CAMARO6 - View Single Post

joelster · 07-03-2023, 06:33 PM

My point with regards to the PAX was that a CAMC car with a spoiler and .819 is likely more competitive than a CAMC car with a wing and .827 PAX. On a standard 35 second course the SCCA is saying that a wing is worth .339 seconds. I'm not buying it. I'm fairly certain that from 0-40mph a spoiler is producing more downforce than a typical dual element wing setup. We spend most of our time floating around the 25-50mph zone at an autocross. My force gauge was binding up because of the way I had it mounted. I changed the entire mounting setup so it can "float" as the lid gets pushed down. It will be far more accurate for my next round of testing.

This is some interesting data for those that say steep angles don't work. Check out the downforce at 52 degrees at 80mph:

07-03-2023, 06:33 PM	#10
joelster Drives: '94 Z28+ '15 Z/28 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Cheektowaga, NY Posts: 1,320	My point with regards to the PAX was that a CAMC car with a spoiler and .819 is likely more competitive than a CAMC car with a wing and .827 PAX. On a standard 35 second course the SCCA is saying that a wing is worth .339 seconds. I'm not buying it. I'm fairly certain that from 0-40mph a spoiler is producing more downforce than a typical dual element wing setup. We spend most of our time floating around the 25-50mph zone at an autocross. My force gauge was binding up because of the way I had it mounted. I changed the entire mounting setup so it can "float" as the lid gets pushed down. It will be far more accurate for my next round of testing. This is some interesting data for those that say steep angles don't work. Check out the downforce at 52 degrees at 80mph: Attached Images __________________ 1973 Mach 1, 351C cruiser '15 Z/28 Red Hot, A/C 1980 Z28- resto-mod project 1979 Y84 Trans Am 1986 IROC-Z