|
I actually don't think people get it.
I used to wait after Aerohead posted something that was completely wrong - wait for someone to say "No, that's not right", but what people would do was to instead thank him for being misled!
A classic example: Aerohead saying that on the current Porsche Cayenne, the airflow separates at the top of the windscreen and is separated right across the roof. Absolute garbage - which if accepted, is going to lead people astray in almost any aerodynamic car modification that they might try to subsequently think-through on a squareback car.
And there are so many of his posts like that...
When I first came here, I couldn't believe some of the weird things people believed about car aero. And what really gobsmacked me was that they were said with an air of absolute certainty. I knew they couldn't have come from any formal references (textbooks or SAE papers) so I started to look at where they did come from. In nearly every case, they came from what Aerohead was spouting.
I initially tried correcting him (eg look at the Tesla paper on wheel design and don't keep saying that full wheel covers are always best for low drag), but instead of gratefully updating his knowledge, he just poured shXX on Tesla! I couldn't believe it! Then I realised Aerohead isn't really interested in getting correct information out to other posters; he's interested in repeating - ad nauseum - his old misunderstandings.
But as I often say - don't believe me! Go and read the Tesla paper for yourself. Go and put some tufts on a Cayenne. Read some good aero books - like the one this thread was originally about.
As Vman455 has found, as soon as you start looking at the references Aerohead quotes, reading some aero texts and doing some testing, you will quickly find out for yourself that Aerohead writes a great deal of misleading rubbish.
|