ideas for kammback on my '93 Lumina

[Regenerit]

Also, a side note: it almost seems like if the car were reversed such that my rear was my front and my front my rear, it would be a lot closer to a tear drop which means that i would theoretically get better fuel economy....

[Sven7]

If I'm interpreting Aerohead's stuff right, you could see a 20% fuel economy increase with a well-made Kammback.
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ial-12986.html

Based on the fact that the rear of your cabin hits near 20% of the template, and the end of the kammback will hit about 40%.

zero------ Cd 0.488
10 %----- Cd 0.375
20 %----- Cd 0.299
30 %----- Cd 0.240
40 %----- Cd 0.194
50 %----- Cd 0.162
60 %----- Cd 0.135
70 %----- Cd 0.125
80 %----- Cd 0.118
90 %----- Cd 0.118
100 %---- Cd 0.115

.299/.194=~1.54, or 54% drag reduction... right? Half that for fuel economy increase. Phil let me know if I'm doing this wrong

Even if that equation is backward you should still see 4mpg. Start to drive more economically and you could see 30mpg tanks. After all 20mpg on an auto trans is not the best starting point

Last (I promise haha), you might consider doing a build thread for the car to consolidate all this info and the grille block stuff, etc. into one place.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Regenerit

Also, a side note: it almost seems like if the car were reversed such that my rear was my front and my front my rear, it would be a lot closer to a tear drop which means that i would theoretically get better fuel economy....

Carl Breer of Chrysler commissioned a wind tunnel examination which demonstrated that most cars of the day would perform better backwards.As a promotion stunt leading up to the introduction of the 1934 Chrysler Airflow,a DeSoto was reconfigured with its body on backwards, and driving coast to coast, attempting to educate the public about aerodynamic streamlining.
And yes,many cars today would be more efficient if driven this way.