Best looking spoiler?

Home  \  Asian Imports  \  Best looking spoiler?

Ok, so I want to get a rear spoiler for my 98 prelude. I kinda have an idea on what I want, but I can't decide. I kinda like the stock spoiler (mine doesn't have one), but then its kinda plain, and I want something a little more unique that stands out more. What's everyone's opinion on what spoiler looks best on a 5th gen lude? Pics would be great.

posted by  Vlad

The stock one.

posted by  Oomba

This one isn't too rice, and it'll make the car look less "naked"

eBay Spoiler :thumbs: (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/97-98-99-00-01-PRELUDE-TECHNO-R-TYPE-II-SPO ILER-WING_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6755QQitemZ4580318673QQrdZ1)

posted by  chris_knows

That one is Rice-y but not too rice-y.

posted by  Spencer

Bra get off the crack that looks like ass :laughing:

posted by  99integra

You know you used ass and crack in the same sentence, right? :laughing: :laughing:

I don't think it looks too bad, better than a five foot high spoiler, and this one looked like it might be for performance... :doh:

posted by  chris_knows

I'd get the stock one...
http://store.streetbeatcustoms.com/honprel97fac.html

but i guess this doesnt look too bad if you want an OEM look but taller/more aggressive...
http://store.streetbeatcustoms.com/honprel97thr.html

posted by  thunderbird1100

aftermarket wings dont do anytihng
a wing is used for downforce under high speed. the little plastic ones dont give anytihng, and most people dont really dont have a need for the big ones
technically its unnecessary
that money can be put elsewhere
just what i would do
i have a spoiler on my car but its from the factory. I want to personally maybe take it off. bad visibility in the rearview

posted by  6000LE

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. :screwy:

posted by  Pythias

I can't believe this but I acually agree with you lol, stock spoiler is the best. :thumbs:

posted by  GreekWarrior

Stock or none :thumbs:

posted by  GonnaDie4TheGov

Be a brave man and bolt these onto your trunk:
http://www.ebodykit.com/data/photo/s_GTR_R34_highwing5.jpg

I suppose if you want to stand out from the crowd you'll realise that you can't please everybody.

posted by  fudge

Here you go

http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/9317/dsc003115fq.jpg

posted by  Oomba

i usually wouldn't say this but i do think the stock one on the prelude looks real nice. Most of the stock spolers these days i don't like but the prelude one is pretty good.

posted by  V-Tec

Of course the wings don't do anything at normal road speeds!! :screwy:

So, you're saying you wouldn't spend money on aesthetic improvements?
Do your neon lights add power?

posted by  windsonian

LMFAO :orglaugh: :orglaugh: :orglaugh:

posted by  Pythias

no they dont
as a matter of fact i gave them to my buddy Nissan_Altima because they look better in his car
In my case (3-speed auto) performance wont do anytihng so im gona work style
But in the case that my car was at a good performance level i would do some of the ricey things.

posted by  6000LE

if that car is fast, then whats wrong with addint a huge wing?
at least its matched to the color of the car not the big silver and black ones on alluminum posts

posted by  6000LE

Are you serious!??!
So, it's alright for you to do aesthetic mods because your car is slow, but this guy can't because his car has more performance potential.

So what you're saying is:
If your car is slow, you are allowed to make it look good.
If your car is not slow, you must spend your money making it faster, without improving the looks at all.

I think you need to re-think your argument.

posted by  windsonian

Thats an Integra type-r wing :laughing:

posted by  99integra

no offense to mike if you are reading this
BUT NISSAN ALTIMA HAS ALMOST NO PERFORMANCE POTENTIAL
it reminds me of the time my friend was "tuning" a hyundai elantra
and thats not what i said. i said
If your car has performance potential i would work that before style so you dont get called a ricer and have numbers to back up body works
if your car has no performance potential, make it stylish, or leave it alone
once again these are just my opinions

posted by  6000LE

All cars have performance potential.

posted by  hondaman

:ticking: .... are you including neons? J.P yes they all do.

posted by  Pythias

OK, so now you're saying that you're only a ricer if your car has potential, but you make aesthetic mods instead. If it's slow naturally, then you can rice it out as much as you want without being a ricer... Is this what you mean?

posted by  windsonian

it's supra spoiler. But close :thumbs:. The best wing is no wing. If it's not a factory spoiler then don't put it on. Shower door on the back of your ride = rice

posted by  jzxTT

Sorry for double post. I think what you're trying to say is that some cars don't have very good aftermarket support. But that doesn't mean that they have no potential. Don't quote me on this but I'm pretty sure a few nissan guys have swapped fwd sr20's in their altimas. And as far as making your car "pretty", you'll get called a ricer if you buy: altezza's, put 9ft. wing on your trunk, spinner hub-caps, "RACING" seat covers, APC anything, 7inch muffler, get the picture. Who cares what people say. If you want a 9 foot "custom" wooden spoiler and some 13" spinner hubs than do it. It's your car. And don't worry I don't think being called a "ricer" hurts too bad.

posted by  jzxTT

Its all a matter of opinion. I suppose if you want to do it then do it.

posted by  6000LE

no
but there are show cars, and sport cars. all depends what you wana do

posted by  6000LE

the old mini coopers?
old VW beetles?
i actually saw a chevy minivan beat a camaro in some vid
geo prizm?
they have potential..just not as much to make them fast.

posted by  6000LE

Read your quote above ... it says in the first instance, don't put aesthetic mods on your car unless you have performance numbers to support them.

