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

Reply  Post New Thread
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-29-2008, 12:24 PM   #21 (permalink)
Weight Reduction
ankit's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 313

4x4 - '06 Nissan Altima 2.5 Special Edition
90 day: 29.04 mpg (US)

Mom's Van - '99 Plymouth Voyager SE
90 day: 25.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to ankit
Originally Posted by .Cd View Post
When they say that the LS430 was tested at .25, do you think that they cheated a little ?
What about those big pimpin' open spoke wheels , huge side mirrors , and overall boxy shape ?

Do you think it actually has a .25 out the showroom door ?

They could say it had a .10 drag coefficient and no one would know the difference.
It's hard to believe that the difference between the Lexus and the Fusion is only .05 cd. I mean compare the two pictures, maybe the cd for the fusion is lower?


Live Simply So Others Can Simply Live
-Ed Begley Jr.
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

Old 03-29-2008, 12:38 PM   #22 (permalink)
Lurking footless halls
Silveredwings's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: northeast
Posts: 249

Dark Horse - '16 Ford Mustang GT convertible Premium

Gutless Beauty - '19 Toyota Corolla SE
Thanks: 3
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
If the same volume of air passes through a smaller cross-section or channel, the speed of that air will increase while passing through. It may be counter intuitive but the pressure at that same point will decrease (the Bernoulli Effect). Think of it as a venturi.

In the case of lowering an air dam and the ground, I don't think the volume will be the same as before lowering, since the gap is more of an orifice than a venturi. If the front of the car channels air under the car (unlike an air dam), however, the airspeed probably does increase and Darin has a good point Doesn't he always? .
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Clarke's Third Law
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 01:24 PM   #23 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 96

The Civic - '00 Honda Civic DX
Team Honda
90 day: 37.05 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
2000 Honda Civic Hatchback = .38
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 04:01 PM   #24 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
aerohead's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,038
Thanks: 24,130
Thanked 7,276 Times in 4,693 Posts
Bonneville Fusion

Originally Posted by MetroMPG View Post
OK, so it's a Bonneville car. But it's instructive about the basics what to do to improve aero:

- grille blocking
- smooth wheel covers
- narrower tires
- deleted mirrors
- deleted wipers
- lowering, in conjunction with...
- full undertray
- rear decklid extension (improved roof to trailing edge angle)
Sorry! I'm late to the party on this one,but I'll throw my two cents in.How fast did the car go? If its over 200-mph,compressibility issues would be looming up on the crew.As mentioned already,since this is a pure racing environment,safety may play as big a role as drag reduction and speed.The Fusion's roofline approximates an airfoil form,and the bellypan may be there to minimize static pressure under the car in an effort to forestall takeoff.

References state that air velocity under a car is always a fraction of road speed,therefore Bernoulli's theorem would come into play,dictating that pressure would have to be higher than the surrounding flow field.Not good! The smooth underbelly,acting like a traveling duct, would better allow low pressure from the wake,to be communicated under the car to help spoil the lift created by the more stagnant flow.

With respect to the airspeed under the car,as a function of ride height,my thought is that because of the plan radius of the front airdam,that air is being channeled around the car as much as the rulebook will allow,and while the air volume under the car will be an arithmaic function of the gap between salt and dam,the actual velocity remains a fixed fraction of groundspeed,as the dam doesn't aggressively funnel air under,but rather around.

The lowering also improves the fineness ratio,as well as the rear deck foil,both of which reduce drag,and the rear foils horizontal projection moves separation and lift completely behind and under the foil,a great boon to lift reduction and directional stability,creating a pressure weather-vane,if you will.

And I agree that the fences are also only for safety,should the car loose traction ( not an unusual event at Bonneville ),and yaw into a more wing-section attitude,sideways,as NASCAR vehicles which we may have all seen literally fly off the track.

Being a fuel-cell car,the nose can be sealed,and while not a great drag reducer for race cars ( they can be idealized for low drag ),again,it cuts off airflow "through" the car,for added stability and safety at high speed.

