[mlee]

Originally Posted by motorhead

Well that's that. Well boys lets see who will be the first to go fast enough to buckle their trunk lid. Think of it as a right of passage.

Now that's the spirit...

[nicktechla]

Originally Posted by motorhead

Well that's that. Well boys lets see who will be the first to go fast enough to buckle their trunk lid. Think of it as a right of passage.

now we got a challenge!

[Smuuth]

Originally Posted by motorhead

Well that's that. Well boys lets see who will be the first to go fast enough to buckle their trunk lid. Think of it as a right of passage.

Probably the same guy who throws his new iPhone X onto a concrete floor to see if it will break.

[TheShooter]

So, if things are clear...

It's about 5K to do the aero package on a regular ZL1, which is not terrible, but still pretty expensive compared to the total cost of the 1LE package. Benefit is improved handling and appearance, but you paid a lot and still missed out on the suspension. But if you want an A10 better road car with the aero, this is the only choice for now.

Though I've only heard a few comments about it, I'm going to guess the following:

1) If you plan on higher speeds, mounting the 1LE wing by itself is going to mess with the downforce by putting to much at the rear and not enough at the front. I've read three owner posts reporting this happening and it makes sense.

2) Straight line speed will be effected as additional downforce will shave time off as you gather speed. We've observed this with other cars with aero packages.

3) Mounting the big wing on the original deck lid might cause fatigue and damage, though it would seem unlikely unless you are regularly at 160 MPH (and even then I doubt it would happen as I believe the load is well distributed).


R.

[Miss Delgado]

There is a youtube by this guy named Justin Opinion. He added the ZL1 1LE Wing to his ZL1. Is he a member here? We should ask him ......

[17CamaroZL1]

From what Al told me and a few others that asked about adding the wing to a regular 17 ZL1, he said there is additional bracing inside the trunk lid of all 18 and up models that isn't there on the 17. He made it sound like it is between the deck lid skin and what you'd see on the bottom of the lid with or without the liner, so it's not something you can easily see and know whether you have a reinforced lid or not. When the question of whether 17 models were just out of luck, he wasn't sure how they would handle that. Whether a whole new lid would need to be purchased or if they could come up with a way to add the necessary reinforcement. The reinforcement could also be thicker sheet metal on the top of the lid, but he made it sound like a plate or something else below the skin.

Just because there may have been reinforcements to prevent damage doesn't necessarily mean ones without will definitely suffer from installing the wing.

I like the challenge of seeing who can buckle one first. Lol

[Miss Delgado]

Where is Justin Opinion?

[Alpha1BC]

Originally Posted by ninetres

Oh I absolutely believe you. It’s valuable information. But if the part numbers are the same, and they are visually identical.....the TSB isn’t exactly gospel IMO.

I believe the part numbers did change. If I'm reading everything correctly, looks like 84282675 is the decklid for 2018+, but it used to be 23150390 for 2016/2017?

I haven't personally seen damage, but have it on good authority it's physically happened. I don't know the exact scenario where this occurs, so I can only speculate what needs to happen to cause the failure. My guess is that these swaps are probably not going to have any impact for most people. I'd think that this would be fine for driving on the street, but over time the people going faster on a track would run into issues. For instance, every time it's loaded at high speed could permanently deform the decklid a tiny bit, until eventually it becomes so permanently deformed that the metal yields/buckles under the load. Or, maybe you just have to go fast enough to generate a high enough load once, but only a handful of tracks around the country have a straight that allows you to go fast enough? Downforce also typically increases exponentially with speed, which explains why downforce is more of an issue going 130+ than it would be going 80 and below.

Like I said, I can only speculate at what it would take to actually fail one of these, but even ignoring the info that I have heard through word-of-mouth, I can definitely see it being a possibility for anyone that drives it hard enough. I highly doubt GM would issue a bulletin and spend money on designing a new decklid without having significant risk of one of these failing within the expected use of these vehicles.

I'm also interested to see if/when someone gets one of these to buckle

[JusticePete]

Originally Posted by ninetres

Maybe. Maybe the lack of reinforcement is only problematic after 150mph.....which isn’t exactly something everyone does all that frequently haha.

Down force in any aero package increases with speed.

Originally Posted by TheShooter

I've read that the extra downforce at the rear is a stability issue at high speed unless you also add the front downplanes as well.

Any comments on that?

Rob

If you addd down force to the rear only, the front end will get lighter as the rear wing generates down force.

Originally Posted by waterman

Originally Posted by travislambert
There is. GM actually published a bulletin about it.

#17-NA-310 - Information on ZL1 1LE High Wing Rear Spoiler Installed on non ZL1 1LE Models

Here's some text from the bulletin:

"The ZL1 1LE high wing rear spoiler uses the same mounting holes as vehicles equipped with a stanchion spoiler. Installation of the ZL1 1LE high wing rear spoiler requires internal reinforcement to the decklid due to the downforce the high wing provides. 2018 Camaro decklids are produced with the internal reinforcement. Addition of the ZL1 1LE high wing spoiler may cause the decklid to buckle on a 2016/2017 Camaro unless the decklid is replaced with a 2018 reinforced decklid."

