View Single Post
Old 02-09-2022, 06:37 PM   #5 (permalink)
JRMichler
Master EcoModder
 
JRMichler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Phillips, WI
Posts: 1,000

Nameless - '06 GMC Canyon
90 day: 37.45 mpg (US)

22 Maverick - '22 Ford Maverick XL
90 day: 46.92 mpg (US)
Thanks: 188
Thanked 453 Times in 279 Posts
I took photos of the underside. The first photo is under the front bumper looking to the rear.

There is no air dam, except for a spat in front of each front tire. The underside is belly panned from the front bumper back to the rear axle, with gaps for the front suspension and exhaust system. This truck is front wheel drive, and the hybrid does not have a four wheel drive option. Ford did not leave space for a drive shaft to the rear axle in this vehicle.

The next photo is under the rear bumper looking forward.

The belly pan stops at the rear axle. There is no rear diffuser underneath, just an open area. But that open area is above the belly pan, so does not have high velocity air hitting things. This is consistent with a figure from Aerodynamics of Road Vehicles by Hucho:

The largest drag reduction comes from belly pans extending from the front bumper back to the rear axle, with only minimal benefit from belly pans after the rear axle.

I do not intend to experiment with front air dams or belly pans on this truck. Ford did too good a job, and I see no opportunity to make a noticeable improvement in this area.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Mav Front Underneath.JPG
Views:	543
Size:	180.1 KB
ID:	31681   Click image for larger version

Name:	Mav Rear Underneath.JPG
Views:	540
Size:	173.7 KB
ID:	31682   Click image for larger version

Name:	Hucho Belly Pans.jpg
Views:	520
Size:	86.7 KB
ID:	31683  
__________________
06 Canyon: The vacuum gauge plus wheel covers helped increase summer 2015 mileage to 38.5 MPG, while summer 2016 mileage was 38.6 MPG without the wheel covers. Drove 33,021 miles 2016-2018 at 35.00 MPG.

22 Maverick: Summer 2022 burned 62.74 gallons in 3145.1 miles for 50.1 MPG.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JRMichler For This Useful Post:
aerohead (07-25-2022), redpoint5 (02-09-2022)