@niky,
Thanks for the good link. However, since the results are within any reasonable fudge factor, I would say that the differences were negligable.
However, that does raise questions about the dimples used. As a thin film, the dimples would have been quite shallow, and quite likely very equally spaced. Not so with the MythBusters application; leaving all sorts of variables. However, since there results were highly significant, their test is the one that needs further study, rather than dismissal.
Further, A-B-A testing is questionable because of such little difference between that and A-B. Why not A-B-A-B..... to infinity? Would that help? At what point do we say that the improvement is real? Or even good enough?
@MetroMPG,
Please note that the test results were very significant. They were not minimal. Therefore, the small details you mentioned would not likely make any significant difference. Actually, what we can really say is that they got real results that were significant.
9% is nothing to disregard.
What still takes me by surprise is that no one seems to notice that the air on the surface of a moving object is what creates drag. Therefore it is reasonable that breaking that up would decrease the drag of attached air. Let's discuss the basics first.