Then it says, if you can't make your car fast, do aesthetic mods.

Can you not see the contradiction here?

posted by  windsonian

... and they all have the potential to be made fast, just not the potential to be made fast easily or cheaply.

posted by  windsonian

and the last line reads that "these are just my opinions"

posted by  6000LE

There is plenty of room to get your point across in ONE post.

posted by  jzxTT

i know :)

posted by  6000LE

But my whole point is that "your opinions" contradict themselves. I'm not saying whether aesthetic mods are good or bad (I quite like the idea of both, so I choose to sit on the fence on this debate), but I don't say "aesthetics are bad if you've got a slow car that can be fast cheaply, but they're good on a slow car that can't be fast cheaply"


And yes, sorry about the double post, but I just hit quote to reply to the quote I was replying to, rather than edit my post, copy and paste the quote and fill in the [/Quote] codes around it.... sorry if it wasted too much of your time reading it. I know it wasn't necessary, and I knew it at the time, but it saved me some effort, and hey... I'm lazy.

[EDIT]:

......?? interesting.....

posted by  windsonian

No offense.

But for your Neon to keep up with a stock 3.5 5spd Altima SE. You'll need at least a turbo kit :laughing:

While your neon runs 16s the Altima 3.5 SE will do mid-high 14s.

Again, STOCK 3.5 Altima SE... :laughing:

posted by  thunderbird1100

he has a 1999 Altima GXE

posted by  6000LE

I know what he has, I can read. You said...

"BUT NISSAN ALTIMA HAS ALMOST NO PERFORMANCE POTENTIAL"

And I rebuttled by saying you think your neon has potential but is already over a second and half slower i nthe 1/4 mile over a STOCK 3.5 SE Altima. Is the new 3.5 SE Altima not an Altima?

Plus a manual GXE 2.4 would probably just as quick as your 3spd auto Neon.

posted by  thunderbird1100

i was talking about mike's car

posted by  6000LE

It would if you put "HIS" or somethinhg to that effect in there. Because what you said was definatley a generalization.

His 99 Altima has as much performance potential as your neon. If not more. Afterall he has a KA24DE.

posted by  thunderbird1100

I don't even need a manual trans... If my trans wouldnt be breaking down (meaning if we had this conversation about 6 months ago), I think I'd be able to at least stay parallel with you. However, we'd look like 2 of the biggest morons racing 2 stock, 4 door, automatic cars. :laughing:

PS: My dad's Altima will destroy you so not all of Nissan stocks are that slow.

posted by  Nissan_Altima

Any new stock Nissan could beat his Neon, except the 1.8 Sentra and four cylinder Frontier.

posted by  thunderbird1100

wings do do something, just not the huge shopping cart ones. they disrupt the lift that can be produced by the cars body.

posted by  bebopin64

For a wing to work effectively it must be tested on a wind tunnel during it's design process.

posted by  fudge

ya im not saying they all help im just saying that they all arent useless

posted by  bebopin64

I just want a wing so my car will stand out a bit more, and I think most cars, including mine, look better with one. I don't want it to increase downforce or whatever. I would get the stock one, but I want something more unique and aggressive looking. This one looks alright:
http://store.streetbeatcustoms.com/honprel97thr.html

but i'm still not sure...anyone got any others?

posted by  Vlad

that wing looks good i think

posted by  bebopin64

Looks good Vlad. Just dont put it on until its painted for the love of god.

posted by  Oomba

That's the one I posted! Woohoo.

posted by  thunderbird1100

I know its the one you posted. Thats how I got the link. Thanks for posting it by the way.

I'm not stupid enough to put it on before its painted...

posted by  Vlad

RUBBISH!!!!

You know the Boeing 777 ... it was designed on computers, not in wind tunnels. And I think the wings on that would be a little more important than the wing on a car.

Testing in a wind tunnel will show how effective the wing will be, thus aiding in design. But it doesn't NEED to be tested in a wind tunnel for effective operation.

posted by  windsonian

In most cases at least with the more important things, like the wings on the new Boeing will be tested in the wind tunnel, because computers are not yet advanced enough to be able to predict a 100% accurate simulation of what will happen...

posted by  chris_knows

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/background.html

Of course computers are... ever heard or CFD? What about FEA?

[EDIT]: I just realised what I claimed there. Obviously they aren't accurate enough for 100% of the time, but then again, neither's a wind tunnel model. What I meant is that they can be accurate enough for design purposes.

posted by  windsonian

Yeah but if you don't test it how would you know how good it is?

posted by  fudge

Ok... firstly, you didn't say you need to test it to see how good it is, you said you need to test it for it to work ... NOT TRUE.

... but we'll move on, I know what you were getting at.

Secondly: You do need to test it at some point ... but in the case of a car wing, if it was designed thoroughly enough, the testing could take place on the car.

In the case of the Aeroplane wing, yes there'd still be testing to verify the design, because let's face it if the design is bad, lot's of people die. However, the testing wouldn't necessarily need to be used as part of the design phase. The old planes (747 etc..) would have had model after model built and tested ... the computer designed ones may only need 1 model if all goes according to plan with the verification.

posted by  windsonian

Your Message