[thedarave]

Yes, I've seen the other two threads. This is less related to that, and more related to the "whys" of the functionality. For this thread, lets make the following assumptions: Adam and Jamie of Mythbusters didn't screw anything major up in the science and testing and that some of their testing might hold merit. Dimpling has some affect on the aerodynamics. Adam and Jamie scaled a golf ball up to car size. (Use this third item to establish a baseline dimple size)

I am proposing that dimpling the whole vehicle might not work to our advantage. That dimpling starting at the furthest ranges of the Z and Y axis then working back to the rear of the vehicle is all that's actually required, and that any more than that might work against us. I am also proposing that there is an optimal dimple size for said construction, and that simply scaling up a golf ball might not be the optimum solution. However, investigating this phenomenon has many benefits to this community and should be explored. Currently "boat tails" cause a large extension to the rear of the vehicle. With the golf ball dimpling, it might be possible to lessen the distance and cost of the current home brew iterations. Unfortunately, creating something new like this, takes time and resources.

Now, with all that under advisement, how would we test this? Is this something that can even be done small/medium scale first? How does one figure out the "optimal" dimple size? Is there a mathematical representation for this somewhere? Any other stray thoughts?

Thanks for reading and not throwing bottles at the fence!