 degrees creating an attack of 30-45 degrees. This would multiply the downforce created by 1.9-2.7x. In theory, that 60 lbs at 120 MPH could be 114-162 lbs under heavy braking. This creates much more stability of the vehicle under heavy braking. This may even play a role for a 60-0 brake test where the wing itself (not including the rest of the aero) might produce between 29.5-41.5 lbs. You know how people with really front heavy cars like to put sand bags in their trunk to keep stable in the winter? There's your 50 lb bag of sand. Granted as you slow the weight reduces substantially (20.5-29 lbs by the time you're at 50 MPH). Going to stop at full speed would have 233-331 lbs of force with this setup. Note this is assuming the 15 degrees with a nose dive of 15-30 degrees. I don't know the actual numbers for the CTR.

Basically, it allows variable weight over the rear of the car depending on speed, gas, and brake inputs. The front splitter does something similar as well in theory, variable weight over the front of the car under similar circumstances.

It is definitely not to shed physical weight so it's lighter at lower speeds, the wing does have its own weight and at low speeds you'd be better off without the wing or weight of the wing.

Edit: so remember when I said you probably wouldn't notice it in everyday driving. I kind of lied, you'd probably notice it at least a little under heavy, emergency braking.
 

mecheng32

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
98
Reaction score
159
Location
California
Car(s)
2018 FK8
Country flag
It'd be the equivalent of distributing 24 lbs where the wing is actually located if you want to get technical. Keep in mind the wing also technically has weight itself too. But that's at 75 MPH. The designers designed the wing for high-speed applications (with the formula I gave above the better a wing works at high speed the better it works at low[er] speed), it's actually designed to produce over 100 lbs at top speed or 40-80 lbs around a track without needing to add 40-80 lbs of weight.

Also, under braking the angle of attack also increases (downforce should increase linearly with the sine of the angle). I don't know the actual angle of attack for the wing, but let's assume we have a wing set at 15 degrees and under braking the car shifts 15-30 degrees creating an attack of 30-45 degrees. This would multiply the downforce created by 1.9-2.7x. In theory, that 60 lbs at 120 MPH could be 114-162 lbs under heavy braking. This creates much more stability of the vehicle under heavy braking. This may even play a role for a 60-0 brake test where the wing itself (not including the rest of the aero) might produce between 29.5-41.5 lbs. You know how people with really front heavy cars like to put sand bags in their trunk to keep stable in the winter? There's your 50 lb bag of sand. Granted as you slow the weight reduces substantially (20.5-29 lbs by the time you're at 50 MPH). Going to stop at full speed would have 233-331 lbs of force with this setup. Note this is assuming the 15 degrees with a nose dive of 15-30 degrees. I don't know the actual numbers for the CTR.

Basically, it allows variable weight over the rear of the car depending on speed, gas, and brake inputs. The front splitter does something similar as well in theory, variable weight over the front of the car under similar circumstances.

It is definitely not to shed physical weight so it's lighter at lower speeds, the wing does have its own weight and at low speeds you'd be better off without the wing or weight of the wing.

Edit: so remember when I said you probably wouldn't notice it in everyday driving. I kind of lied, you'd probably notice it at least a little under heavy, emergency braking.
Those numbers for braking don’t sound accurate. Logic check time. Since your velocity is decreasing in a braking scenario, and it decreases exponentially in the equation, your speed would have more of an impact on the downforce equation than your angle of attack would, thereby generating less downforce than at higher speed. Not saying that a nosedive wouldn’t create additional downforce, but the way I see it, your loss of downforce from velocity loss is more than your gain of downforce from the increase of angle of attack.
 

UFO CTR

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
1,860
Location
San Frrancisco, CA
Car(s)
2017 CTR#1348
Country flag
Did you really just post a link about spoilers and not wings? Then make a quote about ignorance?

You know what, ket's do some math. Formula for lift (downforce = negative lift) is shown here. So we get:

L = ½pSCv^2 where
L = lift
p = air density
S = surface area of wing
C = lift coefficient @ designed attack/angle v = air velocity​

Now, I don't know true values for p, S, and C, so I'll end up rolling them all into 1 constant c, I'll also throw in that ½ too. I can do this since I'm trying to model lift for the CTR under the test conditions Honda used when they made 66 lbs @ 124 MPH.

Let c = ½pSC
→ L = cv^2​

Let's plug and compute c for the conditions Honda tested at:

66 = c(124^2)
→ c = 66/124^2 = 0.00429​

So we get:

L = 0.00429v^2​

Now we can (roughly) compute downforce at any speed.

