Jersey Tom wrote:More advanced than 'most actual companies' ? What does that even mean? I'm sure its 'more advanced' than CFD McDonalds does.. but I'd imagine its nowhere near that of a Formula 1 team.
CFD is nice but it isn't hard test data.
How consistent are your drivers? Are they able to put down competitive laps and be within 0.2 sec of each other?
How many tenths faster do you run with aero package than without, in autocross? Is the difference definite given the driver consistency?
Does it make any difference in skidpad times?
How much slower does it make an acceleration run?
That's the only stuff I'd be interested in. Or if not that, what validation and verification have you performed? In a rolling wind tunnel, how well would your CFD match to real life? In the straight ahead position? Does it capture yaw sensitivity? Pitch sensitivity?
What uni are you with? I'll likely be around at competition in Detroit.
Bring enough wheels this time
The wings advantage is as JT pointed out is greatly dependent on how good your drivers are and what course they decide to setup.
Personally I would like to see them set up more realistic racing courses I don't think there is anybody with an open wheel car in SCCA who wouldn't run a wing if given the chance. The mickey mouse course they use at comp are not really representative of what you see at an autoX