Cd or weight?

[kach22i]

In my Porsche while entering the highway on a cloverleaf curve I took the entry ramp extra fast to shake a Fox body Mustang off my tail.

Much to my amazement he stuck to me like glue.

I got a better view of the car and driver as he passed me on the highway.

He had some serious mod's to the car and knew how to drive.

Color me impressed.

Decades earlier a Ford Escort driven by an aggressive young woman (I swear she was going to hit me a couple of times) tried to follow me into a sweeping curve at 15 mile (Maple) and Telegraph, a curve I drove every day into work at "speed" and at my Diesel Golf's limits.

Well, I swept though the turn as she tried to mimic me.

It didn't end well.

She jumped the curb and totally messed up her front end.

I was laughing, school of hard knocks calling.

Back on topic...............seems aircraft have other issues to contend with.

What is the relation between drag and weight?
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q...rag-and-weight

Say we compare two A320s, the one heavier by a factor of 1.3. Of course the heavier one will fly with a higher angle of attack, because it needs more lift.

I suppose hull shape and ship weight will have additional factors to consider as well.

More weight on a road vehicle could mean more tire deformation, more contact area, more rolling resistance.

Ever see an overloaded pickup truck?

Nose up and tail dragging would increase Cd one would think (angle of attack).

[kach22i]

Okay, we have a real world example to discuss.


Random TRANSPORTATION pictures - Page 2399 - Pelican Parts Forums


I'm not sure where to start, but the scientist in me says don't guess - test!

[Stubby79]

I like the look of that. I’d do it, if it weren’t illegal to drive on the road like that around here.

[Grant-53]

In the early 1980s I drove a used '72 Cadillac hearse. It weighed 6000 lbs and with the 472 cid engine I got 10 mpg city/13 hwy. How does that compare with a pickup truck from the same era?

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by Stubby79

I like the look of that.

https://www.classicdriver.com/sites/...ch-cars-01.jpg
Needs some finish work on the rough edges. I'd do two curved arcs from the A to C-pillars.

[Stubby79]

Yes...that would look good. And save it from my first thought...folding in half when it hit's it's first big bump!

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by kach22i

Okay, we have a real world example to discuss.

I think it would be better to go with something like this:

[Charlie Cheap]

Originally Posted by Grant-53

In the early 1980s I drove a used '72 Cadillac hearse. It weighed 6000 lbs and with the 472 cid engine I got 10 mpg city/13 hwy. How does that compare with a pickup truck from the same era?

In the 70's pickups got horrible MPG, mostly due to rear axle gears and cheap gas. Your Caddy was probably about the same. In 73 the crunch hit and guys started changing rear axles, which dropped pulling capacity but helped MPG. At $1.50 a gallon after .50 cents, it made a difference. I was still in my Hot Rod stage of life but had enough common sense to buy a Ford Falcon Ranchero with a 6-cylinder and automatic for my daily driver. Later I got a 55 Plymouth with a flathead 6 and auto for work commuting. With a major tune-up it got OK MPG at 15 to 17, which for the mid 70's was not bad in traffic. No air conditioning, no cruise, no power anything, but the flathead was bullet proof dependable.

[aerohead]

My grandfather's '62 Dodge D-100, with the 225-CID slant-six,( a decade early ) with 3-spd 1:1 trans, and 4:56 rear diff was good for 50-mph, and 11-mpg.
A nearly- perfect bolt-in of a 1977 Dodge D-100 4-spd OD, and 3:50 rear axle allowed for 16-mpg at 60-mph.
Some streamlining pushed it to 21.5 mpg at 60 mph, and 91-mph indicated top speed.

[freebeard]

My grandfather's '62 Dodge D-100, with the 225-CID slant-six,( a decade early ) with 3-spd 1:1 trans, and 4:56 rear diff was good for 50-mph, and 11-mpg.

Ha! My Clark Cortez got 10mpg with the 225-CID six and a side-draft Carter carburetor.