View Single Post
Old 12-08-2020, 10:44 PM   #73 (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
Your theory has already been debunked, but here it is again.

I don't have a white car so I took a panel I cut from a white car and added some chrome wrap, angled it towards the sun:



Measurements taken from the underside:

Optical:


IR:


So two degrees cooler than white. Now if my cars were white, I wouldn't bother, but bright green already shows a 10-15 degree improvement, and black and grey show up to 60 degrees.

We use chrome wrap to insulate buildings in hot conditions, car window foils are chrome etc. It really shouldn't be controversial. We actually WANT high reflectivity and low emmisivity:



If we can reflect 97% of the IR energy, we don't really have to worry about the emmisivity of the remaining 3%.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	test_setup.jpg
Views:	126
Size:	31.8 KB
ID:	29728   Click image for larger version

Name:	Copy of flir_20201209T101457.jpg
Views:	108
Size:	27.0 KB
ID:	29730   Click image for larger version

Name:	underside.jpg
Views:	117
Size:	41.3 KB
ID:	29731  
__________________






  Reply With Quote