View Single Post
Old 09-15-2009, 03:39 AM   #22 (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 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by alohaspirit View Post
its a good way to improve aero but imho that money would be better spent towards something else (perhaps a better aero shell for the metro)
Actually I don't think it's a good way to improve aero.

It probably isn't necessary.

As we know, most of the action is towards the rear.

As long as it's attached up to the point of max x-section area, that's pretty much all it takes to make the air happy (yeah gross simplification but whatever).

Then there's the weirdness of looking through a windshield that gives you the impression of driving from the back seat. And the solar gain. And maybe fogging (it's 3x bigger).

Quote:
but there was no real scientific testing laid out there...
are ya sure?

Quote:
Here's a fact: To properly "lay back" a windshield, you have to chop the top. That means a reduction in frontal area, as well as a smoother rake to the windshield line. NOW do you think it would have an aero effect?
now yer throwin other stuff in there, no fair.
__________________



Last edited by Frank Lee; 09-15-2009 at 03:44 AM..
  Reply With Quote