Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtlethargic
Chaz's comments seem to contradict what I believe Aerohead has commented on before: that as long as the front end isn't too bad, the rear template aero stuff will work well. So, I plan on doing a 61 Ranchero and am wondering if I could get to 40, maybe even 50 mpg highway with a 1.6L Pinto engine and aero mods.
|
*The issue with radii would need a historical context.
*A 1960s car,without modification, would not qualify for Hucho's (or other's) caveat,that a mid-1980's production car would already have enough radius for attached flow past the windshield.
*In this adapted image from F.K.Schenkel,of 1977,you can see the enormous pressure spikes around the body,due to the body contour.
*There would be separation at the hood leading edge,then reattachment.This would rob the stream from critical energy needed later on the aft-body.
*Even with the 1963 Corvette Stingray,we never see a positive pressure on top of the body once we leave the windshield,but we do have semi-attached flow.
*With a mid-30s Jaray Combinationform,Cd 0.19,we have enough front rounding to prevent separation in the forebody,and also,enough elevational,and plan-form pressure recovery to produce positive pressure over rear.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the Chevelle had a cleanup at the nose (at least as good as the 1975 VW Golf/Rabbit) we'd be on the way.But it would cease to LOOK like a Chevelle.Maybe!
*So Chaz is correct due to the time frame in which the Chevy was produced.