View Single Post
Old 03-15-2008, 11:08 PM   #9 (permalink)
Awesomeness personified
AndrewJ's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbia, MO
Posts: 642

Harold - '94 Honda Civic CX
90 day: 54.51 mpg (US)

Margot - '08 Surly Big Dummy
Thanks: 0
Thanked 28 Times in 18 Posts
Send a message via AIM to AndrewJ
Originally Posted by Who View Post
I always wonder how many manufacturers even strive for aerodynamics. Lexus sure does. Hyundai sure doesn't
Well, while I get your jist, you have to look at the motivations of your two examples. Lexus wants a very low interior noise level, which is helped massively by a lower Cd. Hyundai, on the other hand, just wants to capitalize on the latest styling trends to help move some cars.

But, back to the point, there are some rather strange choices in aerodynamics among different auto companies.

For example, the 1st gen Ford Taurus, it had a Cd of only .29 (.28 for the Mercury Sable) even though keeping the low Cd provided no tangible benefit in the marketplace. If you remember, the sleek-styling was a selling point, and we all know that "sleek-styling" doesn't have to mean a low Cd.
Even with the Taurus's lower aerodynamic drag it's mileage was only 2mpg or 10% better than the Ford LTD it replaced (21mpg vs 19mpg), even with smaller engines and an extra gear in the transmission. So, we can gather that it's increased FE wasn't an enormous selling point.
"I got 350 heads on a 305 engine. I get 10 miles to the gallon. I ain't got no good intentions." - The Drive By Truckers.

  Reply With Quote