|
I was impressed by it at first, but it really was a very questionable result.
Mythbusters is fine entertainment, but that's what it is first and foremost, entertainment.
The Golf Ball test was done in uncontrolled conditions, with merely A and B testing. Not A-B-A. Meaning to say, while they did all they could to ensure the runs were conducted in as similar a manner as possible, they did not control for weather... wind speed, temperature, humidity... or car condition (even if the car starts "warm" or "cold" both times, the fact that it already ran earlier in the day is already a big factor...)... which they could have done simply by performing an A-B-A test to ensure the results for the second set of tests were truly representative.
This is because they overcomplicated the making of the dimples. The extra layer of clay exaggerates the effects of shut-lines and gaps. By the end of the layering, it wasn't a very aerodynamic car. And the clay made it impossible to do both tests within reasonable time of each other.
I would have gone with making dimpled body panels. Swappable dimpled body panels, with two cars. Say Fieros. Run both side by side, one dimpled, the other not... swap panels... repeat. Swap panels again, repeat again. Or produce fiberglass panels that fit snugly over the stock, dimpled panels on the Taurus.
A-B tests prove nothing. I've seen A-B tests "prove" everything from HHO injection to air bleed devices to fuel magnets. Easiest way to tell if the "modification" is real or bogus? take it off and test again.
|