Which mass produced car is closest to a teardrop shape ?

[Daveedo]

Originally Posted by bryn

my van is only .30 stock .cd according to gm. I think bluebook value is down to about $800, with all plastic body pannels rust won't be a problem. with a engine/trans swap mpg could be pretty good. besides with seat belts for 7, car pooling is easy.

Hmmm...what would Red Green do? He'd get two, chop them in half and mate the two fronts together so they were back to back. If you did that what would the Cd and CDa be?

PS He actually did that in one show

[botsapper]

Daveedo - the corporate GM anteater models where too different (in the EV1 & Insight kind of way) for the buying public. These shapes were definitely aero inspired but the boxy trucky SUVs grew in popularity and soccer minivans were waning. There were ergonomic quirkiness and they did not have any performance or economy advantages compared to the class leaders.

As for your quandary about the body and any eco mods here are your requests how it might look. One has a conservative mod of just echoing the A-pillar frame & glass at the rear and modifying a new D pillar to accommodate the existing sliding door. The OEM wheelbase is kept intact.
The next one has the symmetric mirror-image concept. There are rear lighting mods and a longer wheelbase because of the midline at the C-pillar. It does have a Shinkansen feel about it. The project does have a lot of eco interest potential.

[Christ]

I like the 2nd one.. with sui-doors in the back, and some refinement of the C-pillar area. (It's a little too thick, but that's b/c of the window angles.)

Nice wheel choice LOL.

[Daveedo]

Cool!Thanks for the pics. Isn't 15 percent the limit for slope on the back for reducing drag? The mirror image one seems to be a bit steeper than that at first glance.

[instarx]

Originally Posted by lunarhighway

i think perhaps a worhty winner would be the 1970 citroen sm
0.26Cd ! and not to much frontal area by the looks of it it's got a smooth underside that slopes up gently... a true drop on wheels

Plus its hydraulic suspension lowers the body at speed. And you could still outrun terrorists with one wheel blown off (true).

[d0sitmatr]

sorry for awakening an old thread, but I was kind of surprised no one mentioned the 2nd gen Eagle Talon ?
I owned one for about a yr and it got considerably good mpg @ 33-34 hwy. with just a few basic aero mods I could see it achieving 40mpg pretty easily.

[Cd]

Originally Posted by d0sitmatr

sorry for awakening an old thread, but I was kind of surprised no one mentioned the 2nd gen Eagle Talon ?
I owned one for about a yr and it got considerably good mpg @ 33-34 hwy. with just a few basic aero mods I could see it achieving 40mpg pretty easily.

Motor Week magazine gave a Cd of .29 for that car " no matter how wide the tires ."
I've wondered if that was just b.s., since the tires are not hidden in any way.
This was still back in the days when car manufacturers still bragged about their Cd figures.

[d0sitmatr]

from what ive seen compared to a lot of other cars a .29 isnt all that bad, its on the lower side of average ?

but I could imagine just a few things like a 1.5 drop all around, some wheel covers, a lower front dam and maybe some ground effects (not the ricey kind, but a nice, clean aero effects, maybe a boat tail of some form (along with removal of the rear wing)

the biggest problem I could see was the gearing itself, 1st and 2nd are super short, and 3rd is quite tall in comparison. so just to get smooth shifts from 2nd to 3rd you have to take the RPM's higher than Id prefer.
but it wouldnt take much retooling to get it a little more even and make all the gears a little taller.
all in all, I honestly believe with just some minor aero mods alone it could see 40+mpg, and a retooling of the gearing could get it up to 50mpg.

[KamperBob]

I don't understand why 40 mpg isn't more common already. Without ANY aero mods, just driving habits, I've gotten 40 mpg from the following cars over the years. My first was an '86 Chevette loaded with camping gear for a long trip. And that 6yo rear drive puppy was closer to dead than new. My more recent 40+ achievers included '00 Prizm and '03 Spectra. All were 4dr models BTW which may be a plus in hindsight. Our 1995 Metro 2dr 3-cyl got 50 mpg (+2/-10) without any mods or any attention to driving for that matter. It was so consistent I thought the name was short for metronome.

Cheers
KB

[d0sitmatr]

the chevette was a surprisingly good economic car though, most especially for its time. I had a friend who didnt drive it very conservatively and still managed to pull high 30's hwy
and the prizm/toyo is rated for 37 hwy so 40 is way easy to achieve. I dont know enough about spectra's so I cant really say anything about those.

I think your right though, in most respects, any car that is rated for the mid 30's is pretty easy to achieve 40mpg with a few simple changes with the wheel nut mod alone