Most drivers in the midwest (I'm mainly in the Chicagoland area) go between 70 and 80 in a 65 zone and 75-90 in a 70 zone. Some go faster, some go slower, but the bulk of the population follows this. I should also note that most also slow down by about 5-ish MPH at night. I personally do... Wait, I'm not going to publicly admit to speeding. Moving on; let's compute for 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, and 90 MPH respectively (rounded to nearest ½ lb).

55 MPH: 13.0 lbs
60 MPH: 15.5 lbs
65 MPH: 18.0 lbs
70 MPH: 21.0 lbs
75 MPH: 24.0 lbs
80 MPH: 27.5 lbs
85 MPH: 31.0 lbs
90 MPH: 34.5 lbs
124 MPH: 66.0 lbs (sanity check)
169 MPH: 122.5 lbs​

When driving around town you'll get 0.5, 1.5, 7.0, and 10.5 lbs of downforce going 10, 20, 40, and 50 MPH, respectively. So, when I'm exiting from one expressway to another entering a clear turn at 70 MPH and exiting at 85 MPH my wing produces 20 lbs of downforce on corner entry, 25+ lbs of downforce mid-corner, and 30 lbs of downforce on corner exit. Or, if I don't feel like hooning as much, I just hold 70-75 MPH while the wing produces 20-25lbs of downforce. It's not much, but it's honest work — Some farmer.
finally someone does fluid mechanics on this forum!!! :thumbsup: don't for get guys...lift is is function of the square of Velocity! :D
 

UFO CTR

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
1,860
Location
San Frrancisco, CA
Car(s)
2017 CTR#1348
Country flag
Did you really just post a link about spoilers and not wings? Then make a quote about ignorance?

You know what, ket's do some math. Formula for lift (downforce = negative lift) is shown here. So we get:

L = ½pSCv^2 where
L = lift
p = air density
S = surface area of wing
C = lift coefficient @ designed attack/angle v = air velocity​

Now, I don't know true values for p, S, and C, so I'll end up rolling them all into 1 constant c, I'll also throw in that ½ too. I can do this since I'm trying to model lift for the CTR under the test conditions Honda used when they made 66 lbs @ 124 MPH.

Let c = ½pSC
→ L = cv^2​

Let's plug and compute c for the conditions Honda tested at:

66 = c(124^2)
→ c = 66/124^2 = 0.00429​

So we get:

L = 0.00429v^2​

Now we can (roughly) compute downforce at any speed.

Most drivers in the midwest (I'm mainly in the Chicagoland area) go between 70 and 80 in a 65 zone and 75-90 in a 70 zone. Some go faster, some go slower, but the bulk of the population follows this. I should also note that most also slow down by about 5-ish MPH at night. I personally do... Wait, I'm not going to publicly admit to speeding. Moving on; let's compute for 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, and 90 MPH respectively (rounded to nearest ½ lb).

55 MPH: 13.0 lbs
60 MPH: 15.5 lbs
65 MPH: 18.0 lbs
70 MPH: 21.0 lbs
75 MPH: 24.0 lbs
80 MPH: 27.5 lbs
85 MPH: 31.0 lbs
90 MPH: 34.5 lbs
124 MPH: 66.0 lbs (sanity check)
169 MPH: 122.5 lbs​

When driving around town you'll get 0.5, 1.5, 7.0, and 10.5 lbs of downforce going 10, 20, 40, and 50 MPH, respectively. So, when I'm exiting from one expressway to another entering a clear turn at 70 MPH and exiting at 85 MPH my wing produces 20 lbs of downforce on corner entry, 25+ lbs of downforce mid-corner, and 30 lbs of downforce on corner exit. Or, if I don't feel like hooning as much, I just hold 70-75 MPH while the wing produces 20-25lbs of downforce. It's not much, but it's honest work — Some farmer.
Sorry, any change you can go over the equation for Drag, and possibly the relationship between Drag and Lift? We've gone over this in my fluid mechanic class, but forgot all about...a refresher would be nice :):thumbsup:
 

tinyman392

Senior Member
First Name
Marcus
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
2,019
Reaction score
1,143
Location
Illinois
Car(s)
'18 Civic Type R (RR)
Country flag
Those numbers for braking don’t sound accurate. Logic check time. Since your velocity is decreasing in a braking scenario, and it decreases exponentially in the equation, your speed would have more of an impact on the downforce equation than your angle of attack would, thereby generating less downforce than at higher speed. Not saying that a nosedive wouldn’t create additional downforce, but the way I see it, your loss of downforce from velocity loss is more than your gain of downforce from the increase of angle of attack.
Downforce would be decreasing as you came to a stop by the square of the velocity still, however, the multiplier created by the difference in the original angle and new angle (sin(new)/sin(old) if I'm not mistaken, I could be) would still be there. So while the numbers that I computed are "true" (I'll admit the car dropping 30 degrees seems a bit excessive), they're all instantaneous and does drop (quite quickly) as you come to the complete stop.

