Okay. Are we addressing a known problem with the platform with this modification? I highly doubt it. The fact is the vehicle probably operates quite well aerodynamically within the general operating parameters it is limited too (speed, tires, etc.) Can it be IMPROVED upon. Quite possibly and we intend to find out.

Yes reducing lap times at a road course is a top priority for the design. Will the benefits be realized on the the street as well as the track? Too early to tell.

Is the goal of the product to do something different just for the sake of doing something different? Of course not. I have stated that repeatedly here and in the other posts as well.

Not to mention the basic idea of the design concept is not new. It can be found on Porsches, and Mercedes. Application of the concept to the Corvette world is what is new.

 

What I like about the potential of this mod is that it would make the Vette more "exotic". This is something one would expect to find on a $250,000 car, not a $50,000. Anything that makes the car more exotic gets a by me.

 

I would be interested if it ends up something like these and under $3k, extra for motors with a clicker

 

Count me in if it ends up looking very good and in a reasonable price.

I wish you guys try making it look great both ways

 

I think $1,300~$1,600 might be the price target. At 3K it would just be one of them "highly" expensive carbon fiber pieces you see pop up here once in a while

 

I like the idea of speed sensitive.

 

So the engineering principle you are using here is the time honored "throw an idea against the wall, and see what sticks" method... That's fine, many good products are produced this way. The pitfalls of this method are many though, including not identifying the problem to begin with, and not knowing if you have solved it once you have finished.

I will be very interested to see if this radical aerodynamic modification is justified based on reduction in lap times. Just as a suggestion, you should use the well proven C6R rear wing on a "street" car as a baseline. Since the C6R piece is much bigger than yours, you can expect that yours will be significantly less effective. It will save you a lot of development and fabrication costs.

That's good, because a flamboyant mod like this without an actual purpose would be just like the ricers and their silly mods.

This is the second time you have brought this up, so I hope you know that there are very few street cars that generate any usable downforce at ANY speed, and likely NONE that benefit at "normal" highway speeds. This includes the exotics. Yes, those movable spoilers on Porsches, Mercs, Crossfires, and the like are simply "look at me" gadgets. If you read anything other than the sales brochures and these forums, this is immediately apparent. An aerodynamic "wing" is only one element in the quest for usable downforce; there are many other complementary issues to deal with including managing airflow under the car. Just the tall ride height of a street car pretty much eliminates any advantage that even the best wing can offer. Simply slapping an airfoil on the back of a street car in the hopes of finding downforce is about like putting a huge cam in an otherwise stock engine... It doesn't work by itself. Just remember, even the guys in Stuttgart do not have the power to change the laws of physics.

Anyway, I wish you the best of luck. It appears you don't need to actually prove your theory anyhow - you seem to have some willing buyers no matter how expensive or ineffective, just as long as it motors up and down.

 

I have to jump in a bit here - I've spent time in full scale wind tunnels, as well as studying the theory behind vehicle aerodynamics as part of my degree and career. A lot of what 455HOGT37 is saying is true.

A few points, cut down a bit so as not to bore everyone:
Most of the aerodynamic behaviour of a car is determined by its overall shape.
There is a difference between a 'wing' and a 'spoiler'. A wing is exactly what it says, like an aircraft wing, designed to purely produce downforce when applied to a car (or upforce on a plane )
A spoiler is VERY different - it is actually used to just detach the airflow from the car body. Those thin 'lips' you see on hatchbacks, or trunk lids, are actually very effective at detaching the airflow and reducing lift.
This design is aiming to be a wing, and generate downforce. HOWEVER, it will only ever genereate downforce on the rear, and the nature of the design, especially in the raised position, will REDUCE downforce at the front of the vehicle if no other changes are made. If you found that the front of the vehicle is already a little light at speed (which it is on most average passenger cars), this will make the problem far far worse. (Imagine a huge force pushing backwards on the wing - it will act like a lever and lift the front).
To really get any benefit in terms of vehicle performance on a track, you'd have to finely balance front and rear aero changes to get a combination that gives an improvement to both as equally as possible. Even putting a Z06 rear spoiler on your car without the Z06 front end is going to have some effect on the balance that GM designed the cars with.
Don't be fooled by small sizes when talking about wings - they can generate pretty huge forces with the correct design.
Nobody has mentioned this yet - but any wing, especially ones that are raised up from the trunk lid, will substantially increase DRAG. Race car teams are continually trying to balance downforce and drag - at some tracks they will opt to reduce downforce, and hence get lower drag, in order to get a higher top speed (with slightly lower corner speeds). As already mentioned, it is a BALANCE. Without any benefit in downforce, any wing will just be costing you in terms of drag - top speed and acceleration at higher speeds will be hurt (As well as MPG, but not many of us care too much about that).

So, in short, there is a lot more to aerodynamics than a lot of people realise

 

Some quick maths, and some basic assumptions (Coefficient of drag of wing is 0.3, frontal area is 8cm x 160cm, and also not including any effect of the struts):
The wing will reduce top speed from 186mph to 180mph.
At 100mph, the air force pushing backwards on this wing will be nearly 50 Newtons (11lb) (more if I include the struts). At 180mph, it is 150 Newtons (36lb)

While looking for the data for the standard C6, I also discovered the the Z06, with its wing and front end changes, has an increased coefficient of drag of 0.34 over the standard coupe, which is 0.28. That's a big expense for extra downforce.

 

I'm a mechanical engineer, but I've studied enough aero to know that Roastbeef and 455 are right on the money. If you are trying to design a functional, performance enhancing wing, those need to be your primary design goals up front. Get a wing that works (and balance the front) then make it as pretty as possible without sacrificing performance.

One comment to Roastbeef . . . I'd guess that most of the additional drag on a Z06 comes from the wider tires and fenders. I could be wrong though.