Airdam vs Ride Height vs Belly Pan what is more effective

[tunedbytad]

Airdam vs Ride Height vs Belly Pan what is more effective?

[tunedbytad]

Frank your a man of many words...

You mean yes do all the mods?

what mod is the most effective?

[tunedbytad]

If you make 3 Lefts then you just made a right

but what are we saying here
Post whoring is not my style
running up your post count for no reason what so ever.....

I want info what is most effective?

belly pan or air dam?
does one cancle out the other?

[tunedbytad]

Frank,thanks for the warm welcom to eccomodder

I'm looking for general guilde lines and a point in the right direction

maybe someone else will post something usefull

[ChazInMT]

I'd think that for any of the sleds you have listed, an airdam would be your most cost effective solution. If you keep the air flow under the car at a minimum with an effective airdam, belly pan mods would be unnecessary.

If you lower your ride height, I'd guess you would reduce your frontal area a bit and make an air dam less needed. So it would probably be the best overall thing to do, but at what cost in ride, parts, labor, and handling performance? Spending thousands to save hundreds does not pencil out in my book.

[cfg83]

tunedbytad -

Originally Posted by tunedbytad

Airdam vs Ride Height vs Belly Pan what is more effective?

Hmmmm ... it depends. They all have pros and cons. These are my opinions, subject to people that know more than me :

- Belly Pan: most effective if done right. The devil is in the details. But, now you have a high maintenance issue on your hands if you don't do your own servicing (me).

- Ride height: Seemingly always an improvement. Lots of "Eco-packages" that manufacturers whip up for existing cars are lowering ride height by maybe 10 mm (< 1/2") as compared to base models. I looked this up for my car (KYB struts + Eibach lowering springs) and heard that at least one person ended up with tires rubbing in the wheel well. Sooooooo, it's low on my list.

- Airdam: A good compromise if you don't want to spend lots of time under the car. Again, there is an issue with finding the "how low to go" sweet spot for your car. You want to get the airflow past your messy engine bay (good). But, you are also increasing frontal area (bad). You will also need to manage front end clearance issues, so tough materials like lawn edging are useful.

CarloSW2

[cfg83]

tunedbytad -

If you go with an air dam, you may also want to look into side skirts :



CarloSW2

[Piwoslaw]

Cfg83 pretty much covered it. I'll just add that lowering may change the way your suspension works. It'll not only be a harder ride (even harder with tires pumped to a higher pressure), but suspension elements will be spending more time at slightly different angles, which may cause more wear.

The new trend in airdams is that the center is cut out. This still pushes air away from the front wheels, but reduces frontal area by letting air under the car. This works well only if:

1. Your wheels are cleaned up (flat hubcaps, closed gaps),
2. You have a good bellypan.

Lower suspension and airdams can also cause problems with scraping. A bellypan protects the underside from mud and salt.

[cfg83]

Piwoslaw -

Thanks for mentioning the lowering issue. For some FWD cars, the transaxle geometry changes to the point where other parts need to be modified (probably less so for tunedbytad's RWD cars). For instance, in a Chevy Cobalt, I have read that lowering the car can require a shortened steering wheel shaft, . That isn't true in my case.

CarloSW2

[winkosmosis]

The only thing reducing ride height helps with is reducing tire frontal area... right??