Let's say we do a 70-0 run (emergency braking at expressway speeds) and the car can drop 15 degrees (with the wing fixed at 15). At 70, the downforce is about 21 pounds. At 65 MPH, say you dropped half of the 15 degrees (7.5 degrees), then you'd be at 27 pounds at that point. At 60 MPH, say you're at the full 15 degrees now, so you'll be producing about 30 lbs of force. Say you remain at this 15-degree dip for the remainder of the stop; downforce will go down very quickly after. By the time you're at 50 MPH you're at 20 lbs, then 13 at 40 MPH, then 7 lbs at 30, then 3 at 20 and 1 at 10.

The stop from 70-50 would be quick-ish so while you're generating 20-30 pounds at peak, it doesn't last long and dwindles very quickly as you come to the stop (you'll be producing < 15 lbs thereafter). Your average might also be quite low as well during the stop at around maybe 10-15 lbs.
 

Ducky

juiceboxes
First Name
Brandon
Joined
Jul 17, 2019
Messages
823
Reaction score
735
Location
Austin, TX
Car(s)
'07 S2000, '19 Civic Type R
Country flag
Actually its not but ok. There are literally 100s of car engineering videos that explain the wheels. Every single thing on the car is designed around the wheel. There are hundreds of factors alignments and so on. It can change the way the car wheels react during braking. Scrub patch changes depending on strut . Front wheel rear wheel and so on.... but pointing out truth compared to popular forum conceptions never ends well so ok yeah they can just slap a wheel on... i mean why bother having 300 engineers, 40 plus years in racing and millions and millions in r and d... hell just hire you. Guys we should just slap a 19 on it and send it... honda, ok by george old man you are correct.
Because it's the exact same thing. You got owned on wings and now you want to get owned on wheels too?

Go put 245/30R20 vs 245/35R19 into a tire size calculator and tell me the percent difference between the circumference and contact patch. Don't you quote me that bullisht article about "Should You Swap To 18s?" because I don't care what you can Google, I care about math.
 

mecheng32

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
98
Reaction score
159
Location
California
Car(s)
2018 FK8
Country flag
Downforce would be decreasing as you came to a stop by the square of the velocity still, however, the multiplier created by the difference in the original angle and new angle (sin(new)/sin(old) if I'm not mistaken, I could be) would still be there. So while the numbers that I computed are "true" (I'll admit the car dropping 30 degrees seems a bit excessive), they're all instantaneous and does drop (quite quickly) as you come to the complete stop.

Let's say we do a 70-0 run (emergency braking at expressway speeds) and the car can drop 15 degrees (with the wing fixed at 15). At 70, the downforce is about 21 pounds. At 65 MPH, say you dropped half of the 15 degrees (7.5 degrees), then you'd be at 27 pounds at that point. At 60 MPH, say you're at the full 15 degrees now, so you'll be producing about 30 lbs of force. Say you remain at this 15-degree dip for the remainder of the stop; downforce will go down very quickly after. By the time you're at 50 MPH you're at 20 lbs, then 13 at 40 MPH, then 7 lbs at 30, then 3 at 20 and 1 at 10.

The stop from 70-50 would be quick-ish so while you're generating 20-30 pounds at peak, it doesn't last long and dwindles very quickly as you come to the stop (you'll be producing < 15 lbs thereafter). Your average might also be quite low as well during the stop at around maybe 10-15 lbs.
Ok, I can get behind that logic. You are calculating them after all so I guess the numbers don’t lie.
 

UFO CTR

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
1,860
Location
San Frrancisco, CA
Car(s)
2017 CTR#1348
Country flag
This downforce during braking probably only serves to "stabilize" the rear end of the car, no? don't forget, as we hit the brakes from 70 mph, our cars will want to "overturn" (rigid body rotation) in the longitudinal direction...so the tail end of any car during braking will want to uplift, so the additional down force from the rear wing will counteract the uplift tail end due to braking? Trying to gain further understanding of what else is our big wing good for. :)
 

Harlaquin

Senior Member
Joined
May 7, 2017
Messages
1,694
Reaction score
1,261
Location
USA
Car(s)
2017 Type R and a beater ford focus
Country flag
Because it's the exact same thing. You got owned on wings and now you want to get owned on wheels too?

