Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Aerodynamics
Register Now
 Register Now

Now available from EcoModder: ScanGauge II fuel economy gauge.  Click for details.  

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-16-2012, 04:32 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Blacktree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 26

The SaTurd - '01 SL1
90 day: 34.37 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Speed Holes for MPG?

The "speed holes" are a fad in the tuner circles. Basically, they just cut a bunch of holes in the rear bumper. Supposedly, by ventilating the rear bumper, it reduces the aero drag.

Has anyone tried such a thing on an "ecomodded" car? And was there any measurable benefit? I have my doubts, but wanted to ask anyway.


(Support Ecomodder.com & get rid of these annoying ads!)      
 
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2012, 04:44 PM   #2 (permalink)
ooo ooo ooo ah ah ah
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 7,357

Blue - '93 Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 F150 XLT
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 636
Thanked 848 Times in 591 Posts
The premise is faulty and the execution is usually even worse.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2012, 05:38 PM   #3 (permalink)
PSmodder lurker
 
botsapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chino
Posts: 537
Thanks: 11
Thanked 154 Times in 93 Posts
...they make the car go faster...

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to botsapper For This Useful Post:
capnbass91 (01-16-2012)
Old 01-16-2012, 05:41 PM   #4 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orange Country, CA
Posts: 89

Leviticus - '97 Sebring Convertible JX
90 day: 21.33 mpg (US)

Fiesta - '012 Fiesta SE
90 day: 30.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 30
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I haven't seen "holes" but I've seen some cars like this

http://www.bodykitsuperstore.com/ima...nda/890179.jpg

If they want to make a difference on cd they should have boat tails. And if they're racing I'd love to see the faces on the other people who are racing them haha
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2012, 06:29 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 3,975
Thanks: 1,179
Thanked 807 Times in 469 Posts
holes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacktree View Post
The "speed holes" are a fad in the tuner circles. Basically, they just cut a bunch of holes in the rear bumper. Supposedly, by ventilating the rear bumper, it reduces the aero drag.

Has anyone tried such a thing on an "ecomodded" car? And was there any measurable benefit? I have my doubts, but wanted to ask anyway.
Opening holes in the rear bumper would increase the drag,not lower it.The bottom of the rear bumper should be close to the elevation of the underside of the car.You want it to pool dead air up where all the naughty bits are,allowing the air underneath to flow smoothly to the rear.
If you're having a problem with wheelspin at high speed,then perforating the rear would allow low base pressure of the wake to communicate forward under the car to provide downforce and traction.It would cost you speed though.
A rear spoiler would be better.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aerohead For This Useful Post:
Ryland (01-16-2012)
Old 01-16-2012, 08:59 PM   #6 (permalink)
V8 guy
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico
Posts: 632

Sub - '84 Suburban C10
Pickups

camaro - '85 Camaro Z28
Thanks: 8
Thanked 47 Times in 42 Posts
Assume anything the ricers do is wrong, no matter what the intended goal is.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L high compression diesel.
New engine is in and should be good for 29mpg highway.
1985 chevy camaro mostly stock.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to oil pan 4 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (01-17-2012), mcrews (01-17-2012)
Old 01-16-2012, 09:12 PM   #7 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Old Tele man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,351

Vibe - '09 Vibe Base (2ZR-FE)
90 day: 32.19 mpg (US)

Goldie Locks - '011 Cruze LTZ
90 day: 29.42 mpg (US)
Thanks: 56
Thanked 331 Times in 250 Posts
...a BENEFIT, albeit slight, would be LESS weight to haul around (wink,wink).
__________________
2011 Chevrolet Cruze LTZ 1.4LT 6A
2009 Pontiac Vibe 1.8L/SFI 4A
2004 Pontiac Vibe 1.8L/MFI 4A
2003 Ford Focus ZX5 2.0L/Zetec 4A

1971 Dodge Charger 318 3A
1970½ Plymouth AAR 'Cuda 340/6BBL 4M
1968 Dodge Charger 383 3A
1967 Plymouth Barracuda Formula S 383 4M
1965 Plymouth Barracuda Formula S 273 4M
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2012, 10:02 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Boise Idaho
Posts: 708
Thanks: 38
Thanked 63 Times in 53 Posts
I spent an afternoon with a guy who was head mechanic fora Le Mans team which won its class. He was backed by a BIG factory which spent a LOT of money on windtunnel testing.

Any air which gets under the car slows the car down by causing drag. More air, more drag. This is known by ANYONE who races, and front spoiler height is heavily regulated by every sanctioning body.

Once the air gets under the car, get it OUT at the back. Run the highest possible bumper with the most amount of the biggest holes.
Any amount of restriction in getting the air out the back of the car causes upforce and drag.

These rules apply to any car which can't run aero tunnels, which are defined to be any car with a ride height of over 2 inches (you can't make very effective tunnels with 2 inches of ride height.)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2012, 10:25 PM   #9 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: houston
Posts: 358

Black Knight - '94 Corolla
Team Toyota
90 day: 61.92 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 30 Times in 25 Posts
we are not talking about fully built race cars... we are talking about the punk ass ricers civics with fart cans.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2012, 11:16 PM   #10 (permalink)
I are aerodynamic kitteh!
 
t vago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Canton, OH
Posts: 625

2000 Fiat Dakota Quad Cab - '00 Dakota Quad Cab SLT
90 day: 18.33 mpg (US)

Dakota A-B-A HAI - '00 Dakota Quad Cab SLT
90 day: 19.38 mpg (US)
Thanks: 219
Thanked 150 Times in 86 Posts
I don't see any "racing holes" in this, or any other, Le Mans car I've looked at.



Le Mans cars can sometimes have too little aerodynamic drag. They turn into lifting surfaces, to the detrement of their drivers.



(Support Ecomodder.com & get rid of these annoying ads!)      
 
__________________

2000 Dodge Dakota Quad Cab
2002 Chrysler Sebring Convertible GTC with transplanted 3.5L LH engine
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com