How long will it take the fanbois?

I am super excited about the Mustang GTD, but have to wonder how long it will take for Temu-sourced GTD style wings to show up on everything from Mustangs to Camrys?  

Already seeing them at shows. Mostly goose neck though. 

I mean, I think its cute your Dad keeps bees. How old is your Dad? 

Mr von Koenigsegg is saying the same thing ;)

Not gonna lie, I'd put it on the FR-S.

Rear spoilers generate downforce.  Why hang it from a cantilever?

In reply to porschenut :

In the first pic its still putting force on the rear axle.   And they can open the trunk still.

Just a modern Superbird.  Superhorse?

In reply to porschenut :

These are wings, not spoilers. 

Semantics out of the way, the mounting point doesn't change the aero balance. The downforce still happens at the wing. Even if you had a cantilever starting at the nose but holding a wing at the back, you'd still get rear downforce. The long cantilever is so the supports help straighten and guide the airflow. They act like sails. 

With all the wings and flaps and flares and scoops and things, it reminds me of one of those AI generated pictures.

cyow5 said:

In reply to porschenut :

Even if you had a cantilever starting at the nose but holding a wing at the back, you'd still get rear downforce. 

I mean, technically you would.  The force at the wing would be "down" but the cantilevered beam would act as a moment arm and would pivot around the rear wheel (provided the wing is behind the wheel.)  It would lift the front end while pushing down on the rear.

Feels like a flawed example. 

In reply to stuart in mn :

Glad I'm not the only one. AI concept was my first thought after "holy E36 M3 that's ugly even for a mustang"

Yes it still makes downforce but it adds a torque vector to the mount, which adds weight to the body.  Is there an aero advantage?

In reply to porschenut :

No massive aero advantage beyond some mild flow direction control a the wing leading edge. You are right about the structure though. That is a lot of leverage and stress at the C-post attachment. The torque applied by the downforce will always react with a front lifting force with a rear mounted wing, the difference is the internal loadings to get the downforce to the chassis/springs/tires.

Everyone should keep in mind this is a halo car and requires something to make it stand out. I also suspect this is the soon to be homologated IMSA entry for GTD/GT3 and that may have some impact on the why.

The mount geometry is inconsequential, it's where the wing itself is located.  The mount and the chassis are a rigid structure, unless its flexing, so the load still transfers the same, just along a different pathway.

Mr_Asa said:

cyow5 said:

In reply to porschenut :

Even if you had a cantilever starting at the nose but holding a wing at the back, you'd still get rear downforce. 

I mean, technically you would.  The force at the wing would be "down" but the cantilevered beam would act as a moment arm and would pivot around the rear wheel (provided the wing is behind the wheel.)  It would lift the front end while pushing down on the rear.

Feels like a flawed example. 

That feeling is actually what makes it a great example. You have to really think through it. You mention lifting the front - this IS correct. It happens any time the wing is aft of the rear axle. You get the same downforce (total) wherever the wing is, but the balance is related to where the wing is, not the attachment point. If the wing was centered over the middle of the car and still attached to the front bumper, it would give a 50/50 aero distribution.

Moments and forces always sum up the same as you move your reference frame since you are not moving the loads. 

Apexcarver said:

The mount geometry is inconsequential, it's where the wing itself is located.  The mount and the chassis are a rigid structure, unless its flexing, so the load still transfers the same, just along a different pathway.

 

Even if it is flexible, that just gives a tiny delay while things settle. If you put 100lbs on a stiff spring or a soft spring, you still added 100lbs. Just takes longer for the sudden force to reach the ground with a soft spring. With aero loads, the loading rates are much slower than the natural frequency of the supports (in the loading direction), so some flex still will not detract from the load that reaches the tires. 

The explanation I've heard before on wing mounts on the top was that they disrupt the air flow less than supports on the bottom. IIRC that was on a factory Cadillac CTS-V race car.

It's probably more structurally efficient than mounting to the trunk lid.

Form follows function.  

In reply to MadScientistMatt :

Yes "swan neck" mounts generally have less influence on the low pressure (bottom) surface of the wing that is doing most of the work. It does make for longer mounting arms and potentially convoluted shapes, but the aero impact to the wing itself is a gain. If you really anted to get out there and rules did not limit it, you could sweep the pylons/mounts/whatever-you-want-to-call-them behind the wing and up over the top surface. If strategically placed they could extend the end-plate effects further aft and reduce the vortex spin up until much further behind the wing.

I have been involved with some cars that used the rear brake duct scoops to effectively extend the size of the endplates beyond the rule limits. The inlet to the ducts were taped over and not flowing. The tech officials said they had to flow or be removed, so the engineer in the discussion took his pencil out of his pocket and stabbed a small 1/4" hole in the tape on each side and said how about now. Tech official was officially beaten and walked away.

I'd do it in a heartbeat if I got the wing for cheap.

stafford1500 said:

If you really anted to get out there and rules did not limit it, you could sweep the pylons/mounts/whatever-you-want-to-call-them behind the wing and up over the top surface. If strategically placed they could extend the end-plate effects further aft and reduce the vortex spin up until much further behind the wing.

Some of that is being tried out.