Ford Torino Talladega V. Dodge Charger 500

[Aero426]

Just talking out loud here, a rear spoiler would certainly create some rear downforce, but increase drag slowing the car slightly.   The front spoiler would keep air out from under the car and would help it turn.   Because the front end is nailed down and turns, it would create a loose condition on the rear.   A slightly loose race car is a fast race car.

[WINGR]

Well spoken Doug, maybe that was their plan all along. 

Like I said they are the engineers.

Usually the spoilers are on the rear to give it more stability, correct? 

[hemigeno]

Usually the spoilers are on the rear to give it more stability, correct? 

Yep, that's what they're for.  I remember reading about what Doug mentioned, that the front scoop helped keep air out from under the car.  The same info also mentioned that the scoop increased front downforce, and I think it also mentioned that it created a wedge of air to help get the airstream up and over the hood.

In any event, they were able to create front downforce (i.e. negative lift, for the pocket protector crowd) with the big front spoiler.  Having all the downforce in front and comparably little in the rear makes for a white-knuckle ride.  Like Doug said, slightly loose is fast, but really loose usually means a DNF.  That's one of the reason you see the IIGen Charger oval-track cars all jacked up in the rear - it kept more air on the back end for downforce.  The beauty of the Daytona/Bird shape was that the nosecone's shape (when combined with the front chin spoiler) made for extremely high front downforce numbers that could be balanced nearly perfectly with the adjustable rear airfoil.  I think the rake of most race Daytonas was much lower in the rear for high-speed tracks because the rear wing made it unnecessary to "catch air" at the rear in the same fashion.

I'd have thought a small spoiler at the rear trunk lip of a C500 would have helped out quite a bit, but I'm sure they studied the numbers well enough to know what worked best.  Seeing as how they started working with rear spoilers on the '66 Chargers, Chrysler's engineers definitely didn't forget about them.  There had to have been either a performace reason for leaving them off, or maybe Big Bill France gave them a reason to leave them off - although if he let them play with front spoilers I don't see why he'd have barked about rears.

[Ghoste]

I seem to recall some tale about France going beserk when he first spotted a front spoiler under the Charger until the Chrysler engineers pointed out that he had one on his street car (a 68 or 69 Z28) and convincing him that it was a standard everyday car practice.

[Aero426]

I seem to recall some tale about France going beserk when he first spotted a front spoiler under the Charger until the Chrysler engineers pointed out that he had one on his street car (a 68 or 69 Z28) and convincing him that it was a standard everyday car practice.

That's a true story.   That was Billy France, not Big Bill.   When he questioned the front spoiler on the Charger, it was mentioned "well your Camaro over there has one." 

Also, I agree with Geno's assessment.    I ran the question by Greg Kwiatkowski the other night, and he admitted he had thought about it a lot.   His opinion was that with the front spoiler, the rake angle of the body, and the small ducktail built into the decklid, that they did get some benefit without a rear spoiler.   It's all about the total balance of the car.   

[WingCharger]

They made up for the lack of spoiler on the 500's with the Daytona.

[WINGR]

Thanks for the follow-up info. Doug and Gene, that is something that I have wondered about for awhile. No matter what, they are great cars and have forever staked their claim in Automobile and Nascar history. 

WINGR