Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic
Yes, I agree. And when I got here in early 2011, the emphasis was on testing. Aerohead was part of that. He has done quite a bit of testing, including working at a wind tunnel. We usually did these tests on the road using a variety of measurement instrumentation. A few years ago, testing efforts fell off.
|
We must be seeing a different forum then. When I did my book, I asked people for examples of modifications that had been well-tested, so I could feature them. Lots of people contacted me but unfortunately I had to reject most of them because either:
- testing hadn't actually been carried out
- testing was done with poor methodologies (eg coastdown)
- their results were internally contradictory (eg claimed decrease in Cd didn't match actual increase in top speed)
As for Aerohead's wind tunnel testing, it was done in a such a tiny wind tunnel (with therefore such a huge blockage factor), I'd place zero credence on the results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic
|
I can't see anything there about throttle-stop testing, lift/downforce testing or surface panel pressure testing. Or eroding clay testing or even tufting!
Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic
I'd reject a too hard distinction between theory and empiricism. Theories are the result of empirical examination and can themselves be tested further. Darwin's theory is not an invention of his imagination. It was an empirical investigation testing somewhat different concepts. Science is not just an accumulation of measurements.
|
Who has said testing should replace theory? Not me, anyway. The actual argument is this: if test results do not match theory, then the theory (or mostly in Aerohead's case) the
application of it, is wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic
The aerodynamic qualities of the so-called template and similar low-drag bodies have been investigated empirically. The only controversy about them is whether they are appealing or practical as road cars.
|
That may be your belief; it is not mine. I agree that there is controversy about them in appeal and practicality as road cars, but I also have strong doubts about they way they are applied in developing modifications to existing cars - after all, what basically 99 per cent of people here are doing.