[aerohead]

Originally Posted by kach22i

Using the reasoning above, one could then argue that Zone-1 and Zone-2 pressure zones illustrated below, destroy any chance of Zone-3 working at all, even though it conforms to the template.

Automobile 2 - Odds and Ends pictures by kach22i - Photobucket


Also using this reasoning, there is not a car or truck out there which can benefit even a little bit by attempting to make one part or another (typically the aft section) template friendly.

I cannot accept this as an all or nothing, black or white proposition. What has everyone in the forum been doing with all of their efforts then? And what of all the results and success stories?

And what of Zone-4?
Automobile 2 - Odds and Ends pictures by kach22i - Photobucket


I did a little more work on the "1.5 body" last night, scanned and did the overlays this morning. I do want to bring it "all together" in the end.
Industrial Design - Transportation pictures by kach22i - Photobucket

*It is the pressure gradient from the max camber point aft which is critical to the streamlining.
Automobile streamlining is about minimizing or eliminating separation at the rear of the car.The 'Template' cannot produce separation.
*The Insight has more 'nose' than it needs for low drag.If it had the Schor car front end it wouldn't suffer a drag increase at all.
*Like all cars,the Insight has an incomplete tail and there's still a 50% drag reduction possible for the car by extending it.
*If you're going to stitch components together to create a car that's fine,but you'll need to follow the hard and fast rules established long ago to maximize your performance.This is why I recommended Hoerner for one.He is an aerodynamacist and he's done complete body-discard and alternate-body install wind tunnel testing for real cars.He was also involved with the design and testing of Messerschmitt's fighter aircraft.You can see two examples of his work in the recent movie 'Red Tails.'