Originally Posted by Alpha1BC

I believe the part numbers did change. If I'm reading everything correctly, looks like 84282675 is the decklid for 2018+, but it used to be 23150390 for 2016/2017?

I haven't personally seen damage, but have it on good authority it's physically happened. I don't know the exact scenario where this occurs, so I can only speculate what needs to happen to cause the failure. My guess is that these swaps are probably not going to have any impact for most people. I'd think that this would be fine for driving on the street, but over time the people going faster on a track would run into issues. For instance, every time it's loaded at high speed could permanently deform the decklid a tiny bit, until eventually it becomes so permanently deformed that the metal yields/buckles under the load. Or, maybe you just have to go fast enough to generate a high enough load once, but only a handful of tracks around the country have a straight that allows you to go fast enough? Downforce also typically increases exponentially with speed, which explains why downforce is more of an issue going 130+ than it would be going 80 and below.

Like I said, I can only speculate at what it would take to actually fail one of these, but even ignoring the info that I have heard through word-of-mouth, I can definitely see it being a possibility for anyone that drives it hard enough. I highly doubt GM would issue a bulletin and spend money on designing a new decklid without having significant risk of one of these failing within the expected use of these vehicles.

A functional big rear wing without a corresponding change to the front will create high speed instability. As the rear if pushed down, the front end will be raised. Use the 1LE aero bits as a package and not stand alone parts.

[ninetres]

Are you guys saying a rear wing downforce plot graph would be perfectly linear vs speed? And not reach a point of diminishing returns? You all sure about that?

Still like to see a 2017 decklid damaged from this. I know several people running them ( on road courses at high speeds). No issues yet. Interesting part number insight a couple posts up, that’s what I’m looking for. I don’t have time to swing by a dealership and ask for myself.

I’m just an evidence based kinda guy. I don’t take anyone’s word as gospel.

[Alpha1BC]

Originally Posted by JusticePete

A functional big rear wing without a corresponding change to the front will create high speed instability. As the rear if pushed down, the front end will be raised. Use the 1LE aero bits as a package and not stand alone parts.

Exactly! More downforce on the rear wheels without the addition of front aero would make for some interesting high-speed sweepers and turn-ins, to say the least. Would definitely want something (preferable the matching ZL1 1LE front bits) to keep the aero force balance where it's supposed to be.

Originally Posted by ninetres

Are you guys saying a rear wing downforce plot graph would be perfectly linear vs speed? And not reach a point of diminishing returns? You all sure about that?

It'll actually curve up vs. speed (like this) because downforce is a function of speed^2. You are also correct that you will eventually reach a point of diminishing returns. Once speed becomes too high, the airflow will stall meaning there's a sudden drop in downforce. An unexpected, sudden drop in downforce would be tough for a driver to react to, especially in a high-speed corner. For this reason, automotive and racing airfoils are typically designed so that they won't stall until well above the fastest air-speed the vehicle can realistically reach.

Originally Posted by ninetres

Still like to see a 2017 decklid damaged from this. I know several people running them ( on road courses at high speeds). No issues yet. Interesting part number insight a couple posts up, that’s what I’m looking for. I don’t have time to swing by a dealership and ask for myself.

I’m just an evidence based kinda guy. I don’t take anyone’s word as gospel.

Can't argue with that! I'm interested in proof as well, have just heard enough info from the right people to be convinced not to try it on a track with mine without a spare decklid

[Deakins]

I've never heard of an airfoil stalling due to high velocity...only too little. Also, any road going car will not see the transonic region so there no issue with compressability effects. To he honest, GM put some time into the airfoil on the car but due to the front end of the car not being really conducive to producing downfirce the rear wing is not that capable. It has to be what it is to stay in balance with the front end and also to not bleed off too much energy going down the road while meetings GM's target handling charracteristics and oerfirmance. To be frank, I'd like to see some different options outside of the OEM wing. Depending upon the track, suspension set up, ttire package, and power/gear of the car you could be in the market for something more potent.

[EDFHOBBIES]

What about a 30 plus wind or cross wind anyone factor that lol? then add that to 150 or 160 close to 200 mph..

I have had no problems yet but that's short jogs to 160 sustained speeds is usually how metal fatigues..

Honestly on a windy day with the wing and dive planes now it feels like the car is more sensitive being blown around out of its lanes.

[2SSRS@Gen5diy]

Originally Posted by ninetres

The owner of ACS composites told me the part numbers for 2018 ZL1 1LEs and 2017 ZL1s trunk lids are the same. Another forum sponsor also removed the liners of both car models, and the cracking/molding, washers, and bolts were identical. Tons of people have installed them on non-1LEs and tracked them, and we have yet to see any evidence of damage show up on the interwebz.

I still call it marketing hype, and trying to keep the aero package exclusive to the 1LEs. Could be wrong but that’s just my opinion based on all evidence I have seen to this point.

One last time, as of 12-12-17 our 2016 2ss and and 2018 ZL1LE, use the same part number for the trunk, our 2016 1LT 2.0T does not use the same part number, as it comes with now holes, we ran the part # by VIN and groups.