Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
* I gave you a 'glimpse' of a diffuser-less tail, and it's ramifications above, at 5). And Lawrence Livermore's tail sides were 'rigid' enough to 'hold' their geometry without deforming aero-elastically under load.
* As you continue your aerodynamic journey, you may come to reverse what it is you believe about the value of wheel skirts. All those Chinese cars are 'Paris Dressmaker' cars, not 'aerodynamic' cars, as is the Vision EQXX. When Daimler-Mercedes Cars gets serious about drag, you'll see them revisit their 1978 C-111- III technology. 'Skirts' are a component of 'wheel integration' and truly low-drag cannot exists without them.
* If a roofline is used solely for pressure recovery/drag reduction, it loses about 60% of it's potential, so, it's 'conditional.' You can see how crappy they are from Fachsenfeld's 1935 research in Stuttgart.
|
Well a cd of .17 and having no skirts and looking good is definitely a great engineering feat. You can’t deny how impressive the eqxx vision is
Light year zero said their skirts only add about 7 miles of range to a full battery. That’s barely anything. What are your thoughts on that? Don’t you think it should have a bigger impact?
And I’m not against wheel skirts. I use them when they can fit with my all season tires. I love the look of them and people ask questions and it gets attention in a good way with my Ioniq. It helps feed clean air to my cavity fins in the back too which makes them more effective. But they only seem to add about 1 extra mpg in the real world. Better than nothing, but a lot of effort to build and materials cost for a small gain is a bummer