The 0.08 Cd reduction is really impressive and tailshadows Ford's active suspension contribution to their PROBE-IVand V concept car low drag numbers.Since the PROBE-V achieved Cd 0.137 in the 1980s,the Fusion's 0.21 doesn't carry the same wow-factor,buts its still instructive,and of great value to anyone who lives between the lines.Liked the article,thanks!
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2008, 04:14 PM   #25 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Auburn, NH
Posts: 451

Wicked Wanda - '99 VW Beetle GLS
90 day: 29.59 mpg (US)

Green Monster - '99 Ford Explorer Sport
90 day: 16.73 mpg (US)

Dad's Taxi - '99 Honda Odyssey EX
90 day: 24.23 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I had a '91 Subaru XT that had an adjustable air suspension. The car would drop about 1" at 50 MPH. Hmmmmm... The car was very aero for it's time: 0.29 Cd. Flush door handles.

I wonder how difficult it would be to add an air lift system. There are plenty out there for the low-rider crowd.

Anybody have any experience with air lift suspensions?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2009, 10:31 PM   #26 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
gascort's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 548

Gascort RIP - '93 Ford Escort Wagon
90 day: 43.01 mpg (US)

WifesCruze - '11 Chevrolet Cruze LT
90 day: 31.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 14
Thanked 25 Times in 16 Posts
air ride can be pretty tough; you need to be good at customization and welding.
Gasoline, Wind, Solar, Gravity Hybrid-to-be! http://www.scientificmethodfueleconomy.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2009, 08:29 PM   #27 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 204

- - '10 Toyota Prius III w/Navi
Thanks: 4
Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts
Originally Posted by ankit View Post
It's hard to believe that the difference between the Lexus and the Fusion is only .05 cd. I mean compare the two pictures, maybe the cd for the fusion is lower?

Hi All,

The picture on the first page is not the .25 Cd LS-430. There is one of the newer ones in my work parking lot most days. Its much more aero-looking, and even similar looking to the Fusion Aero. First off the grill work is allot smaller. And there are wheel dams, like on the Prius et al. Which tends to obviate the effect of the wheel spokes. At least a little bit. One of the more obvious aero features on the LS-430 is the rear trunk lid shape, which is scooped out and blends perfectly in with the surounding body work.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2009, 07:45 PM   #28 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
mcrews's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,523

The Q Sold - '02 Infiniti Q45 Sport
90 day: 23.08 mpg (US)

blackie - '14 nissan altima sv
Thanks: 2,203
Thanked 663 Times in 478 Posts
Originally Posted by cfg83 View Post
MetroMPG -

Hrmmmmmm, I want to say "now I am glad I never did a belly pan". But, I think the Belly Pan benefit is being effected by the lowering. Would the belly-pan benefit have been more if they had never lowered it? Do you know what I mean? Did they test/simulate each mod independently?

That exact same thought crossed my mind.
A sreet car (mass-produced) can only be SOOOO low.
Look at the work that just Audi put into the underbody panels.

I would think that there is an invers relation betweeen the amount of space and how smooth the bottom of the car needs to be. IMHO
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2009, 01:56 AM   #29 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: KC
Posts: 62
Thanks: 3
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Cd View Post
Metro, after looking at the gallery, I assumed wrongly that they ran at Bonneville with those stock door handles.
The door handles were flush at Bonneville.
I just reviewed my old Speedweek pics of the 999 from Bonneville. Mine show stock looking door handles covered in green/white/black vinyl.

One of the aero tricks that I really liked was how they jacked the 999 up. It was sort of like the jacking holes that rally cars use, except much larger and you had to open the rear doors for access. Once a rear door was opened, a foot-long pipe with an upside-down trailer ball was pinned in place with an aircraft pip pin. Then a floor jack would lift the upside-down trailer ball. They went to a lot of effort to hide the jacking points.

The whole rear of the car was one big science project. It looked like NASA. The fiber tanks were protected by a roll cage that even extended to the trunk. (Trunk cage?) It was all pretty slick, except the snorkel exhaust pipe that stuck out beyond the rear of the car. That was goofy.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aspera For This Useful Post:
Cd (08-09-2011)
Old 08-09-2011, 04:49 AM   #30 (permalink)
Posts: n/a
Thanks for letting me know about other good stuff !

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com