Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
NIO -- 0.208
Mercedes-Benz EQS 450+ -- 0.200
Tesla Model -- 0.208
EQS 580 4MATIC i-- 0.209
Lucid Air -- 0.21.
As sedans converge. I wonder if that body style is more optimizable than coupe, CUV, or station wagon/sedan delivery.
1958 Merc Turnpike Cruiser, WRC race cars and big rig clearance lights nod approvingly.
|
Long ago, Hucho laid out the situation. In a low drag competition, the sedan/coupe would ultimately have the advantage, simply because of their minimum frontal area. They're the easiest platform from which to express the streamline half-body.
You get the flow attached, you keep it attached, and keep stretching the rear, reducing the cross-section while respecting sectional density, recovering pressure for every added millimeter, and when the air finally reaches the end of the car and breaks away, you're at the smallest wake and highest base pressure.
Historically though, some of the most 'efficient' car shapes developed were more 'CUV' than coupe/sedan. Like the Renault Vesta-II and Bionic Boxfish. For their 'length' these two deliver the lowest drag with the 'least' amount of car.
Coupes and sedans, presently waste a lot of body length on useless forebodies, which could become longer aft-bodies. Where the money's hidden.
Drag specifications and safety considerations compete for real estate.
The GAC.ENO 146 concept will be the one to watch. If something like it actually makes it to production, it will change the entire design calculus of the market.
The Paris Dressmakers have had a long, 95-year run. Perhaps it's time to reintroduce serious physics into the automotive equation. Something scientists have eluded to, at least since 1957.