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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-27-2011, 12:51 PM   #1 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: london, on
Posts: 339

Buggie - '01 Vw Beetle TDI Gls
Thanks: 4
Thanked 32 Times in 22 Posts
Lower the rear

Was looking at my jeep, the back is way high too high because the frot springs sagged. looked at several other vehicles, looks tha same way. Manufacturers raised the back to allow for cargo carrying capacity, and I think a lot of front springs sag on older vehicles, looks like if the back of most vehicles was lowered a half to one inch they would be more aerodynamic, the slanted roof creates too much downforce because it acts like a spoiler

now if you were to lower the back 2 inches, the grill would be more aerodynamc, the windshield would be on more of an angle, the roof at the windshield would be the highest point that would allow the wind to start falling off immediately

a lowered front air dam would cancel any negative effects of lowering he back

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 03-27-2011, 02:02 PM   #2 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
It's generally accepted that a slight nose-down rake is best for Cd and I believe that applies to the underside. I suppose it's possible for a deep airdam to allow a nose-up rake to have better Cd... who knows, it might be kinda like the "banana car"?
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2011, 03:18 PM   #3 (permalink)
Pishtaco
 
SentraSE-R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 1,485

Mean Green Toaster Machine - '06 Scion xB
Team Toyota
90 day: 48.92 mpg (US)
Thanks: 56
Thanked 286 Times in 181 Posts
I recall another recent thread where a Nissan SUV (Xterra?) owner complained about the dangerous handling of his vehicle in crosswnds. The previous owner had leveled it from the factory nose-down position. I speculate the previous owner's leveling allowed crosswinds to lift and lighten the front end. Beware unintended consequences.
__________________
Darrell

Boycotting Exxon since 1989, BP since 2010
Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac? George Carlin
Mean Green Toaster Machine
49.5 mpg avg over 53,000 miles. 176% of '08 EPA
Best flat drive 94.5 mpg for 10.1 mi
Longest tank 1033 km (642 mi) on 10.56 gal = 60.8 mpg
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2011, 03:23 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: london, on
Posts: 339

Buggie - '01 Vw Beetle TDI Gls
Thanks: 4
Thanked 32 Times in 22 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SentraSE-R View Post
I recall another recent thread where a Nissan SUV (Xterra?) owner complained about the dangerous handling of his vehicle in crosswnds. The previous owner had leveled it from the factory nose-down position. I speculate the previous owner's leveling allowed crosswinds to lift and lighten the front end. Beware unintended consequences.
DepEnds on the alignment, lots of offroaders lift he cherokee and grand cherokkees more in the front, that's what gave me the idea
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 02:29 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,861
Thanks: 23,922
Thanked 7,207 Times in 4,640 Posts
rake

I would be hesitant to go beyond the factory,fresh springs inclination.The rake may be the only reason you have attached flow over the roof,as it is still 'attacking' the air up to the rear.Without the rake you might experience separation at the windscreen header.Very unstable! Very high drag!
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 05:10 PM   #6 (permalink)
Got MPG?
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Southern Alberta, Canada
Posts: 330

The Car - '09 Toyota Corolla CE Enhanced
Thanks: 13
Thanked 43 Times in 38 Posts
What about on a car? I have a 2009 Corolla and the back end sits 1 inch higher than the front. If I were to install a specific spring kit that evens out the ride as well as lower the car entirely by 3/4 inch would I have a good net result?

I have a lifetime average of 38mpgUS with a max of 46mpgUS so I want to keep getting decent numbers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 05:37 PM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,861
Thanks: 23,922
Thanked 7,207 Times in 4,640 Posts
rake

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeanBurn View Post
What about on a car? I have a 2009 Corolla and the back end sits 1 inch higher than the front. If I were to install a specific spring kit that evens out the ride as well as lower the car entirely by 3/4 inch would I have a good net result?

I have a lifetime average of 38mpgUS with a max of 46mpgUS so I want to keep getting decent numbers.
Long ago HOT Rod Magazine published an article about findings reported by GM during inclination/drag tests conducted on a Chevy.Positive and negative rakes were investigated.Nose down was always better.But touchy!
I suspect that Toyota has fully investigated the Corolla and without a full-scale tunnel I would be hesitant to think I could outguess them.
It's true,that many really low-drag/high-mpg concepts have dropped noses only with 'active' suspension.
As far as I know,they NEVER reduce the amount of nose drop.
If you could lower both ends equally and maintain the stock inclination then that would be my recommendation.Watch your clearances though.Too low and the Corollas naughty bits may drag the ground!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 11:30 AM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: london, on
Posts: 339

Buggie - '01 Vw Beetle TDI Gls
Thanks: 4
Thanked 32 Times in 22 Posts
I still think my front springs are sagging, I'm looking for info on what the stock rideheight should be.

Doesn anyone have the article on this nose down vs nose up FE test?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 01:01 PM   #9 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
comptiger5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 544

RaceJeep - '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) 5.9 Limited
90 day: 13.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
Rooster - That's part of it as well.

Bandit, what kind/year of Jeep is it?
__________________
Call me crazy, but I actually try for mpg with this Jeep:



Typical driving: Back in Rochester for school, driving is 60 - 70% city
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 03:52 PM   #10 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: london, on
Posts: 339

Buggie - '01 Vw Beetle TDI Gls
Thanks: 4
Thanked 32 Times in 22 Posts
01 grand cherokee laredo, 4.0L

just waiting for a nicer day so I can take the luggage rack off. Why does almost every suv and van have roof racks, noone ever uses them. would be better if they left a bolt you could take out and screw in an I bolt to tie off to

  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