|
Drag penalty for having a shallow rear window angle, and using spoiler to re-attach ?
I was wondering if you guys could post a chart showing the aero penalty for having to use a spoiler / trunk ( boot ) to re-attach the airflow when the rear window angle is not steep enough.
I have seen a couple of cars that had exceptional Cd figures despite having too shallow a curve to the rear window. The cars usually re-attach the air flow at the trunk/boot, or by using a spoiler. Thanks. |
Something like this truck here that had a .315 Cd.
http://highperformancetrucks.com/gal...serialNumber=2 I was surprised to see some - open bed - GM truck studies even dipping into the .20s ( .28 - .29 ) That's a lot of turbulent air flowing back there. |
Additional spoilers
I had to remove 15-images from the above post.I'm adding more here
http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...ntitled5-4.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...ntitled3-5.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...d2/06-2829.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...d2/06-2827.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...d2/06-2818.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...d2/06-2817.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...d2/06-2815.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...ad2/06-286.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...Untitled16.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...Untitled15.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...ntitled3-2.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...d2/06-1316.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...2/06-133-1.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...ad2/06-131.jpg http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...d2/Scan102.jpg |
Wow. That was an awesome post.
Thanks Aerohead ! |
0.315
Quote:
The original half-tonneau was only good for an 8% drag reduction on the C-10 pickup.We don't know for sure what its effect to the GMC was. We do know that the rear has reattached flow and that it captures a vortex in there.Here's the GMC (bottom) http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...ead2/5-175.jpg Here's a link to an article about the 1986 Pontiac Grand Prix 2+2 with its aeroback rear treatment for NASCAR slaying which illustrates one car's different 'attitude' to the air Homologation Hotness - 1986 Pontiac 2+2 | Hemmings Motor News |
So apparently, the drag was actually better on a rear window angle of 18* versus 12* ? ( .270 versus . 275 )
( From the Charger Daytona on the second image section ) Is that due to being just outside the template ? |
Daytona
Quote:
Chrysler referred to a 12-degree slope as a 'fastback,' but it includes zero curvature,is not incorporated into the cars body,and would cause an 'overshoot' jet,with the downwash actually interfering with the pressure recovery of the ideal contour,degrading the drag. These notchbacks have the most complex flow of all body types.They do provide nice rear vision,they're lighter,and the trunks are easy to use,hence their popularity in everyday driving. In Kamm's last official assignment for the Battelle Institute,he discarded the Audi's notchback,and went directly for his Fachsenfeld/Kamm signature K-form roof.http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/...ntitled7-2.jpg For lower drag,you'd just provide the elongation which Hucho has been pushing since the early 80s. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
As we all know, the stock '68 - '70 Charger had buttresses on the sides of the rear glass. http://i1170.photobucket.com/albums/...0/DSC00348.jpg |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com