Quote:
Originally Posted by Vekke
I find it really not nice how you try to sell your book here by saying things you say on the video.
Basic manners should mean something. If you claim something to be not true then you should show the results. I did not see any results showing otherwise in your video.
Sure those new cars have low drag figures, but is it due to to the roof taper or whole car being shaped in the windtunnel to match manufacturers idea of that current car model is and looks or is it modeled to have the lowest drag coefficient? I bet you dont know that so you cannot assume nothing just by looking at some tufts tests you have done. You say you have easy method to measure the pressure coefficients at the wake. from those you migth be able to see something already can you show your test results here on all of those tuft tested cars?
- Sure the old car has low drag figure but its not lowest it can go. Cars drag coefficient does not tell nothing about the potential how low the drag coefficient could be if everything is done to get lowest drag.
Aeroheads template shows the shape which leads to lowest drag.
- I have understood there can be attached flow with even steeper curves, but the the lowest drag is achieved if you follow the template.
Julian I would appreciate rapid answer with pictures and measurements to point out your argument true.
Here is a link which you should also read. https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthre...uel-15251.html
I dont want to hear answers it can be found at the book. For me it seems you have created your own truth on many topics here which are not true this topic especially.
I hope the wind will be with you on this, but my hopes are not high. |
I would sell more books by agreeing with what everyone here says, rather than arguing against it. Pretty obvious.
In this, and the other posts you have made on this topic, you are not arguing against what I have actually said. So I'd better say it again. Note that I am talking about
how I have seen the template being used here in the last 12 months, not what it was originally intended to do (or anything else for that matter).
The template is claimed to allow you to:
- Show where there is separated and attached flow on existing cars
This is very much yes/no - is the flow attached or separated? The template definitely does not show this on cars.
- Guide the shape of rear extensions
Absolutely not. The best shape rear extension will depend on a whole lot of factors, and following a preset template is no guide at all to gaining the best outcome.
- Show how rear spoilers on sedans should be positioned and shaped
Completely wrong. This confusion shown by Aerohead when describing how rear spoilers work is based on his belief in the template (and how rear spoilers worked on old cars), and following that advice will give terrible outcomes on any modern sedan. (And in answer to your point - I have seen it stated here that the spoiler should reach up to the template line.)
- Allow the assessment of the ‘aerodynamic purity’ of cars
The idea that, if only car makers followed the template they would get so much better results, is complete rubbish. Therefore, overlaying a car and 'measuring it' against the template (to purportedly see how good the car is) is equal baloney. After all, why not pick one of the other five low drag shapes with which to do the comparison?
The template is just one of a bunch of different, low drag, theoretical shapes. If it were presented as that, then that would be quite correct, and I'd have no issues.
I don't know, maybe it started off like that - but it's certainly gone into crazy land since!