Unless you want to fit a front cooler, you won't notice the difference with what you have. The tail looks to be a non factory profile.
Printable View
Unless you want to fit a front cooler, you won't notice the difference with what you have. The tail looks to be a non factory profile.
not to veer too far off topic, but Audi made a few changes as part of the recall: rear spoiler, updated front control arms, and retrofit of Electronic Stability Program. IMO, omitting ESP from the car seems like the real error Audi made with the original car because it allowed people to push the car well beyond their limits at Autobahn speeds without the computer guardrails that are/were present in modern cars. but with the press at the time being pretty bad for the TT, Audi needed to make some drastic changes that would make the car 'safe' again even if that meant loading it up with understeer.Quote:
Originally Posted by 911MRP
here's a graphic showing a comparison of the downforce figures with no spoiler, the factory retrofit spoiler, and a larger Abt Sportsline aftermarket rear spoiler that was available.
https://i102.photobucket.com/albums/..._downforce.jpg
some suspension changes together with the factory rear spoiler end up creating a pretty fun and tossable car!
Attachment 528966
The development tests in 1972 gave even better performance with a larger 'Entenburzel' but head of design did not like it so they had to make it smaller. Still they added a few cm's without telling. It looked good as well..Short story, the setup as we have now does work.
Cees
It’s clear to me that the reason for the difference in the RS Spoiler is to accommodate a front cooler, not that it was a better performer than the spoiler it was based on. All engineering is a compromise. Just because a feature was part of the final road going version of the RS doesn’t mean it was a pinnacle by any means. Sure it’s an iconic car but, in the end a production car and production entails compromise.
So with the suggestions being asked, the owner needs to decide if he wants to mimic look or maximize performance. Obviously if he’s thinking of a front mounted cooler then the RS spoiler is the way to go.
Makes sense and agree. Think the German magazine let the side down by not testing S vs RS front . Shame on them:). It is probably not relevant for OP but it was thoughtful of the factory to make the shape and size of the area for the RS cooler cover the right size to perfectly fit a long thin British standard sized licence plate! So adding front to a road-car doesn’t much mess up the carefully designed airflow for about 100 c16 examples and the many imitators here ;) Likley the same for Germany and some other countries. That was obviously the real goal :)
Re Integrating another component maybe compromising an existing design reminds me of a little anecdote from back when I was a director of Lotus’ engineering consultancy company. The Lotus Olympic pursuit bike was essentially a demonstration of Lotus’ engineering capabilities like aerodynamics , materials and showcasing rapid innovation from motorsport :
https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cul...story-bicycle/
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/10176/lot/196/
They optimised the bike in various ways including putting it in wind tunnel. Not just the bike but one of the “ah ha” moments from the smart chaps was optimising aero of the bike in a wind tunnel including with the rider positioning on it in his riding gear. A compromise from the bike aero alone I suppose. The success Gold medal, World record from the Olympics caught a lot of attention. Kind of obvious to err...reframe ... the problem to include rider that way in retrospect but a fairly novel thought process back then in design of bikes. I’ve worked with a lot aero guys over years but I’m certainly not an aero guy myself and the bike project was not of my doing so no credit for it due to me but it stuck in my memory from way back then.
However unless OP is planning on strapping a MAMIL (middle aged man in Lycra) plus bike to front of his early 911 I’ve strayed down an memory lane aerodynamics rabbit hole. Having said that the London Olympics and subsequent annual mass- participation cycling events it inspired have pelotons going right past my door on closed road. The the top riders swishing by are the fastest thing I see moving on suburban London tarmac.
Unless the T the OP posted pics of has engine mods, it doesn’t need an RS spoiler. The one on there looks fabulous, as is.
If he want to mimic the RS all the way, go for it, but it is still a T. Given the lattitude for self-expression with a car like this, I vote to keep what is on there.
Yes it's just a T. But it will have a dual plug 2.8 with some custom stuff in it. Wanna try the RS front to complete the "faux" look. Interior is here. And some other pics.
Nice car, with a 2.8 you will definitely need an auxiliary oil cooler.
Well, I expect they didn't want to publish numbers better than the RS configuration.;) Also it was an opportunity to obsolete those front license plate brackets that had already been designed, to perfectly contour to the existing S spoiler profile. Needless additional over engineered solution for license plate mounting?? Sounds perfectly German to me. ;):DQuote:
Originally Posted by 911MRP
Attachment 591403Quote:
Originally Posted by 70SATMan
Reopening old thread because I came across some information that sheds light …
The comparison measurements, source R.Snodgrass who had access to factory info in his excellent books. Acknowledgements to author and Parabolica and Porsche archives who presumably supplied the historic figures they used.
Interesting chart showing aero evolution. The RS front bumper air-dam is compared to the 72S front air-dam both no rear ducktail. Interesting numbers between those two columns — datapoints. Some differences evident in the measured hard numbers.
The more optimal RS balanced front rear configuration is also shown.
It is clear the factory were making strides on aerodynamics with the work for the RS homologation special in 1972 — interestingly the German central regulatory authorities didn’t approve the rear spoilers due to concerns over rear crash especialy two wheel rider hitting it so the RS for Germany had the front RS bumper air-dam but not rear requiring workarounds to get local approval to use the optimal solution. Some customers specified rear spoiler be omitted in ignorance of the combined benefits presumably chose it for just fur aesthetics. Regulators in France didn’t allow the RS front bumper air-dam so cars there had 72S front and RS ducktail rear. Don’t have figures for that but maybe wasn’t as optimal solution as the final balanced configuration?
Steve