2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STi - Huge Rear Wing, Sedan and Hatch!

[Azuremen]

I look at that picture and see no downward attack on that spoiler, without downward attack the spoiler is not functional, simple. Additionally, unless it's bred purely for the track, manufacturers wouldn't want a spoiler creating drag hurting fuel economy especially in this day and age. Unless someone can find facts stating how much downforce this wing creates, I'm a non-believer in it.

Somewhat narrow understanding of aerodynamics to make that statement. As has been clearly mentioned in the thread, the wing does something - reducing upforce and drag, both of which are beneficial to the car.

But the function of much of the kit is primarily aesthetic. You can negate rear lift through a properly designed underbody venturi instead of having a (mostly) cosmetic spoiler on the car that takes up half your rear-view mirror. In fact... a lip spoiler on the trailing edge of the roof will also act to create a more laminar flow over the rear windshield, decreasing drag and increasing top speed.

A venture, I think, would cost more than this spoiler. But I'll agree it is cosmetic as well, and rather ugly bit of kit at that. Still, any downforce (or reduction in lift) is helpful.

Not that I'd ever buy one... the interior plastics and space drive me crazy.

 

[Paulie]

niky understands, the rest of you don't. The wing should be used for downforce, not reducing drag. The effect it does have is so minimal it practically makes the wing not much more than an aesthetic add-on.
Of course none of this would matter if the wing looked good.

Simple? I think you need to check your eyes. The sides of the spoiler show a downward slope and it's quite obvious. STI spoilers have always been functional. Either way, simply having a "downward attack" doesn't make the wing functional. You should know that though, seeing as you're such an expert, lol. Fuel economy concerns, on a car such as the STI, lol.

The sides of the wing?! Why don't you just get a butterfly to sit on the boot!

 

[McLaren]

niky understands, the rest of you don't. The wing should be used for downforce, not reducing drag. The effect it does have is so minimal it practically makes the wing not much more than an aesthetic add-on.
Of course none of this would matter if the wing looked good.

Beside the point. You said it wasn't functional. It is.

without downward attack the spoiler is not functional, simple.

But there's some aerodynamic function behind it. It drops the STI sedan's coefficient of drag to 0.35 versus 0.37 on the hatchback. All this, says Martyn Harding, product manager for the Impreza and Forester line, is enough to increase top speed.

 

[Paulie]

Barely functional. So I'm still allowed to make fun of it because it doesn't do much.

 

[Sharky.]

Am I the only one that looked at the pic of the STi's ass in Paulie's post and saw a Lacetti with a M3 rear bumper? Seriously, that's exactly what it looks like.

 

[eSZee]

The sides of the wing?! Why don't you just get a butterfly to sit on the boot!

STI wings have always been designed with functionality in mind. Aerodynamics of the car play a big role as well. The body and wing work together to make significant amounts of downforce. Don't try to compare it to a GT3 or a ACR viper, but it creates whatever downforce it needs for whatever speeds it was designed for.
I guess they had a choice of making the rear look good, or making it functional. Since we decided it looks like ass, lets leave it at that.

 

[niky]

With drag being reduced from an absolutely woeful 0.37 to 0.35, I think it's safe to say the the sedan wing works by not creating as much drag as the hatch wing. In other words... both wings help negate lift... the sedan wing just doesn't exact as great a penalty as the hatch wing.

And both cars will likely go faster without the wings at all.

 

[eSZee]

And both cars will likely go faster without the wings at all.

Isn't that true with about any car with a top speed that ridiculous? Take wing off, reduce drag, increase top speed.

Drag coefficient of the evo x is .34, m3 is .32, .35 isn't bad for a sedan.

 

[Andrew C]

I miss the old STi's

 

[niky]

Isn't that true with about any car with a top speed that ridiculous? Take wing off, reduce drag, increase top speed.

Drag coefficient of the evo x is .34, m3 is .32, .35 isn't bad for a sedan.

0.32 isn't bad... The Civic is around 0.29... actually most stock compacts are. It only goes up to 0.32 in some cases where they have body kits and spoilers. 0.35 is incredibly bad for a modern car... but (going against what I said earlier) often indicates that a car has active aerodynamics.

 

[Omnis]

It looks like a riced out Corolla.

 

[Adam41]

Am I the only one that looked at the pic of the STi's ass in Paulie's post and saw a Lacetti with a M3 rear bumper? Seriously, that's exactly what it looks like.

I miss the old STi's

+1 👍 It looks ugly. Ugly.

 

[mafia_boy]

Am I the only one that looked at the pic of the STi's ass in Paulie's post and saw a Lacetti with a M3 rear bumper? Seriously, that's exactly what it looks like.

You're giving it too much credit Sharky, I would've said it looks more like a Kia Rio from that rear shot, and I've already seen too many riced out Kia Rio wannabe WRX's around here already.

 

[YSSMAN]

It looks like a riced out Corolla.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this.




Still, I'd have the sedan over the hatchback. Screw practicality, that's for VWs.

