Making the Ioniq slippier

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Phase

Yeah but that was back in the day. My wheel skirts bulge out a little but they reduce drag because they keep air flow attached and increase pressure in the wake. Smooth air flow is going to have lower drag than hitting a whole turbulent wheel well and detaching. So idk why they are saying that.

And now I’m confused about the diffuser part and it seems expensive now to try and do real testing to see if drag is reduced or not. Cardboard isn’t going to hold up for a coast down or throttle stop test at super high speeds. And i don’t think pressure gauges would show if drag is reduced and fuel economy is improved.

Their diffuser lowered drag by as much as 2.5%.
If their baseline was Cd 0.32, then the 'lower than 8-degree' diffuser was good for as low as Cd 0.312.

[aerohead]

If you add the box-cavity, as you mentioned earlier on, it will require the rear skirts in order to function, so, in that context, running without them is not an option.

[Phase]

http://www.cleanmpg.com/community/in.../49683/page-17

Fun info from stock Ioniq testing over at clean mpg. My numbers aren’t that high, but I do have over 100k miles and that’s on a new car testing

Still, over 80mpg at 50mph is pretty good stock with no mods!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Phase

http://www.cleanmpg.com/community/in.../49683/page-17

Fun info from stock Ioniq testing over at clean mpg. My numbers aren’t that high, but I do have over 100k miles and that’s on a new car testing

Still, over 80mpg at 50mph is pretty good stock with no mods!

A third party test by Emission Analytics over an entire tank of fuel, under the same conditions would be interesting.
The shorter the test, the lower the resolution.

[Phase]

Originally Posted by aerohead

A third party test by Emission Analytics over an entire tank of fuel, under the same conditions would be interesting.
The shorter the test, the lower the resolution.

http://www.cleanmpg.com/community/in.../54013/page-10

Wayne even got the tanks signed and sealed officially. Here’s the several old thread where he drove the Ioniq from San Diego to Florida. About 3 full tanks of gas cross country. I don’t think that counts as short term test

Someone asked him about his average speed and if he used cc. He said no cc and his average speed was around “ 50ish” mph.

The guy drove in the right lane on the interstate across America going 50 mph. That’s some mad man stuff. Obviously you’d get good fuel economy that way. He said out of all 3 tanks, his averages were still above 80 mpg in that thread. It’s an interesting read to scroll they the thread. Tons of pics. Even drove into a hurricane.

But I’m young and I don’t have the mental patient to drive across America at 50mph in the right lane. I’d rather go faster and try to keep good fuel economy. Hence the aero mods and the whole point of doing all of this for my car!

[freebeard]

I drove though Eastern Oregon on the way to Bonneville, at night, at 45MPH. Best mileage ever for the Superbeetle at 34MPG.

I wouldn't want to do that on the Interstate!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Phase

http://www.cleanmpg.com/community/in.../54013/page-10

Wayne even got the tanks signed and sealed officially. Here’s the several old thread where he drove the Ioniq from San Diego to Florida. About 3 full tanks of gas cross country. I don’t think that counts as short term test

Someone asked him about his average speed and if he used cc. He said no cc and his average speed was around “ 50ish” mph.

The guy drove in the right lane on the interstate across America going 50 mph. That’s some mad man stuff. Obviously you’d get good fuel economy that way. He said out of all 3 tanks, his averages were still above 80 mpg in that thread. It’s an interesting read to scroll they the thread. Tons of pics. Even drove into a hurricane.

But I’m young and I don’t have the mental patient to drive across America at 50mph in the right lane. I’d rather go faster and try to keep good fuel economy. Hence the aero mods and the whole point of doing all of this for my car!

Although it's been mentioned by Emission Analytics that hybrids recover 81.1% of the energy typically lost in a non-hybrid during braking, we have no way to quantify how much influenced Wayne's overall mpg.
Other investigators might 'shadow' one test car with another of a different stripe. Hybrid vs non-hybrid variant.
It's information. It would have more value with comparative data.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to your car's performance, it would get the following:
* 67.07-mpg @ 50-mph
* 61.78-mpg @ 55-mph
* 56.87-mpg @ 60-mph
* 54.11-mpg @ 65-mph
* 52.34-mpg @ 70-mph
* 48.20-mpg @ 75-mph
* 44.43-mpg @ 80-mph
* 41.00-mpg @ 85-mph ( legal posted speed between Austin and San Antonio, Texas )

