fullymatted.
Back to search
Rennlist

996 Wing Aerodynamics - The Uber Thread

Add to repair workspace
Open repair workspace
Original source
14 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW

Discussion summary

YOUR RESEARCH996 Wing Aerodynamics - The Uber Thread

Leading reported evidence

Run taco/aerokit ii wing

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 · Original poster

certain cup cars will run the taco/aerokit II wing but others will run the CUP wing (the gangsta looking race wing) and i'm curious as to the aero difference between them, there must be a reason that the different wings are used.

996 Wing Aerodynamics - The Uber Thread
Read full discussion summary

Leading evidence: 'Run taco/aerokit ii wing' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Run taco/aerokit ii wing' (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.

Read captured replies

1 matching discussions · 14 captured posts examined · 0 partial discussions

Frequently discussed actions (1)

These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.

Run taco/aerokit ii wing

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 · Original poster

certain cup cars will run the taco/aerokit II wing but others will run the CUP wing (the gangsta looking race wing) and i'm curious as to the aero difference between them, there must be a reason that the different wings are used.

996 Wing Aerodynamics - The Uber Thread
Coverage and how to read this overview

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.

14 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.

0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.

Generation: 20261026T213932Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources

POST 1 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

I think it would be a good idea to compile some statistics on the wings available for 996's and the amount of downforce they can produce, as well as other important statistics which would be considered important to "go faster" so to speak. Once we have compiled a bunch of data, I will put it toghether in a table and post it online. I will begin searching for information and filling it in as i can get it, but others, please chime in if you have any data to contribute as I would like this to become a comprehensive and informative thread. Please post information in the following format: Manufacturer Name Of Wing Price Weight Material of construction Angle of Attack Downforce produced at X speed Other Notes (other comments you would like to make regarding the wing). An example of such would be something like the following: Porsche OEM GT3 RS (Street Car) Wing 2150 Euro Weight: xx lbs alone, xx lbs when mounted to base/decklid Angle of Attack: 0deg stock, 4 and 8 deg shims available Downforce produced: ?????? Other notes: Available on european GT3 RS street car. Aftermarket replicas available in Fiberglass. Other personal comments on handling effect go here. This is a pretty good list of wings I think are popular and worth collecting data on: Porsche Aerokit I (99-2001 996/GT3) Porsche Aerokit II (2002-2004/5 996/GT3) Porsche GT3 RS (European Street Car) Porsche GT3 "CUP" Car Wing (2002 or so cup cars) Porsche GT3 RSR (i think the wing was longer on this compared to the cup car version because of the wider body) Porsche GT2 (996 Turbo/GT2) Mashaw GT2 Wing (aftermarket for 996) MISHA GT2 wing (aftermarket for 996) RUF RGT Wing (99-2001 996/GT3/RGT) RUF Ducktail Spoiler I think that covers the most common wings seen on 996's that are pushed hard. I'll cross post this on rennlist/renntech/6speedonline in the interest of speeding up data collection.

POST 2 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

Here is the formula for the calculation of downforce: D = 0.5 x (WS x H x AoA) x F x p xV^2 (in other words V squared) Where: D is downforce in newtons WS is wingspan in metres H is height in metres AoA is angle of attack F is aerodynamic coefficient ? is air density in kg/m3 V is velocity in m/s2

POST 4Original post

Omar, good idea but pretty much pointless for 99% of the guys here. Unless you take your car to the track or push it well above the 100+ mark on the highway then you really will not feel the effect of the downforce. And if you want the "optimal" wing for the car then you really have 1 choice: OEM. For the pre-facelift cars, there is the carrera wing and the MkI (taco) wing and for the facelift models you have the carrera wing, the MkII (GT3) wing, and the RS wing (need to pair with cup splitter). For the fat-**** crowd you have the aerokit wing (TT/C4S) and you have the GT2 wing. Anything other than that and you are talking bling. Nothing wrong with bling, but the last thing you want is an UNTESTED replica that is made of heavier materials and could actualy produce negative results at high speed--which has been confirmed by Rennlisters that tried replica items. So you just need to ask yourself, what you are looking for in a wing. Functional or Bling?

POST 5 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

personally i will be looking at function this time around since i will now be racing and i believe my current wing has far too steep an angle of attack relative to the tracks we will be on. I definitly understand the point that your making about untested replicas and bling, although it was my understanding that Techart does aerotest there cars (ditto for RUF) but i will digress on those since we both agree it seems. my real interest is between the various forms of the porsche factory wings..I.E. certain cup cars will run the taco/aerokit II wing but others will run the CUP wing (the gangsta looking race wing) and i'm curious as to the aero difference between them, there must be a reason that the different wings are used. I mean, i could probably run at our local shannonville track sans wing at all since the straights are so short and its a very tight technical corner, but for mosport...proper aero would be a must.

POST 6Original post

How do you suggest we come up with the aerodynamic coefficient for a given wing. I doubt that even some of the manufacturers know this value for their wing.

POST 7Original post

what about angles for the MKI GT3 Wing (taco style)?

POST 8Original post

Dell is spot on, OEM is the only choice, AD speaking all others are basically junk including OEM lookalikes. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, been there, done that.

POST 9 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

^ Chris, there must be someone who can make an accurate replica of the OEM wing out of a lightweight material. It would seem to me as if there would be quite a bit of weight to be saved by going from stock PU material to a composit.

POST 10 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

^ Chris, there must be someone who can make an accurate replica of the OEM wing out of a lightweight material. It would seem to me as if there would be quite a bit of weight to be saved by going from stock PU material to a composit.

POST 11Original post

That would be nice, but just isn't the case I'm afraid. The misha gt2 wing is a prime example (I had one), the wing size, ht, AoA, area of lateral drag are very different than a oem GT2. It looks roughly the same, but acts completely differently AD wise (read squirrly at the track). A while back I compared my oem aerokit to the misha gt2 wing in a thread, the differences were significant, and that was widebody C4S to widebody C4S, can't imagine how off the aerodynamics would be with a GT2 on a NB car. I would strongly suggest that anybody out there considering a wing/aerokit not waste their money on aftermarket stuff, the quality, R&D, prep work required negate any percieved savings. You really do get what you pay for in this case. Off my soapbox. C

POST 12Original post

Omar, I commend your idea. I totally disagree with those that are of the opinion that your only "good" aero option is the one that Porsche provides (i.e. aerokit). In my PCA region I have seen plenty of cars that utilize aftermarket and "home grown" aero solutions with apparent good results. In much the same way that individuals can experiment with different suspension options or tire sizes to suit their particular needs, there is no reason that aero mods cannot be successful.

POST 13Original post

This figure gets thrown around a lot but I've actually driven (i realize we aren't talking about the exact same porsche and the stock aerodynamics have improved but...) a 964-RSA with no wing, RS "whaletail" wing and a multi-element RS3.8 "bi-plane" wing back-to-back and you can definitely feel a difference at highway 55+mph speeds with the multi-element. Not that our cars are unstable to begin with but the car is a LOT more stable with the bigger wing. The thing that stuck out most was the improved crosswind stability. So if you can live with the boi~racer looks they are definitely worth adding.

POST 14Original post

All these are valid points OEM VS AFT but my concerns are balance front to back and the only way I know is to test is the taxpayer paid wind tunnel.

This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.