Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Aerodynamics
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-16-2020, 07:15 PM   #81 (permalink)
Cyborg ECU
 
California98Civic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Coastal Southern California
Posts: 5,932

Black and Green - '98 Honda Civic DX Coupe
Team Honda
90 day: 66.42 mpg (US)

Black and Red - '00 Nashbar Custom built eBike
90 day: 3671.43 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,219
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,307 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
Actually, most of what happens here is speculation. Educated guesses, really.

Based on what I read here, I inflated my tires to max sidewall, and observed less speed lost in coasts and an increase in both short and long trip mpg. I could have ABA-ed it, I could have tried to eliminate variables to find exactly what improvement I was getting and studied the effects of even higher tire pressures, or I could have done what I did- accepted that it improved things and stuck with it.

A year after I got my current car, I put in a grille block. Again, based on reading here that it generally improved things. I found a greater amount of speed retained in coastdowns and come the next winter the increase in cabin heat allowed me to take my gloves off after 10 miles (down from 20) and my hat off after 20 miles instead of still having it on at the end (over 40).

Hardly science. Maybe more science than current public health policies employ, in that my actions were informed by science, but still not sctually scientific. And that's okay. It was actually a crappy grille block, stealthy, yes, but held in place with a couple wires and some duct tape. It came partly loose after it punched through its first snowbank, losing some of its aero benefit but probably enhancing its thermal benefit by being against the radiator. Don't know, don't care. The aero was still better than stock and the coolant temp never got higher than I was comfortable with, even in traffic in August.

Since I don't have a wind tunnel or a budget, I'm not going to do the legwork to tell the world exactly what needs to be done to a 2nd gen Honda Fit to improve its aerodynamics the most. Because no one cares- The 4th gen is already out. And that's where we here at Ecomodder are at: we've all got the cars we have, for whatever reasons. We're all looking for ways to get the most out of them, and unless someone has the exact same vehicle and has done extensive, actual scientific research on it, all anyone here has to offer are generalities. They're ugly, but they're still helpful.

I've maintained that the best ecomod, even more than the nut behind the wheel, is vehicle choice- but we all have needs and restrictions. I consider myself lucky that my circumstances let me buy a relatively fuel efficient vehicle that met my needs. I would have come across it in my search, but kudos to PaleMelanesian for showing the Fit's capabilities. Thanks to him it was already on my list when the time came to get a new car.

But arguing over aerodynamic ideals, while interesting and educational to laymen, are totally irrelevant to people who already own cars. My grille block could have been better. Someone else's boattail could have had a more ideal angle. But my grille block helped me, and an imperfect boattail is better than my stock hatchback. And that's what Ecomodder is about.
Exactly Fat Charlie (three words that sound like a 70s TV jingle).

Julian, it is not a reply to you. It is a reply to freebeard. And it is not a refutation of freebeard's quip, either. It's my own assertion, riffing on my experience of what goes on here.

__________________
See my car's mod & maintenance thread and my electric bicycle's thread for ongoing projects. I will rebuild Black and Green over decades as parts die, until it becomes a different car of roughly the same shape and color. My minimum fuel economy goal is 55 mpg while averaging posted speed limits. I generally top 60 mpg. See also my Honda manual transmission specs thread.



  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to California98Civic For This Useful Post:
freebeard (05-16-2020)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 05-16-2020, 07:45 PM   #82 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 3,869

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,611
Thanked 1,739 Times in 1,123 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianEdgar View Post
You'd rather do mods that provide results less effective than you could possibly achieve, because you just don't want to do some simple testing of alternatives? That seems pretty strange to me, but your choice.
Because while perfect is great, I already have a job. And a family, a house, and all sorts of other things that take a lot of my time. And with a couple fast and dirty mods and no testing, my best tank in this car was 56 mpg over 575.9 miles in a car rated 29 mpg combined. Maybe that tank could have hit 57 mpg if only I'd devoted more time to aero testing, but alas! I have other things to do with my time. I dropped my kids off at camp every day, got to work on time, picked the kids up, got to the grocery store, and did all sorts of other things.

I knew deep down that my car wasn't the ideal aerodynamic shape, but I tolerated it because it carried the family and groceries and other things, and with attentive driving and a couple mods that apparently are only worthy of scorn, I still got nearly double the EPA rating for the car.

Maybe if I'd put more time into testing I'd have gotten 57 mpg on that tank, I don't know.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Fat Charlie For This Useful Post:
California98Civic (05-16-2020)
Old 05-16-2020, 08:11 PM   #83 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 496
Thanks: 36
Thanked 528 Times in 291 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
Because while perfect is great, I already have a job. And a family, a house, and all sorts of other things that take a lot of my time. And with a couple fast and dirty mods and no testing, my best tank in this car was 56 mpg over 575.9 miles in a car rated 29 mpg combined. Maybe that tank could have hit 57 mpg if only I'd devoted more time to aero testing, but alas! I have other things to do with my time. I dropped my kids off at camp every day, got to work on time, picked the kids up, got to the grocery store, and did all sorts of other things.

