View Single Post
Old 04-30-2009, 08:45 AM   #12 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

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

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

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

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

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,556 Times in 2,218 Posts
While I appreciate the thought going into the flaps, it violates the K.I.S.S. principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid (no offense!).

I don't know what sort of traffic conditions you have to deal with, but especially if I'm in busy multi-lane conditions, I want to be able to glance around at any time, with no notice, without reaching for a button or something.

I'm recalling the PNGV cars and how Chrysler's version had a more vertical visibility panel. It appears to me the flow is designed to skip over the rear window and reattach on the decklid. The car had impressively low Cd; right in there with the Ford and GM models, so that break in the flow must not have had negative effects on drag.



Also I wonder why you are proceeding on Version II before knowing how Version I actually performs, i.e. "I wonder if the angle is too steep and flow is separating". A yarn test on VI would answer that.

Lastly, there is no gaslog data for us to peruse. There is no way of telling how effective this device is for improving fe at all.

Anyhoo, feel free to proceed and let us know how it works out.

Last edited by Frank Lee; 05-01-2009 at 03:15 AM.. Reason: a pic is worth 1,000 words
  Reply With Quote