Quote:
Originally Posted by ChazInMT
I think it lines up great with the 2nd Gen Aero Template.
Bigger Version
Here is a comparison of the old template (Green Line) vs the new one (Red). Aerohead figured out a shorter faster template might be a smidge better if you read what he wrote in the Aerodynamic Streamlining Template: Part C thread.
Bigger Version
Here is a link to the new template outline alone in HiRes if you wanna grab it. Made it Just4U. 
Oh. And you still can scale the thing if you want, and you're right, you'll probably have attached flow when you do scale it, but it won't be an optimized shape.
The template is a guide to optimize the shape of an Entire Vehicle, because when you scale it to fit, the top line of the rear portion automatically becomes the ideal shape the air likes to see for the least overall resistance taking into account the form drag and the skin drag.
And most cars are flat on top for 4-6 feet across, making them something of a wide 2D shape, so you may wanna think about that before you muddy the waters with a 2D vs 3D thing. If you want to build a trike or bike, then you may not be able to make much use of the template because they are taller than they are wide.
Finally, 0.13 is the ideal Cd for a vehicle following the template.
Found it here |
Yes,the 2nd-gen 'Template' attempts to rectify 'discrepancies' found when fitting the 1st-gen AST when considering cars like Insight,Prius,XL1.
The difference is subtle but also significant when considering forms.