I knew deep down that my car wasn't the ideal aerodynamic shape, but I tolerated it because it carried the family and groceries and other things, and with attentive driving and a couple mods that apparently are only worthy of scorn, I still got nearly double the EPA rating for the car.

Maybe if I'd put more time into testing I'd have gotten 57 mpg on that tank, I don't know.
Worthy of scorn? Yet again, people putting words in my mouth.

And you are quoting test results - but I thought testing was worthless? So how is mileage testing worthwhile, but literally a few hours of testing alternatives is not?

You make your own life priorities - and that's fine.

But I see people here wasting countless hours pursuing courses of action that some simple testing could have shown them wouldn't work. (Or would work, of course.)
__________________
Modifying the Aerodynamics of Your Road Car

"Your book is unique! It was high time that someone covered vehicle aerodynamics through the practical eyes of someone like you." - Dr Wolf-Heinrich Hucho, the founder of modern vehicle aerodynamics
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2020, 08:40 PM   #84 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 16,215
Thanks: 4,269
Thanked 5,455 Times in 4,346 Posts
Quote:
It is a reply to freebeard. And it is not a refutation of freebeard's quip, either.
Thanks for that, but really, it was Frank Zappa's quip.
__________________
.

Corporate needs to know, is this glass half empty or half full?

It's twice as big as it needs to be.

_________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2020, 09:30 PM   #85 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 3,869

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,611
Thanked 1,739 Times in 1,123 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianEdgar View Post
Worthy of scorn? Yet again, people putting words in my mouth.

And you are quoting test results...
My mods were not based on testing and were never evaluated by testing. Your views on testing led me to believe that your views on non-testing would be at least similar, if not stronger. I wasn't pretending to quote you, but was simply stating your position. I believe I was correct.

The numbers I cited were not test results at all, just logs. Calling them test results is quite the mischaracterization, Mr. Wordsinmymouth. I would expect an author to have a finer touch with the language. I based my mods on hearsay from this forum and was very happy with the results. I've left the grille block in and continually maintain my tire pressure, without ever having tested either, but I've gotten impressive results from them. In my position, it doesn't matter what percentage gain I may get in mileage from a mod, I just want a gain. What mileage do you get in your ride, or is it all just aero-theory? Don't get me wrong, the aero threads are very interesting to me, I do read them and I'm glad you've brought up the deficiencies in older testing. It's a great point and has been a great read.

But you do bring to my mind mind David Hobbs laughing at how the aerodynamicists had to be beside themselves when F1 cars turned faster lap times when racing with damage than they had in qualifying under perfect conditions. Because theory is great, but application matters more. I'm just in the application end of things.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2020, 09:55 PM   #86 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 496
Thanks: 36
Thanked 528 Times in 291 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
The numbers I cited were not test results at all, just logs. Calling them test results is quite the mischaracterization, Mr. Wordsinmymouth. I would expect an author to have a finer touch with the language.
I am sorry, but a mpg result is a 'test'. It is an assessment of an outcome, in this case a modification.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
I based my mods on hearsay from this forum and was very happy with the results. I've left the grille block in and continually maintain my tire pressure, without ever having tested either, but I've gotten impressive results from them. In my position, it doesn't matter what percentage gain I may get in mileage from a mod, I just want a gain.
That's great, but read some of the other threads about people who tried things that didn't work, and so needlessly wasted lots of time and effort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
What mileage do you get in your ride, or is it all just aero-theory? Don't get me wrong, the aero threads are very interesting to me, I do read them and I'm glad you've brought up the deficiencies in older testing. It's a great point and has been a great read.
I can get anything from 84 US mpg to 47 US mpg, depending on how I drive it. (And that's with about 80 per cent more power than a stock Insight. And I don't have IMA!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Charlie View Post
But you do bring to my mind mind David Hobbs laughing at how the aerodynamicists had to be beside themselves when F1 cars turned faster lap times when racing with damage than they had in qualifying under perfect conditions. Because theory is great, but application matters more. I'm just in the application end of things.
I am a bit puzzled by what you say. Nearly all that I write here is about practical applications - how you can do some tests in order to find out what works best on your car. It's certain other people on this group who endlessly talk about theory!
__________________
Modifying the Aerodynamics of Your Road Car

"Your book is unique! It was high time that someone covered vehicle aerodynamics through the practical eyes of someone like you." - Dr Wolf-Heinrich Hucho, the founder of modern vehicle aerodynamics

Last edited by JulianEdgar; 05-21-2020 at 08:02 PM.. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2020, 12:37 PM   #87 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,271
Thanks: 18,113
Thanked 5,994 Times in 3,649 Posts
separation edges

It appears that Fachsenfeld 'invented' the 'separation edge' (burst edge in Chrysler parlance) in the 1930s, at the FKFS.
Fachsenfeld also invented the 'splitter' and 'wing car,' 'ducted car,' the list goes on and on.
See: Aerodynamiks des Kraftfahrzeugs,' Baron Reinhard Koenig-Fachsenfeld, self-published,1951.

__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com