View Single Post
Old 11-14-2020, 01:11 AM   #12 (permalink)
JulianEdgar
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,060
Thanks: 107
Thanked 1,605 Times in 1,136 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aardvarcus View Post
I see you are ignoring the part of my post about not using the AST-II template, which fits several of your example cars in your video per my overlay.
Why pick that one? Why not pick one of the five differently shaped ones shown in the video? No doubt we could find lots of cars that match those five too. So what does all that mean? Absolutely nothing. Using a template - any template - is just absurd. If only it were as simple as following a template....

Quote:
I do not understand your correlation of a photographed wake size to drag, as a photograph can not lend insight into how the airflows that become the wake are exerting pressure on the vehicle.
The angled extension reduces the wake size, as evidence by the dust. Typically, a reduced wake size = reduced drag. As you say that is not definitive, but it's a guide that is right most of the time. But by all means do some pressure testing x area and let us know the results - I don't have a monopoly on testing.

Quote:
I am aware of what is in your aero book, seeing as how I own a copy. Care to comment on why there are so many examples of modifications made to match "the template" in the DIY section?
I am not sure what you mean? None of my modifications in the book were done following a template (any template) and no template is mentioned (let alone lauded) in my description of any modifications in the book. That reflects the professional literature, where 'pure shapes' are given typically only a few pages in a full book - they're simply not that important in the real world. Reading only professional literature and doing my own testing, I'd never even heard of a template when I wrote the book. Had I done so, I would have spent some pages debunking the approach.

Basically, people here have been sucked-in over a long period of time by a completely fallacious approach, vehemently argued by someone who hasn't even read a professional aero textbook more recent than 1987.

As I said in the video, you need do only the most rudimentary testing on a variety of cars to see that much of what is said here about the template is just rubbish. It's no coincidence that those people here who have actually done that testing are also those that most question the validity of the template approach.
 
The Following User Says Thank You to JulianEdgar For This Useful Post:
MeteorGray (12-16-2020)