View Single Post
Old 02-29-2024, 12:11 PM   #824 (permalink)
aerohead
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,922
Thanks: 24,011
Thanked 7,230 Times in 4,656 Posts
' Cd 0.1716............................................ ......'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phase View Post
Well a cd of .17 and having no skirts and looking good is definitely a great engineering feat. You canít deny how impressive the eqxx vision is

Light year zero said their skirts only add about 7 miles of range to a full battery. Thatís barely anything. What are your thoughts on that? Donít you think it should have a bigger impact?

And Iím 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
The Vision EQXX is 'illegal', currently not fit for production in it's present state, due to it's A-pillars and mirrors. In order to bring the car into regulatory compliance would require sacrificing some of it's Cd 0.1716.
M-B had Cd 0.18, 27-years ago with their C-Class-sized F300 concept, so, NO, I'm not impressed. I am 'pleased' that they're willing to have a public conversation about 'aerodynamics.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lightyear has half-skirts.
One might imagine it's range with GM's 1987 Aero 2003A's full-skirt package, front and rear, and Cd 0.13.
Other than for air conditioning, it would have no need of a radiator inlet, as IZUZU Glider and Vision EQXX.
And as to Lightyear's 15 km rating, under what actual circumstances does that metric stand? How would I be required to drive that car in order to realize that value, and does it have anything at all to do with how I might choose to drive it? I don't drive on dynamometers. Your question is extremely contextual. Give me the context, and I'll try to be specific.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to your '1-mpg', it would only mean something to me if I actually knew what you had done to the car. Nothing can be discerned from your photographs. The FBI and CIA have software which could tease out dimensions from orthogonal projections, but I've no access to technology like that.
You've yet to build a tail. You have no 'advance-knowledge' ( a priori ) as to how it might perform, one way, or another. Skirts, no skirts.
The experts say to include them.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote