View Single Post
Old 06-02-2014, 07:26 AM   #40 (permalink)
oldtamiyaphile
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 452 Times in 319 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
Only the C3 was able to actually create downforce. The rest all created lift. Now the Corvette is no GTR (although Car and Driver rates the Vette #1, and GTR #5) it also isn't a Focus. I compared the 2009 model GTR to a 2009 model Corvette, because after the "Black" (or is it a V Spec? I forget what they name them) GTR came out, it started getting more and more downforce.
The reason Corvettes create lift is that in profile, they're basically an aerofoil.

Squared off cars don't have this problem.

Honda Quoted the 1981 City as having zero lift (written just under the blue car):



If you start with zero lift, you won't have to induce much drag to create the modest downforce that the GT-R has. That's part of it's genius, staying away from swoopy high lift curves.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	ctl_004_004.jpg
Views:	232
Size:	143.1 KB
ID:	15111  
__________________






  Reply With Quote