Adding wing gets more MPG?
03-02-14, 07:57 PM
#1
Adding wing gets more MPG?
yeahhhh. so last week I added a 99 spec wing to my fd I left it in the top least drag position . this week I decided out of curiosity I wanna see what effect it has on my MPG's so today I put the wing in the second to last setting . and went to a friends house who lives about 30miles from me , on the highway doing 80 my normal cruising speed i noticed something OFF ... I was cruising at 9 inches of mercury /vac rather then the usual 8.
-.255 on the commandcer vs usual -.237
I thought ok maybe I have a tail wind . so on the drive back same thing same -9 in
This is weird as I thought adding downforce/drag should reduce my mpg/s and increase the load on the motor , Not lessen the load.
I will do more tests next time see if there is a difference in MPG's
But for hte mean time anyone wanna chime in with an explination ! ?? LOL
03-03-14, 10:57 AM
#4
Rotary Enthusiast
Less turbulence at the rear? I have no idea, actually...
03-03-14, 11:57 PM
#5
I don't think it was the wing, personally. I think it was more likely your foot was just a /64th lighter on the gas during that drive. -1inch vacuum isnt really a significant statistic.
If I were you (and I could be bothered to do this) I would repeat the runs with and without the wing and see if the differences are consistently repeatable.
Its just such a small variance, I don't believe the wing is the culprit :p
If I were you (and I could be bothered to do this) I would repeat the runs with and without the wing and see if the differences are consistently repeatable.
Its just such a small variance, I don't believe the wing is the culprit :p
03-04-14, 07:50 AM
#6
I don't think it was the wing, personally. I think it was more likely your foot was just a /64th lighter on the gas during that drive. -1inch vacuum isnt really a significant statistic.
If I were you (and I could be bothered to do this) I would repeat the runs with and without the wing and see if the differences are consistently repeatable.
Its just such a small variance, I don't believe the wing is the culprit :p
If I were you (and I could be bothered to do this) I would repeat the runs with and without the wing and see if the differences are consistently repeatable.
Its just such a small variance, I don't believe the wing is the culprit :p
and then the next day i did almost the same route to his house with the wing at the angle and I got the -9 inches results haha , but I will be going for a test drive tonight after work. lets see what happens . I tried yesterday but was carblocked by miami traffic.
03-04-14, 08:03 AM
#7
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is really interesting, and I am not going to say you are wrong because you are the one with the statistical data, please keep us in the loop. and one inch of vac is roughly 12%.
I am picturing this in line with the pick up tail gate vs gas mileage question. Open vs closed vs off vs cargo net.
I am picturing this in line with the pick up tail gate vs gas mileage question. Open vs closed vs off vs cargo net.
Trending Topics
03-04-14, 08:30 AM
#8
RX-7 Bad Ass
iTrader: (55)
In theory, a wing increases the coefficient of drag. It's using the airflow to produce downforce. The stock numbers on the FD show a different cD between base and R1 models.
You could have had a tailwind, been going slightly downhill, any number of things can account for that difference.
Dale
You could have had a tailwind, been going slightly downhill, any number of things can account for that difference.
Dale
03-04-14, 08:36 AM
#9
That is really interesting, and I am not going to say you are wrong because you are the one with the statistical data, please keep us in the loop. and one inch of vac is roughly 12%.
I am picturing this in line with the pick up tail gate vs gas mileage question. Open vs closed vs off vs cargo net.
I am picturing this in line with the pick up tail gate vs gas mileage question. Open vs closed vs off vs cargo net.
03-04-14, 08:38 AM
#10
In theory, a wing increases the coefficient of drag. It's using the airflow to produce downforce. The stock numbers on the FD show a different cD between base and R1 models.
You could have had a tailwind, been going slightly downhill, any number of things can account for that difference.
Dale
You could have had a tailwind, been going slightly downhill, any number of things can account for that difference.
Dale
Wind god following me around to help my mpgs? LOL
03-05-14, 08:55 AM
#14
I don't think it was the wing, personally. I think it was more likely your foot was just a /64th lighter on the gas during that drive. -1inch vacuum isnt really a significant statistic.
If I were you (and I could be bothered to do this) I would repeat the runs with and without the wing and see if the differences are consistently repeatable.
Its just such a small variance, I don't believe the wing is the culprit :p
If I were you (and I could be bothered to do this) I would repeat the runs with and without the wing and see if the differences are consistently repeatable.
Its just such a small variance, I don't believe the wing is the culprit :p
Theory was prettmuch disproven yesterday . seems like the wind was with me i was getting 8 inches going one way , and 9 going the other with the wing set in the same position I didnt get a chance to change it .
But I did make an observation , the difference in injector duty was quite a bit .
1 inch difference made a 4% injector duty difference 21for 9inches , and 25 for 8 , this is at 15.7-16 afrs , and when i tailed a semi truck , Not so close it was dangerous . at the same speed of 80 mph I went to -12 inches of vacume and about 17% injector but it was running much richer in the lower 14 afr's
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post