Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
With respect to the SM,I think that Hucho would predict attachment down the centerline of the backlight,but attached longitudinal vortices on the C-pillars.Anything over 23-degrees (Hucho) [22-degrees(Mair)] would be considered a pseudo-Jaray 'fastback',notorious for vortices and their drag.
And it might take smoke to discern the vortices,as they would be 'flying' a bit above the bodywork and might not show with tufts.
|
Thanks for your comments, here, and elsewhere. I put the template over an SM image, and it is not until the very aft edge of the backlight that the angle goes to 24 degrees. At the top of the backlight frame, it is about 11 degrees. I could be off in both cases by a couple degrees. The SM actually rode a little nose-low, I think -- at least the picture I used seemed about like my old one. But clearly the backlight begins to drop away from the template at its forward edge.
I agree it would be interesting to see the whole back end tufted.
It would also be fun to reposition the self-levelling linkage, to raise the rear and lower the front. Makes me wish I still had the car. Somewhere there is probably a fully meshed SM model sitting in someone's CFD machine.
Regards, Ken
Oh, and no insult taken at all re your Nuna post. I enjoy all your posts.