Ucube

I don't care what Joel says. There will be no taco on my rear deck.

Wellardmac

That's certainly true - I don't like the taco wing.

Now, Ucube, have you modified the suspension at all? Have you noticed anything like what Joel has described?

LVDell

Forgot to add. Another Rennlister added the Misha GT2 wing to his car after it was lowered with the X73 suspension and the car actually was MORE unstable. Needless to say, the wing came off immediately and went back to planted like on rails with the X73. Lowering is very important. That U.S. 4x4 ride height really screws up the aero stability of the cars at high speed.

Wellardmac

Thanks for the info. Dell. This is a great discussion for me.

Okay, so the message I'm getting is that I'm probably okay with the partial kit, but if I have any problems, then maybe I should opt for the X73 suspension, rather than a rear wing. Is that a fair summary?

LVDell

If you plan on being at speed anytime then I would defintely go with either the RoWM030 or X73/74 kit (wide/narrow).

Ucube

I haven't modified the suspension and don't plan to at the moment. Handling implications aside, I must be nuts to like the 4x4 look of the 911. The 911s of yore all have that 4x4 look, which has made such an indelible impression on me.

I've completed the front bumper, and I'm hoping to finish installing the skirts this weekend, so I can't comment on the aerodynamic issues as described by Joel just yet. I'll take my chances.

Wellardmac

Well, good luck. Let us know how it feels after you're done. I'm probably going to do exactly as you are doing, so it would be great to learn from your experiences and know what to expect in advance.

JimB

Hey everyone. I haven't been around for awhile. Hope all is well.

How does Joel explain the 40th Anv 996 with the GT2 front bumper, skirts and no wing?

Here is my understanding on this. Lift is generated at high speeds because the car is shaped like a wing so the air moving under the car has a shorter path than the air traveling over the car. Lift!

The stock, retractable spoiler doesn't really create down force it just breaks up the flow of air over the car which reduces the wing effect and reduces lift.

The reason the car is more stable at speed when it's lower is that less air goes under the car so there is less overall wing effect and less lift. The same result can be had by adding the front areo kit which does nothing more than reduce the amount of air that passes under the car. In the early days we actually used lawn edging to build an air damn on my 996 for track days and it had a huge effect above 140 or so. My conclusion is that there should be no problem with adding just the front of the MKII or MKI areo kit.

Adding just a wing is a completely different story. It's a very bad idea.
Jim

LVDell

Well put Jim.

Wellardmac

Nice info. Jim! Just the kind of ammo. I need in talking with these guys.

95M3CSL

JimB:

RE: How does Joel explain the 40th Anv 996 with the GT2 front bumper, skirts and no wing?

The 04 40th anniversary 911 actually has a C4S front, the Mk2 aerokit (aka GT3) side skirts, and the usual Carrera wing that lifts at 75 mph and lowers at 37 mph. It also came stock with the US M030 sport suspension. I thought about this too because it obviously is not the full aerokit. Don't know what the aero impact the combo of the C4S front, side skirts, no elevated rear wing on a narrow body car is in comparison with the full aerokit package on an 04 Carrera. To Porsche obviously this combo was fine..

Regards,
Marc

STRASPEC

I love my taco wing, my neighbor was like "nice porsche! what kind of wing is that?" I said: "its called the taco wing." she replied "it does sort of look like a taco huh...!"

anyways Ive noticed it really sticks to the ground after 85mph with the wing and it feels really stable and solid at high speeds which is a good thing! My car is lowered also, I want to say it feels like the car is sucked to the ground at higher speeds

Ray S

Here's my take. I have the 996 Mk II Aerokit front and side skirts paired with the Misha GT2/GT3 wing. While I am aware that at least one rennlister has claimed this wing caused instability at the track, another rennlister has indicated that the aerokit/Misha combo worked well for him at the track.

I can only speak to my experience with the product which has been good. While I have not run the wing up to 170 mph, I have had it well into the triple digits (at the track of course) with no problems or apparent instability.

FYI, I do have the X74 suspension on my car that drops the ride height well below the ROW sport height. I believe this kit (X74) rides almost as low as a stock GT3.

To answer your other question I believe the Misha is made out of fiberglass. In my opinion the quality of this wing is "good" i.e., it is better that the constuction of many other aftermarket wings I have seen, but it is not as well constructed as the Porsche OEM Mk I "taco" or Mk II wing.

Good Luck.

LVDell

FYI, regarding ride height.

The factory measured ride height for the standard C2/4 is 46mm higher in the front and 23mm higher in the rear than the GT3. The C2/4 is a neutral rake (same height front to rear) while the GT3 has a forward rake (front lower than rear). If you add the X73/74 kit you will gain you that 23mm difference in the rear (maybe a shave more) but in the front you will still not be at the same GT3 ride height (close but still about 6mm short). What you do get though is a better rake similar to the GT3 and a ride ride almost the same as the GT3. If anything, that reduces wind travel under the car will aid in REDUCING lift. That is the stability you feel. Don't add the X73/4 and then go run with the replica wing and you will defintely feel the instability.

Ray S

Dell,

Have you honestly ever driven a 996 (stock ride height) with front aerokit spoiler and the Misha wing? Or are you just guessing about "definately feeling instability"?