View Single Post
Old 08-18-2008, 05:12 PM   #18 (permalink)
MetroMPG
Captain Slow
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 6,314

Blackfly - '98 Metro
90 day: 78.69 mpg (US)

ForkenSwift - '92 Metro EV
90 day: 128.28 mpg (US)
Reviving this thread...

I've finally got some photos/video of tuft testing my dad's Corolla with & without the Airtabs.

I'll just say that the difference is pretty dramatic. It's not a case of "well, it looks like there might be a little less turbulence on the rear window" - it's plain as day that the tufts on the glass & trunk lid behave themselves much better with the airtabs on the roof.

SO... why then didn't they appear to make any difference to MPG? Can the energy going into vortex creation be largely cancelling out their aerodynamic benefits apparently seen on the rear glass?

It's worth repeating that I did think there was an audible difference with the VG's on the roof (louder). If I had something I could use to easily measure noise levels, I'd test that too.

Will post the pictures later.
__________________
Latest test: Airtabs on a minivan, A-B-A
Latest mod project:
designing/building front wheel skirts (Geo Metro)





www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote