The Kamm research cars

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

* I'm hoping that it begins the conversation.
* A vehicle of which its roofline profile begins with a streamlined profile, is subject to separation should its profile wander away from the profile. The profile is only streamlined if it remains uncorrupted. This is the premise of using an AST as a Go NoGo.
* As above, if the roofline has wandered away from an originally-streamlined contour, a comparison to the original, uncorrupted profile will illustrate exactly where the contour left the profile. Moving a spoiler up to the profile will at least help get the flow reattached to the spoiler. If you want additional, direct downforce, then so be it.
* The overlay of the streamline profile will inform the observer about the degree of fidelity to the actual streamline profile.
A look at a M-B CLK-GTR,Porsche918 Spyder, Aston Martin Vanguish, 2015 Corvette, 2017 911 Turbo S, Panamera, 2010 A7, Dodge Viper, and dozens of vehicles will demonstrate how the carmaker 'fixed' separation-induced problems by projecting the body or spoiler up to , and not beyond the streamline profiles of which the initial portion of the roof possessed.

This is all just a repeat of Aerohead's discredited theory - even down to using the template to set the height of a rear spoiler.

But for people who have doubted that Aerohead wishes to apply his template in these ways, look carefully at this post from him.

[orange4boy]

Suggested change.

* A vehicle of which its roofline profile begins with a streamlined profile, is may be subject to separation should its profile wander away from the profile.

There are too many “ifs” that have to be addressed to make such a sure claim. It depends. Physics rule these things, not the profile which, I think, makes this statement too dependent on the correct application of “the profile” If the profile equals the physics then, sure. Is that what you mean when you say “the profile”?

[orange4boy]

You seem to be suffering from the delusion that I have a desire to persuade you of anything. Believe whatever you want! Why should I care what you believe?

More useless words that do not address the veracity of your claims.

I’m just pointing out misleading statements and specious claims to other ecomodders.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by orange4boy

Now collect all of the other ridiculous ideas on this site, who they were attributed to, whether they were implemented, whether they achieved the stated goal and divide that against all of the good advice etc, etc. Then you would have a nice ratio of success to fail based on the advice of every person who ever contributed to this site.

Well I could do that I suppose, but I figure it's far more useful if I concentrate on the number one source of misinformation on this subgroup. It's my judgement that Aerohead is that person - so much of what he writes (and he is a prolific giver of advice to others) is outright wrong, is misleading or is irrelevant (and so tends to bamboozle people trying to find the relevance that actually isn't there).

[freebeard]

You seem to be suffering from the delusion that I have a desire to persuade you of anything. Believe whatever you want! Why should I care what you believe?

Why should I care about what you think I believe?

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Why should I care about what you think I believe?

To be honest, I don't much Freebeard. I am more interested in helping people who are aero modifying their cars and - correct me if I am wrong - I haven't seen you do even one aero modification in the year or so I've been here.

[freebeard]

All true, I should at least open up those files I did in Wings 3D in Blender. Ecomodder is my window on the world at large. You won't see me commenting on your Youtube videos. Or Tik Tok, or Zoom.

What little motivation I can muster goes more toward tiny houses. ....and following the shenanigans in my nation's Capital. I spend a few hours a day following some of the more prescient sources.

Substitute [one] for [I] — you care a lot about gullible people and what they might be thinking. To the point where you see [them thinking] it all around you.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Substitute [one] for [I] — you care a lot about gullible people and what they might be thinking. To the point where you see [them thinking] it all around you.

Nope. I see their comments on my YouTube videos, I see what they say here, I see what they write to me personally.

And I see a mass of confusion, just as I saw something like 30 years ago in modified car circles with engine management.

The trouble is, here when you try to cut through to something that will genuinely help people understand and implement techniques that will be helpful to them, the 'traditionalists' (for want of a better term), and their hangers-on, keep just going on and on like nothing's changed or is new.

Aerohead is genuinely the worst person I have ever encountered in my life for refusing to change his views irrespective of whatever evidence is presented.

I hate to use the analogy, but it's a bit like how your (soon to be former) president stated: I could shoot someone and I wouldn't lose any voters.

Aerohead can apparently say anything and some people will continue to agree... no matter how absurd it is.

[freebeard]

Others will continue to passively-agressive[ly?] capitalize his chosen handle. I've learned to tolerate his foibles.

As for our current President, you're quoting his campaign trail voice four years after the fact. (and you whine and snivel about aerohead) He didn't talk to the Queen of England that way. My favorite is the stand up comedy tours. Since this isn't The Lounge you'll have to follow this: We're Not Going To Take It

....if that's your best, your best won't do.

[orange4boy]

Nope. I see their comments on my YouTube videos, I see what they say here, I see what they write to me personally.

Shorter JE: "The Youtube comments section sent me. I'm here to help"

You have no idea how funny this is.