Go put 245/30R20 vs 245/35R19 into a tire size calculator and tell me the percent difference between the circumference and contact patch. Don't you quote me that bullisht article about "Should You Swap To 18s?" because I don't care what you can Google, I care about math.
Well I didn't get owned on shit to start with, I was only trolling on the idiots that come at me hostile ..well.. because yall are like shooting fish in a barrel, you get worked up so easy and are rude. I don't know squat about wings (other then they are tasty with hot sauce). But when someone comes at me with a idiocracy attitude. "wings make things fast cause electrolytes" well I come back with the same stupid crap just in an opposing manor. The ones here that are intelligent caught on. Sorry you didn't. Those people, I actually had a nice conversation with that was very informative and I learned a lot.

Now if you would like to inform me of how you are correct with some sort of facts other than a online tire calculator Im all ears. But if you are gonna ignore hundreds of car engineering videos and articles that talk about scrub patches, angles, side wall, the type of suspension the tire is on, the contact patch, camber, toe and so on.... the hundreds of measurements and millions in engineering. But you used a online tire calculator. LOL ok . let the Idiocracy begin. Hell why does honda pay anyone at all? Why require degrees and spend millions. They can just use an online calculator. Genius.

See the difference is (and Im sure you already stopped reading by now to start pounding out another insult reply) I have a buddy hes been doing car mods and auto cross and racing his whole life. He does not live in a fantasy world. He changes his tires sizes and even uses spacers. But he will also be the first one to tell you he knows it fucks up the car. He knows hes gonna change the angle on the wheel bearings and wear then out faster ( as one example). Hes well aware and assumes the risk. But to say its safe and does nothing to the car. But anyway I am ready and willing to listen to an informative reply that teaches me. I am all ears.
 

Ducky

juiceboxes
First Name
Brandon
Joined
Jul 17, 2019
Messages
823
Reaction score
735
Location
Austin, TX
Car(s)
'07 S2000, '19 Civic Type R
Country flag
lots of words, no thesis, "trust me I know a guy," attacks on intelligence without demonstrating any of it
damn what a compelling argument that completely defers to YouTube and Honda's marketing department without any new information. If only there was a group of people building CTRs at Honda that care about nothing but performance and aren't interested in looking cool...

oh wait. there is. they're called HPD, they have a WTCC CTR, and it has 18"s.

the 20"s are there because they look cool. 19"s are functionally identical, 18"s are within 1%, the problem is getting wheels in ET60 to match the stock offset to preserve all the suspension geometry you're pretending to know what you're talking about.
 

Harlaquin

Senior Member
Joined
May 7, 2017
Messages
1,694
Reaction score
1,261
Location
USA
Car(s)
2017 Type R and a beater ford focus
Country flag
damn what a compelling argument that completely defers to YouTube and Honda's marketing department without any new information. If only there was a group of people building CTRs at Honda that care about nothing but performance and aren't interested in looking cool...

oh wait. there is. they're called HPD, they have a WTCC CTR, and it has 18"s.

the 20"s are there because they look cool. 19"s are functionally identical, 18"s are within 1%, the problem is getting wheels in ET60 to match the stock offset to preserve all the suspension geometry you're pretending to know what you're talking about.
and you don't think that department made any changes at all to accommodate those 18s. you seriously think they are running oem stock every thing from the production type R? They just bought a retail type R put 18s on it and said there we good? and im an idiot? I also seem to remember a world record being set on 20s. not 19s... anyone else remember that little event? or the other 7 track records that were set on 20s not 19s.. remember those.. yeah marketing and looks that's all they are good for. No one thought of performance at all.
 

boosted180sx

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2017
Messages
4,022
Reaction score
3,424
Location
torrance, ca
Car(s)
2017 CTR, 2019 370Z Nismo, '16 ILX
Country flag
spacers can affect the wheel bearing yes. but a different offset wheels are not going to really negatively affect the bearings. different size tires are also not going to affect wheel bearing life.

also, if the wheel width and offset is the same and your just changing from 20s to a 19, it's not going to be any different from stock as long as the overall diameter has not been changed. He used a tire calculator to make sure that the overall tire diameter has not changed from the 20s to the 19s. Maybe lose some slight sidewall stiffness which might numb the turn in (which not many would probably notice, especially since they usually move onto a better tire than stock), but thats really about it.
 

Advertisement






Advertisement




Top