MB EQXX Cd=0,1716 1000km in one charge

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Vekke

Found a great wind tunnel video:

You can download official materials from here: https://media.daimler.com/marsMediaS...173#toRelation

We froze the video as near we could, sideways to the car, and made a print of it. I won't know until I get it home, if I'll be able to extract any useful information from it. Until they publish a formal technical image of the car, it will be 'way out ahead of nothing.'
Thanks for all the digging!

[aerohead]

https://www.netcarshow.com/mercedes-...llpaper_03.htm
With the tail extension, the EQXX may become Mercedes-Benz first 'double-ended' automobile, something General Motors swore it would never touch at one time.

[aerohead]

1) cooling system drag= 0.007 when open
2) Frontal area is less than CLA, which for the Euro Spec CLA 180 was 2.2272 meters-square ( 23.9741 sq-ft )
3) Bridgestone tire sidewalls carefully matched to wheel covers.
4) 'slightly less than' 100-kWh

[aerohead]

1) Backlighting the photograph revealed enough contrast to establish perimeter of the car.
2) Using the Length of 4630mm ( 182.28-inches )as a reference, according to the photo, the EQXX is:
3) Height = 1300mm ( 51.28-inches )
4) Body height (h) = 1180mm ( 46.45-inches )
5) Ground clearance = 120mm ( 4.72-inches )
6) aft-body = 2188.58mm ( 86.161-inches ) [ 47.27% ]
7) V = 1.85363
8) Active diffuser = 99mm ( 3.897-inches )
9) L/H = 3.56153
10) L/h = 3.92372
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A) I'll try for a width from the plan-view photograph.
B) Some estimated frontal area is a target ( we can't calculate without it )
M-B has left us a few breadcrumbs to follow.

[alexshock]

Originally Posted by aerohead

5) Ground clearance = 120mm ( 4.72-inches )

Is that after active suspension or before?

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by alexshock

Is that after active suspension or before?

I can't answer with any clarity. I'm presuming that the EQXX is depicted in its low-drag configuration in the photograph, however, I can't vet it one way or the other.

[Vekke]

What picture did you use for your overlay?

I got 130mm ground clearance in my measurements

Car has composite springs so I think its not adjustable.

[Piotrsko]

You're both within a margin of error for your display devices which could be inflated due to the method of magnification and measurement

[The Toecutter]

Considering this thing weighs about 4,000 lbs, the efficiency it gets is damn impressive. If it had half the mass and cut drag another 20%, 100 Wh/mile would be possible. Then they'd be able to strip all the luxury electronics crap and make an affordable sub $25,000 200+ mile range EV sedan that the lower middle class could comfortably afford.

Mercedes could have done something like this during the 1970s fuel crisis and used a 5-cylinder 3L turbodiesel to get 70+ mpg highway, but they kept this knowledge shelved and away from production cars all these decades. The C111-III proves it.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Vekke

What picture did you use for your overlay?

I got 130mm ground clearance in my measurements

Car has composite springs so I think its not adjustable.

I used the NetCarShow.com image, at an 11-inch by 17- inch image scale.
On the light table I was able to get enough contrast to reveal the entire outline of the car.
It won't be 'true-length' though, and I don't know if they'll ever publish an actual technical drawing.