I was impressed on this service and price of the wing.I bought it from this guy.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...RK%3AMEWN%3AIT

They can make more for the same price.I was a little worried buying it from Hong Kong,but I bought it Monday night around 11 and got it on Thursday at 9AM.

I did a test fit and it fits great.The workmanship is A+.
If you want a Spec at a decent price...here you go.

 

Congrats! I'm always a bit skeptical about the quality/fitment from Hong Kong parts, but I'm glad it worked out for you. Can wait to see what it looks like on your car!

 

thanks for the info! i just might buy one myself. how much did shipping cost you, so i can have a ball park figure.

 

thanks for the tip! i got one myself!

 

Hong Kong has been making Replica body kit for many years and their quality is great. There are many small boat building shops there and they have years of fiberglass fabrication experience, which means they can build body kit for car with the same kind of good skills.

In fact, VIS used to get kit from Hong Kong and I think the majority of them were made in China right now. The price is very cheap to make in China and of course lower quality.

BC

 

actually i talked to this guy before. he makes them individually. so its not like it is some random company in hong kong. it is a regular dude just trying to help us out

 

Arent the Hong Kong replica's in fiberglass and the OEM in ABS plastic?

 

Oem isn't fiberglass.

 

EXACTLY. Why would you want a static, rigid fiberglass rear spoiler which will actually remove from it's functionality? The OEM one is urethane, and is made to FLEX during high speeds in such a way as to aid aerodynamics. :shakes head:

 

Which is obviously why everyone uses carbon fiber for their racing wings, so it will flex.....

 

People use CF spoilers to save weight, nothing more. Urethane is *extremely* heavy when compared to CF.

 

So why would you have an adjustable spoiler, adjustable in that you can create more or less drag as you need, if it was going to be made out of urethane? It would flex so much that your drag would be horrendously unstable. There's absolutely no reason to use urethane at all. How would you know that it would flex into the correct position as to cause less drag?

 

I be highly skeptical that a flexing rear spoiler would be a desirable feature for handling. These things aesthetics first function second. I would definitely jump on one at that price, Thanks for the tip.

 

You guys are more than welcome to express your skepticism about wing flex. But please keep in mind that until you've actually done the *research*, what you say is nothing but an uneducated opinion.

From http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns16983.html

When is a flexi-wing not a flexi-wing?
JUNE 20, 2006

Flexibility is one of the attributes of a modern Formula 1 technical director - and, apparently, a talent also for the rule-makers who seem to be happy to change interpretations of the rules at will in their never-ending quest to keeps the racing teams under control. The latest twist in the regulations is the introduction from Canada of separators between the planes of the rear wings in order to stop these gaps from closing up when the wings are under loading. That reduces the drag and makes the cars move faster through the air and thus gives cars with flexible wings an advantage on race tracks where the straights are sufficiently long to create the downforce necessary to make the wings flex. With the downforce measured in tons, it is impossible for the FIA to test such things in the pitlane and so another solution had to be found.

But there are still ways that wings can be made to flex, even with the separators between the planes of the wings. The new rule does not stop, for example, stop teams from making the wings sink backwards at high speed and thus achieve the same decrease in drag at high speeds.

All things considered, the line-up in Canada will be interesting as we will see who is where on the new playing field that is being created. In particular the efforts of Ferrari and BMW will be watched closely as both were well advanced in the science of the flexi-wings, having interpreted the rules in the same way as the FIA in the early part of the season.
_________________________________________________

From http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=28390

FIA acts on flexi wings
16/06/2006

Despite the best efforts of the FIA, which has always stressed that it finds them within the rules, there have been continued murmurings within the pitlane, fuelled by some sections of the media, that a number of teams, most notably Ferrari, are using wings that flex.

Consequently, the FIA has finally acted, with Technical Delegate, Charlie Whiting, writing to all teams advising them that from next weekend's Canadian Grand Prix, 'separators' having to be placed between the planes in rear wings in order to prevent them flexing.

Several teams have commented at the speed advantage the Ferrari 248 F1 enjoys over its rivals on straights, and this is widely put down to flexing of the wings, both front and rear.

Some teams had threatened to use their own flex wings, indeed some tried but failed to match the success of the Ferrari version. Others simply felt that rules are rules and didn't wish to be seen intentionally breaking them.