 

[Azuremen]

Still, I'd have the sedan over the hatchback. Screw practicality, that's for VWs.

Aside from working all the time

I honestly feel the Sedan looks more like an after thought. What Subaru really needs to do is work on those interior materials, $40k car that most people think is worth $20 grand when they sit in it. Cheap sea of plastic!

 

[Philly]

This also used to be a car that could slay giants. I'm not sure where the new versions would stand on the Top Gear board, but the old STI and Evo were cars that could run with the best at a fraction of the price. Really, how many other cars are there out there that can be driven on the street while also winning track events? Who cares about interior materials when you're buying the car for performance? I certainly won't care when I buy a $40k car that can beat $100k+ cars.

If you really want a car with a nice interior, you can probably find a nice A4 or Acura somewhere.

 

[socomplayer2]

Unless you know of a local Subaru dealer that's willing to give a 23 year old guy who drives an ST204 and has no plans on buying a chance to drive one - No.

But, I've sat inside them. Tinkered with them a bit, read-up on them, etc. I'm just not particularly impressed.

Go to the dealers by me, I go out once a month and hunt for test drives. Last summer at the ripe age of 18 I got to test drive an STI and EVO in the same dealer in my dirty work clothes 👍. As long as you can go into a dealer confident talk a mean financial game and know more than them you should be good.

Back on subject, I think the sedan is absolutely epic looking. I cant wait to take one for a ride when they are released .

 

[harrytuttle]

Except it's probably functional so there for it can "not suit" the car and still be valid without looking ridiculous.

It's not. It's far too flexible and too poorly shaped to be of any use. As an owner of a 2005 STi and having been at NYIAS, I can assure you that Subaru wings are purely decorative. It doesn't completely block your rear view, but I found that it lines up exactly where the police cruiser top lights are.

I calculated the downforce of the STi wing using the Langley Research Center FoilSim wing simulator. The results are 60 lb of downforce at 100 mph, and 140 lb of downforce at 150 mph, which is an increase of between 5% and 10% download on the rear wheels.

If that's even remotely true, then feel free to load your groceries on it. Let me know what the dealer says when you go to get it replaced.

I look at that picture and see no downward attack on that spoiler, without downward attack the spoiler is not functional, simple. Additionally, unless it's bred purely for the track, manufacturers wouldn't want a spoiler creating drag hurting fuel economy especially in this day and age. Unless someone can find facts stating how much downforce this wing creates, I'm a non-believer in it.

It's not about the overall angle, but the angle relative to the airflow. In this case, the air would be sweeping down from the roof to the bootlid. This resulting angle between the airflow and the spoiler are -- theoretically -- quite positive.

But the function of much of the kit is primarily aesthetic. You can negate rear lift through a properly designed underbody venturi instead of having a (mostly) cosmetic spoiler on the car that takes up half your rear-view mirror. In fact... a lip spoiler on the trailing edge of the roof will also act to create a more laminar flow over the rear windshield, decreasing drag and increasing top speed.

Underbody effects are probably best, but hardly cost-effective in this segment. For starters, Subaru would probably have to double their service rates. Regarding the NASIOC forum, any reduction in drag or increase in downforce would most likely not be caused by the upper part of the wing. You mentioned a lip spoiler; the '04/'05 model discussed in the thread was actually a two-tier part. It's more than likely that the lower tier was the cause for any improvements. The upper section simply isn't strong enough to support anything. At around 20lbs, it deforms enough to move itself out of position. At 100 lbs, I forsee broken plastic. This is why most wings and other addenda are made of carbon-fiber.

In light of all this, the '11 car has only one section, and it's raised.

Not to mention the fact that the wing is too low for proper downforce... it needs to be at least level with the trailing edge of the roof to be effective. That position was effective on the last EVO because Mitsubishi used venturi effects to push air down to it.

That actually isn't true. If you remember the 2006 WRC car, the wing was highly effective despite having the same general dimensions as the road car.


I'm still interested in a test drive of the '11 sedan, though. If it turns out to resemble the '09 WRX I drove years ago, I my '05 won't be getting a younger sibling. I can tolerate ugly (I am, after all, a long-time Subaru owner), but I can't tolerate ugly without purpose or driving enjoyment.

 

[YSSMAN]

What Subaru really needs to do is work on those interior materials, $40k car that most people think is worth $20 grand when they sit in it. Cheap sea of plastic!

Its weird, because in the previous car, I thought the interior was a fairly okay place to be. Of course, back then, the car was barely over $30K, and it was the Mitsubishi that was having the upscale issues. But, even then, I didn't mind the Mitsu interior.

 

[Robin]

I'm happy with any Impreza with a proper rear however boring or ugly it looks, I dont actually find it bad at all. Looks like all the other Impreza rears, totally un-interesting!

Maybe it can finally start to compete with the Evo again!

Robin.

 

[Eric.]

I was in a 2004 STi last week and I didn't think the interior was bad by any means. The suede was certainly a higher quality than my Si's. Nothing seemed overly plasticy either.