[Phase]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Although it's been mentioned by Emission Analytics that hybrids recover 81.1% of the energy typically lost in a non-hybrid during braking, we have no way to quantify how much influenced Wayne's overall mpg.
Other investigators might 'shadow' one test car with another of a different stripe. Hybrid vs non-hybrid variant.
It's information. It would have more value with comparative data.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to your car's performance, it would get the following:
* 67.07-mpg @ 50-mph
* 61.78-mpg @ 55-mph
* 56.87-mpg @ 60-mph
* 54.11-mpg @ 65-mph
* 52.34-mpg @ 70-mph
* 48.20-mpg @ 75-mph
* 44.43-mpg @ 80-mph
* 41.00-mpg @ 85-mph ( legal posted speed between Austin and San Antonio, Texas )

there are so many different factors. on average i get better than those numbers with my low rolling resistance tires and warmer temps

ill have to do another test at even lower speeds. remember the other week with the wheel covers and side mirrors removed, i averaged 65mpg while driving 70-75 mph down i-5 INTO A 3MPH HEAD WIND which hurt me. it was a 90 mile stretch of flat valley interstate. no idea why the mpg was that high. poissble corridor effect offset the 3mph headwind? the numbers seemed too good to be true. next time i take the interstate down that way again with no wind, ill probably drop the cc to 60mph and take a measure of that

on a super less busy day or night, id like to do a long distance test with cruise control set at 50mph and compare that to waynes numbers. the only times im able to go 50mph is when doing back country farm roads, and there are two many 4 way stop signs or turns onto other cross roads to accurately measure the mpg...

[The Toecutter]

Originally Posted by Phase

next time i take the interstate down that way again with no wind, ill probably drop the cc to 60mph and take a measure of that

I predict in those circumstances based upon your real-world measurements, 71 mpg.

on a super less busy day or night, id like to do a long distance test with cruise control set at 50mph and compare that to waynes numbers.

With your aeromods, I suspect the car will get close to 85 mpg if you can do a steady 50 mph long-term.




It will be interesting to see your results if you get the chance to try the above. Hyundai is really pursuing fuel efficiency on some of its models to some significance, which is a refreshing break in an industry that has otherwise refused to offer more than small, incremental improvements in vehicle efficiency when it could have easily made massive improvements in the efficiency of its sold fleet without much or any compromise regarding consumer expectations.

70 mpg is getting close to the Ford Prodigy, GM Precept, and Dodge ESX series of the late 90s/early 2000s, that were never sold to the public. To see that Hyundai now sells a relatively inexpensive car that is finally catching up to that is encouraging. It might be 2 decades later, but still. They did recently make a concept that will have finally caught up in drag coefficient with the 1935 Tatra T77A, and have said they will produce that car. Other than Tesla and various small EV automakers, no one is selling the public cars that have a drag coefficient matching or less than that of a 1935 luxury sedan. All of this is better late than never.

Observing this, I suspect massive crisis is right around the corner, or I doubt this would have even been considered for a production car given the history of the mainstream automobile industry and what they have known all of this time.

The efficiency of the Hyundai Ioniq in a car of its size footprint was possible in the 1970s with the best technology of the day. It might not have been a hybrid, or as powerful, but the efficiency was possible. A number of small diesel engines had enough thermal efficiency over a large enough portion of their operating range to get those sort of MPG numbers in a car of similar aerodynamic slipperiness to that Tatra but with thousands of pounds less weight than the Tatra.

[Phase]

Originally Posted by The Toecutter

I predict in those circumstances based upon your real-world measurements, 71 mpg.



With your aeromods, I suspect the car will get close to 85 mpg if you can do a steady 50 mph long-term.




It will be interesting to see your results if you get the chance to try the above. Hyundai is really pursuing fuel efficiency on some of its models to some significance, which is a refreshing break in an industry that has otherwise refused to offer more than small, incremental improvements in vehicle efficiency when it could have easily made massive improvements in the efficiency of its sold fleet without much or any compromise regarding consumer expectations.

70 mpg is getting close to the Ford Prodigy, GM Precept, and Dodge ESX series of the late 90s/early 2000s, that were never sold to the public. To see that Hyundai now sells a relatively inexpensive car that is finally catching up to that is encouraging. It might be 2 decades later, but still. They did recently make a concept that will have finally caught up in drag coefficient with the 1935 Tatra T77A, and have said they will produce that car. Other than Tesla and various small EV automakers, no one is selling the public cars that have a drag coefficient matching or less than that of a 1935 luxury sedan. All of this is better late than never.

Observing this, I suspect massive crisis is right around the corner, or I doubt this would have even been considered for a production car given the history of the mainstream automobile industry and what they have known all of this time.

The efficiency of the Hyundai Ioniq in a car of its size footprint was possible in the 1970s with the best technology of the day. It might not have been a hybrid, or as powerful, but the efficiency was possible. A number of small diesel engines had enough thermal efficiency over a large enough portion of their operating range to get those sort of MPG numbers in a car of similar aerodynamic slipperiness to that Tatra but with thousands of pounds less weight than the Tatra.

Well Wayne got 85mph at 50mph cc. So my aero mods could push 90mpg. Then again my battery has degraded over 3 years and 110k miles and same with the engine. Plus my front undertray is a bit shredded up with a hole in it. So maybe now I’ll get the same mpg as a newer Ioniq in perfect condition lol