View Single Post
Old 01-09-2012, 04:23 PM   #6 (permalink)
Diesel_Dave
Master EcoModder
 
Diesel_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,194

White Whale - '07 Dodge Ram 2500 ST Quad Cab 2wd, short bed
Team Cummins
90 day: 37.68 mpg (US)
Thanks: 112
Thanked 511 Times in 213 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ladogaboy View Post
And that is what I was thinking: Of course, all other things being equal, driving backwards would be less efficient. Lower gearing, more steering corrections, unnecessary and easily removed protrusions, etc.

However, if you quite literally reversed only the shell of the body, but the gearing, engine layout, etc. stayed the same, I'm almost certain the results would be different.
That's what they did (reversed the body). My point was that the shape of the car that they tested IS better forward vs backwards (note the gradual-sloping rear), however, in many cars that's not the case. It's not just a matter of making a blanket statement of forward is always best or backwards is always best--it depends on the car.
__________________
Diesel Dave

My version of energy storage is called "momentum".
My version of regenerative braking is called "bump starting".

1 Year Avg (Every Mile Traveled) = 47.8 mpg

BEST TANK: 2,009.6 mi on 35 gal (57.42 mpg): http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...5-a-26259.html


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Diesel_Dave For This Useful Post:
Ladogaboy (01-09-2012)