Lowering a vehicle affects many aspects related to suspension geometry and aerodynamics. I am trying to understand these phenomena better. Note that although my question sounds like an opinion, it's not really my intent. I just wanted to describe how I understand things so that people can point me to the flaws in my understanding and wrong assumptions.
We read in many places on the internet that one of the main reasons for lowering a car is to reduce its center of gravity with respect to the ground, thereby reducing the body roll. This sounds like a myth to me, because as you lower your vehicle, you are affecting the suspension geometry, lowering the roll center (RC) more than the center of gravity (CG). As the force that results in body roll must be translated to torque by multiplying the distance between the RC and the CG, when you increase this distance you increase body roll. In this sense, you are counterproductive by lowering the vehicle and actually increasing the body roll in an attempt to decrease it. (I am purposefully neglecting the stiffer springs used to make a vehicle lower simply because it's not a good justification for lowering: you could have used stiffer springs that maintain the same ride height, or perhaps better yet, a stiffer anti-sway bar).
My invalidation of the lower CG argument relies on the assumption that your roll center is not corrected by adapting the suspension geometry. But even assuming you made corrections with say control arm spacers, you would still have been better off simply raising the RC and not lowering the car. There is still no point in lowering the vehicle. The torque that produces the body roll is independent of the vehicle height w.r.t the ground and fully dependent on the distance between the RC and the CG.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgdpdtk3LSw
So again my question is why lowering race cars?
Another argument we see is aerodynamics. When thinking about aerodynamics I think of downforce. Downforce is generated by a higher pressure up top than down below. I cannot understand how lowering a vehicle is beneficial in this sense either. Assuming that your car has no angle (0 degrees between the underside plane and the road), and assuming that you don't have a rear diffuser, then you are certainly admitting a smaller amount of air through the front by decreasing the area facing the air on the front, but you are also reducing the volume underneath the car by the same factor ∆h (where ∆h is the amount by which the car was lowered). Following this reasoning, I don't see how the pressure underneath the vehicle could differ from the one above as a result of the lowering (it should still be atmospheric pressure in both places).
If you are using a rear diffuser, then I can see how reducing the volume underneath could help make the pressure even lower at the diffuser, thereby creating a downforce in the rear (since the increase in volume at the diffuser remains the same, while the total volume beneath the car decreases, so the proportion by which the diffuser lowers the air pressure by the Bernoulli principle is greater, and the downforce resulting from the difference of pressure between the top and bottom is increased).
One aerodynamic reason I CAN understand for lowering race cars is the reduction in the amount of air hitting the cross-section of the tires and wheel fenders, reducing the drag. But is this the only one or am I misunderstanding many things here?