In the face of growing discontent, and the fact that both the Canadian and United States Grand Prix feature straights on which flexi-wings would benefit those using them, the FIA has clearly decided that now is the time to act.
_________________________________________________

From http://www.homeofsport.com/f1/news/item.aspx?id=16308

BMW told to stiffen 'flexi' wing - 06 July 2006

The remnants of the 'flexi-wing' saga are likely to soon end, with BMW-Sauber asked by the FIA at Indianapolis to bring modified rear bodywork to Magny Cours.

With Honda's protest threat quietening down last weekend, and the governing body effectively green-lighting the allegedly flexing rear wing, further action had been thought unlikely.

But according to British magazine Autosport, it now emerges that - after a closer look and an unique test at Indianapolis - FIA inspectors ruled that Hinwil-based BMW should stiffen an element of the wing for the French grand prix.
_________________________________________________

There are PLENTY more such articles out there, but I think these will suffice for now. Next time, if you don't know about something, please do your own research before calling into question what someone else KNOWS.

Thanks,
~Ramy

 

Haha, I was thinking about the recent F1 flexi-wing controversy as soon as the subject came up in this thread. I recommend dealing with the flexiness by installing a device that hides the flexiness from view.

-Max

 

Funny thing is I bet you FDNewbie can get you an OEM wing (maybe even painted the color you want) for not much more

 

LOL Max, who's gonna race their FD in the Grand Prix?

 

From what I got out of that article, they're talking about wings with two seperate levels that create a ton of downforce. By the teams "cheating" and making the top wing drop, it closes the gap and creates one single plane in itself. This doesn't apply to the JDM rx-7 wing as it's a single plane wing, and not double.

 

Not to point out the obvious, but what F1 is doing hardly applies to ANYTHING driven on the street.

Street cars do not need low speed downforce, nor do they need such a low downforce/drag setup on 180+ mph straights.

A flexible wing is indeed purposeful for a car that can use it, such as an F1 car, and other open wheel race cars. Maybe even PPIHC cars.

But a street driven RX7? HAHA

If you are building a racecar or a LSR car, sure, no reason to buy a fiberglass imitation wing. In that type of situation, aerodynamics make a difference.

For your joe bloe street car? who cares. Get the cheaper(and probably lighter) fiberglass version. Your points are well intentioned but hardly apply to this situation.

 

The tail (tip of the rear hatch/tailight area) of the FD is actually aerodynamically designed to generate downforce by itself, so having a higher 99spec spoiler that would drop down a bit could very well achieve this effect to an extent.

I'm not debating that. I've simply seen all too often on the 99spec spoiler related threads comments such as "I don't think it's good for a wing to flex" comments, w/o knowing that this is actually a desirable effect if designed as such.

~Ramy

 

I had to go walk outside to go see what you were talking about. I can't imagine that the very VERY slight incline at the tip of the tail would provide an inkling of downforce under any conditions. But I agree that in the case you stated with the FIA cars, that it would be a desirable effect. However I can't agree that it would be a good thing for the '99 wing at all.

 

I'm not debating with you. This is from info published by Mazda. Again, not interested whether or not you can imagine downforce or not from Mazda's design. Feel free to argue it with their windtunnel testing results and engineers. Sorry, but I don't have the time to chase down that info for you. But you're more than welcome to read up on it

 

So now you're saying that the downforce created by the wingless trunk design is enough? Why have a wing at all then? Why not save more weight and just go without a wing if that's the case?

 

1) *I'm* not saying anything...
2) I *never* mentioned "enough," which you should know is a VERY relative term
3) It's very well known that the R1 rear spoiler was barely functional, and cost the FD a great deal of drag for the little additional downforce it generated. That's what prompted it's replacement with the "99spec" wing.

 

Ramy, do you have any links to articles about wing flex specifically applied to FD's?

You may be correct that the '99 spec wing was designed to flex and aid aerodynamics, but articles about F1 technology don't really apply here.

Sorry, I'm an aero nerd.

*edit* Just read the post saying you don't have time right now to chase down the info. That's cool, I have just never come across anything on that subject before. So if you happen to see it again, then shoot me a PM.