i disagree
FWD cars DO need down force on the rear in certain situations
about the only time tho would be if you have a car that somehow manages to get oversteer that can't be dialed out through other means, such as very high speed racing
just look at the top FWD road racers in the world, they all have rear wings (granted, they have front "wings" also)
now, if you are talking drag racing, i will mostly agree, you don't need a rear wing
unless you are breaking 10sec 1/4 miles, you shouldn't need a rear wing, the speeds just aren't high enough to create any bad lift on the car

 

the motor's design came from the stealth and yes alot of of the 90's up motors did come from the mits company.

 

The neon's DOHC was NOT DESIGNED IN ANYWAY BY MITSUBISHI!!! It was a joint venture between Chrysler and Lamborghini.

 

If the rear wing does nothing why does all the front wheel drive cars use them in racing?
It is to keep the rear end from slinging around on turns. No they don't quiet serve the same purpose as on a rear wheel drive (down force for rear wheel traction to plant horse power). But they do help to make the rear end stick to the roads better. Like in road coarses. but on a drag stip no they really don't serve no purpose. Just like ryrel stated.
Now the wings that are 2 feet off of the trunks aren't going to make that much of a difference and the ones that are double and triple stacked aren't going to make a difference unless the decks are at least a foot apart. and that s why i said a good wing

 

true, impossible tho it seems!
mitsu used the same block that they got from chrysler/dodge, but mitsu had nothin to do with designing it

the 420a (eagle talon, plymouth laser, mitsu eclipse) is an NA only motor, and it's REVERSED! (intake is on the back of the engine)
this car is how mitsu got the same block
the 4G63 block (the talon/laser/eclipse) TURBO motor has nothing in common with the 420a

 

First off, I dont give a **** who calls me a ricer.A while back this dumb girl was saying how her mustang would eat my neon up..etc..etc, I will race anyone so I planned it.She gets there in a 1990s grand prix.I asked wtf happened to the mustang, and thru her friends, found out the mustang was her daddys car...lmao So I lined up against this grand prix and just smoked it.Even after I smoked her she still persisted to call me a ricer.She was a dumb immature hoe, and I left it at that.Some people are very stupid..I suggest ignoring them.

As for the boxer bit.I really dont have much respect for boxers either.Especially since my hometown fighter Floyd Mayweather wont keep his mouth shut about mixed martial arts.Saying it's not a real sport and all that bull****.I would step into a full contact ring with him anytime.Throw a flying knee, lets see him punch his way outta that...lmao. Im gonna be cage-fighting locally here next year...I cant wait! It's funny to spar against boxers and start using kicks..there all like....wtf do I do now?....that's my 2 cents

 

Aerorat, a wing on 99.9% of vehicles on the road will serve no purpose other than cosmetic.

 

From chrysler web site

Currently used in the Neon and export PT Cruiser; used for a time in the Breeze and Stratus. Similar to the DOHC used in the Neon, Avenger/Sebring, Mitsubishi Eclipse, and Eagle Talon; seriously considered by BMW for the 3-series. Basis for the 1.8, the 2.4, and the 1.4/1.6 used in the Mini.
Designed by Mitsubishi and built and redefine by Chrysler, the 2.0 liter engine originally produced 132 horsepower, with 129 lb-ft of torque - at a time when most of its rivals failed to beat 100 horsepower. Even the Civic EX, with 125 horsepower, couldn't come close to the torque, despite variable valve timing. Gas mileage is good given the power and weight of the vehicles it is used in. (The exception, the current generation Neon, has an unfavorable gear ratio).

 

and that's the key, isn't it
road vehicle vs. race vehicle!
ding ding ding, we have a winner....

 

You would be surprized
Yes at 35 mph it isn't doing nothing
at 55 mph you are getting downforce