23 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHNo rear spoiler with aerokit front bumper?
Leading reported evidence
Replace handling by fooling
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
It does make sense about changing handling by fooling with down force on front but not rear, however what facts I have found about factual data studies on Aero dynamics for Porsche can fit in a thimble with room left over.
Leading evidence: 'Replace handling by fooling' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace handling by fooling' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I wouldnt run Daytona with that set up but for street its fine.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
It felt like the front could use more weight (down force) .
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Replace handling by fooling
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
It does make sense about changing handling by fooling with down force on front but not rear, however what facts I have found about factual data studies on Aero dynamics for Porsche can fit in a thimble with room left over.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
23 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
So my 2002 C4 had factory side skirts as original options.
A few years ago a car backed into my parked car and damaged the front bumper. The body shop offered to upgrade my bumper at that time to the aero kit front bumper since they had to replace it anyway, and it would look good with the side skirts.
I've since read Porsche information saying that there are only a few combinations of aerokit parts that are safe, and my combination (side skirts, front spoiler, no fixed rear spoiler, no splitter) is NOT recommended. I of course have the motorized standard rear spoiler.
So is this just propaganda or is there any danger to this?
I had a post a couple weeks ago about the installation of an Aero/GT3 front bumper on my 996. It did come from Porsche with the warning about fixed wing rear spoiler.
I did get a little B busting from the group on the post.
It does make sense about changing handling by fooling with down force on front but not rear, however what facts I have found about factual data studies on Aero dynamics for Porsche can fit in a thimble with room left over.
IMHO, the OEM aero front bumper should be perfectly fine.
Think about it... other than perfecting the aerodynamics of the car, why would you think Porsche would strongly suggest the complete aero package. ANSWER = $$$
I personally upgraded my base Carrera with GT3 side skirts and Turbo front bumper with no rear fixed spoiler. No problem at all. In my opinion, it handled better at higher speeds.
That looks great.
I went to Pelican Parts and found this
http://www.pelicanparts.com/catalog/...ec996_pg21.htm
So is this rear spoiler really 7k+?
With the aero front bumper already installed the included front lip spoiler would be unnecessary. It doesn't look like they sell it separately.
Mike
It sure is, I think suncoast sell it as a complete aerokit for around the same money as the mk2 wing alone.
As for the aerodynamics IMO if you're on the track match it with the wing. If on the street you'll be perfectly fine. I think the warning has to be given for liability if you're going to be travelling at excessive speeds.
Although the front bar was never offered as an option by itself (like the side skirts were) so if you're a purist for factory modifications this is not for you.
Which set up are you referring to?
I sure wish folks could find out what the actual areo dynamics are on the different pieces.
That information has to be somewhere
Aerokit 2/GT3 bumper without rear wing.
Porschetech3 has official literature us common folk can get our hands on! He might have the answer!!
Can you tag members on here??
As another person wanting to convert to aero, the lack of data is pretty irritating. You can't do this or this.... it's not safe. Why? How unsafe? Or are you just trying to sell me a rear spoiler that costs 25% of my cars value?
Thats why I decide md to go a different route for aero parts.
+1 That is just where I was a couple years ago.
My car came factory with Carrera Wing and Aero Side skirts, but not the front bumper. Porsche build sheet confirmed.
Previous post had a suggestion for information, I am not sure what he meant by tagging someone here, PM I can do.
IMHO, if one decides to go AERO it is best to go ALL (front chin spoiler/rear wing/side skirts) or NONE. An "aero kit" was a MUST-HAVE when I was searching years ago and was so lucky to find one with all the goodies (dealer added, mix of OEM and Techart pieces) already on the car. Heck even had rear bumper "winglets" for good measure
+1 That is just where I was a couple years ago.
My car came factory with Carrera Wing and Aero Side skirts, but not the front bumper. Porsche build sheet confirmed.
Previous post had a suggestion for information, I am not sure what he meant by tagging someone here, PM I can do.
Here is link to a bumper description
http://www.pelicanparts.com/cgi-bin/...on=00004480228
I had the MK1 side skirts and front spoiler on mine for years with no adverse effects on handling, actually quite the opposite. I got it over 100 a couple of times and it was very stable. Really wanted the OEM cab rear wing, but certainly not worth $6K plus paint and install
Data point: EVEN with the big rear spoiler, the car can get frighteningly light with the wing in the neutral configuration. I had the rear end come completely off the ground over a fairly gentle rise in a course @ approx. 150MPH...just enough to get that feeling in the pit of the stomach and see the tach skip all the way up to redline and then back down as the car dropped back down onto the asphalt. If there had been ANY bend in the road near there...well, there wasn't.
That night I learned all about shimming the rear wing on the MKII aerokit.
If there's a problem, I'm sure it would only be at very high speeds - as per 5CHN3LL's post.
You know how you drive your car.
Aesthetically the aero front bumper is tops, followed by the standard, with the turbo front, to my eye anyway, looking bulbous and nose heavy on a standard slim body, less so on the S, and OK on the turbo.
I wouldn't worry about the aerodynamics if it looks that good!
My .2 C2 is factory and staying that way
My aero
is
matched front-to-rear, and the time the car came "up," the wing was in the default (unshimmed) configuration. I didn't make this properly clear, but I was trying to convey that even when properly configured, you may still need to tweak the aero to ensure it does what you expect. I would imagine that mismatched parts would yield even less predictable results...
My car Carrera Aero pkg- separate assembly but thr three parts, wing, rockers and front bumper.
The bumper comes with thr smallest and narrowest air splitter, the Cup Car and GT3 are larger.
I chouse to upgrade from the small to the cup car unit, goes from end to end of bumber, same as gt3. However the cup car in more flexible made from rubber/vinyl compared to fiberglass as with the small one.
I drive at WGI, big track. It felt like the front could use more weight (down force) .
it was suggest by more experience that putting on the full lenght splitter might make enough difference. Well under 100mph, Not notiicing a whole lot, over 130mph when you need to turn the wheel just a little going up the esses. YOU CAN FEEL THE DIFFERENCE.
1st pic original bumper with small narrow splitter
Original supplied splitter, notice how far from the edges of the bumper it lacks the splitter
New CUP CAR SPLITTER Flexible rubber/vinyl , full length from end to end of bumber and a different angle
Take a look at how well the entire car inplanted coming up the esses at WGI
This is WOT coming up the esses at Watkins Glen
The center of the large Cup Car splitter that flexes, look how flat it climb
s in the center
I did it my self with a rattle can set that I purchased from some paint supplier.
It had worked well on a couple interior pieces. So I thought what the hell.
I went to a local auto finisher shop here and purchased a primer for flexible material
like that really exsisted
It looked good for a couple months, now it has cracked paint and actually looks like the black material is bleeding through the primer, paint and clear coat.
But it is so low on the car, I look the other way, and think in my mind it still looks great.
Maybe next year I will get bumper and frunk repainted, lots of stone chips.
I really would like to do more concours events, but need a little sprucing up in some areas.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.