View Single Post
Old 12-02-2019, 04:04 AM   #115 (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 RedDevil View Post
Musk tweeted that 'with extreme effort' Cybertruck might hit a 0.30 Cd drag coefficient. 'which would be insane for a truck. requirest tweaking many small details'

Well, it takes more than small details to bring 0.48 down to 0.30.

But maybe the 0.48 model did not take this in account:

A completely flat underbody.
I don't understand why anyone thinks 0.48 is a thing. It's way better than any truck sold today, no cooling package, smooth underside and a kamm back. The styling isn't that different to my 84 Celica and that managed ~0.34 in the 80's - the 'all curves' 94 model only managed 0.32. Today's 'full size' Euro vans manage 0.30-0.36 with a completely square rear.

Hucho shows how much gain can be made just by moving an inch here and there, so unless the 0.48 model is from CAD data it's meaningless. All the model proved is that the roof peak isn't the aero nightmare that it first appears.
__________________






  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to oldtamiyaphile For This Useful Post:
aerohead (12-02-2019), RedDevil (12-02-2019)