Perhaps the Honda Insight needs more aero-stability...
 

...but the great (Hasport Hondata w/ 2L supercharged Rotrex K20 w/ 500hp) construction quality of whole-body cage and safety equipment worked. The driver escaped with relatively minor injuries (collapsed lung) considering the violence of the crash. Slow motion of 13 1/2 200-mph barrel rolls and endos. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_-SWoGxWTs

Example why downforce is good; your friend and angel.

Yeah, I notice the insight is not low & flat, but rather high & narrow. That didn't help once the roll started.

Also, the aerodynamics for optimizing minimum drag at "regular" speeds probably aren't the best for high speed stability. Getting both at the same time is quite a trick, and I'm sure the design of the Insight was at least 90% for low drag at regular speed, and less than 10% for "high speed stability".

Using that body design for a landspeed attempt makes sense from the standpoint of low drag, but in this case, at least, the high speed stability thing bit him in the ass.....

There's another video out there of a 2nd generation Mazda RX-7 at Bonneville doing much the same thing, but at 210 mph. Same deal - pretty low drag car, but too much lift/instability at high speeds........

That'll buff out .

The little trip rails on the roof maybe should've been taller?

Must've been a wild ride... wonder if there's any in-car footage.

It doesn't look to me like it's an issue of aerodynamic lift, but simply the wheels digging into the ground enough to "trip" it & start it rolling.

If my understanding's right, instead of rolling when sideways, it would have lifted up off the ground first, once sideways. I don't see any lifting in that video - just rolling. If you can find the video of that RX-7 at Bonneville, I think that one lifed off, THEN did the somersaults, etc.

EDIT: Just remembered, I think the rules actually specify 3/4" high. That's another thing I thought was odd - not 1/2", not 7/8", but 3/4".

When the arse lifts up, the nose digs in, it's a lever.

People mock rear wings on FWD cars all the time, but if balanced up with the front down-force they can play a role in high speed handling/safety.

Maybe this old Lambo below holds a clue.

Lamborghini Countach - Front Spoiler - Red - Front Angle
http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-jk...gle-low-st.jpg

http://ekhatch.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/radotc.jpg

This time attach Scion has seen some success too with it's front wing.

Is that Insight front drive or converted to rear wheel drive? It almost looks like the front tires had too much bite and the back end drove around the front.

That Scion pic above is front wheel drive and needed that front wing to keep as much pressure on the tires through turns. If I remember correctly it was having a lot of trouble starting into the turns (under steer?)

The other +200-mph Honda with much better aero...
 

A new speed record, 238.22 mph from a Hondata CRX. H/Blown Fuel Comp Coupe class. An allowed altered nose but no change on the width or 'contour' (as in the rule book).

http://www.hondata.com/images/bonnev..._full_size.jpg


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEvOcIDH1yo

One thing I didn't really take into consideration in my previous remarks is that there might have been some lift or aerodynamic instability that CAUSED the skid to start. So even though I don't think the roll was a result of the roof rails failing to spoil lift while the car was sideways, the whole thing may have started from some aero problem - - - - or something else. That stuff isn't always the easiest thing to figure out...

Another thread in another forum offers some more insight, that's right........I said insight.

180mph crash at El Mirage...in a Honda Insight, no less! - Pelican Parts Technical BBS

This looks like more of a Cp vs. Cg issue to me...

Although, I would guess the Cg is pretty far forward considering it's a front wheel drive car.

Short wheel based car, extremely light, no wings to create extra downforce, doing 200 mph....
No need to ask what can go wrong. Honestly, what can go right with those parameters?

It's 60/40 front rear. But there is so little weight in the back being all aluminum, add to that a much heavier front engine, minus a rear battery, with a narrower rear track. I would say it's a possible contributing factor. Not saying it couldn't or wouldn't happen in any other car.

stability
 

Regardless of what caused the yaw,there was no weather-vane built into the car.Once you're sideways,any number of things can happen.
A more seasoned driver might have instinctively gone for the parachute at the first awareness of yaw initiation to keep the back of the car behind the car.
Perhaps the SCTA will consider allowing tail fins for cars attempting certain velocities.
Jaray and Kamm both advocated fins for low-drag race cars.

If it's a 60/40 weight distribution front to back, it's possible they should have had more weight in the back. One time at Bonneville when I spun out and had to go to the special inspection they require after spin-outs, they recommended I be sure the gas tank is full so there's more weight in the back. Some guys in rear wheel drive cars try to put as much of the weight distribution in the back as they can for traction, but that's often not good because of the Cp/Cg issue. However, too much weight in the front is apparently bad too, because losing traction on the back causes just as much trouble.

As far as fins, they would certainly help, but I think they're only allowed in the more modified classes like streamliner & I believe, lakester.

Deploying the parachute at the first sign of instability is recommended, but it ends the run, too. So a lot of guys like to think they can "steer out of it", but by the time it's clear they can't, oftentimes it's too late - by the time the 'chute opens, the car's already going backwards. Maybe more experienced drivers can tell sooner whether they can "save it" or not, but in a couple videos I saw, the spin goes faster than the lag in the parachute opening even if it's deployed early.