Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Introductions
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-24-2014, 09:12 PM   #11 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
sjgrimsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 21

Trans Am - '82 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
90 day: 20.84 mpg (US)

Explorer - '95 Ford Explorer XLT
90 day: 19.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I forgot to add I have previously done pop-up deletes on the car. Link to the build thread will be added when I have more than 5 posts

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-24-2014, 09:23 PM   #12 (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
I'd look at the mods made to Bonneville race Trans Ams; IIRC Hot Rod Magazine did a write-up on theirs and went on at length about the aero aspects of it.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2014, 09:28 PM   #13 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 28

Minty Fresh - '15 Chevrolet Cruze LT
90 day: 36.06 mpg (US)

BlueBunny - '15 Mitsubishi Mirage
90 day: 40.64 mpg (US)
Thanks: 12
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
You're starting with an excellent cd of ~0.29, so that thing will be super slippery after aero mods. Sounds like a blast to drive too!
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2014, 11:02 PM   #14 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
sjgrimsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 21

Trans Am - '82 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
90 day: 20.84 mpg (US)

Explorer - '95 Ford Explorer XLT
90 day: 19.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I will look into the firebirds that ran at the salt flats.

Today I started looking for ways to seal up body gaps on the front of the car. Lots of potential there. My cool weather average (not much of a winter here in Louisiana) is usually 18 mpg. After somewhat repairing the front air dam and today's sealing of a few body gaps, I filled up and showed 19.8mpg. Before the changes I had 108 miles on the tank. Filled up at 295.6 miles with 14.9 gallons. This is about 75% highway so I don't consider those to be glorious numbers. Lol

Last edited by sjgrimsley; 02-25-2014 at 07:08 PM.. Reason: correction
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2014, 11:08 PM   #15 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
sjgrimsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 21

Trans Am - '82 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
90 day: 20.84 mpg (US)

Explorer - '95 Ford Explorer XLT
90 day: 19.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Link to pop-up delete build thread on TGO: Pop-up deletes that look good - Third Generation F-Body Message Boards
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 07:07 PM   #16 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
sjgrimsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 21

Trans Am - '82 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
90 day: 20.84 mpg (US)

Explorer - '95 Ford Explorer XLT
90 day: 19.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Going back to the air dam and belly pan, which one would yield the greater results? Which would do more for reducing lift at high speeds?

I know people who have dedicated road race cars and some who road race their daily drivers. They run belly pans with the addition of a rear diffuser because it reduces lift and supposedly reduces air turbulence behind the car. Would this equate to cleaner air behind the car and lead to better fuel economy, or am I dreaming? My thinking: these things help them achieve higher top speeds so they must have drag reduction effects.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 09:41 PM   #17 (permalink)
Hydrogen > EV
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Ohio, United States
Posts: 2,022

Silver Flea - '05 Honda Insight
90 day: 58.96 mpg (US)
Thanks: 992
Thanked 396 Times in 283 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
If you're going to do an underbody, don't bother with an air dam. Air dam increases frontal area so the mess underneath experiences less air- if the bottom is totally smooth, then there is no point in increasing frontal area.
Less frontal area, less hitting the wind.

Less drag under the car, less slowing you down.

Underbody > Air Dam
Air Dam> Nothing
__________________





Best Tanks:
Mustang - 54.83 mpg (US) at the Green Grand Prix
Insight - 82.91966 mpg (US) over 818.5 miles.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 12:10 PM   #18 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
sjgrimsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 21

Trans Am - '82 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
90 day: 20.84 mpg (US)

Explorer - '95 Ford Explorer XLT
90 day: 19.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
Less frontal area, less hitting the wind.

Less drag under the car, less slowing you down.

Underbody > Air Dam
Air Dam> Nothing
Is this why I never see a car with air dam and belly pan? Now that I think about it, I only see either aggressive air dam alone, or belly pan with a front splitter.

*Edit: the C7 Corvette has under body paneling and also a front air dam.
__________________

Fully sequential port fuel injection
406 sbc 350hp @4800 425lb-ft @3600
4L60e trans .70 OD, 3.23:1 rear, 26" dia. tire, 1,600rpm @55, 2,050rpm @70

Last edited by sjgrimsley; 02-26-2014 at 01:05 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 08:46 PM   #19 (permalink)
Hydrogen > EV
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Ohio, United States
Posts: 2,022

Silver Flea - '05 Honda Insight
90 day: 58.96 mpg (US)
Thanks: 992
Thanked 396 Times in 283 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjgrimsley View Post
Is this why I never see a car with air dam and belly pan? Now that I think about it, I only see either aggressive air dam alone, or belly pan with a front splitter.

*Edit: the C7 Corvette has under body paneling and also a front air dam.
C7 as in 2015, or is that a different model? Is that all of the C7s with underbody panels and air dams or just certain editions?
__________________





Best Tanks:
Mustang - 54.83 mpg (US) at the Green Grand Prix
Insight - 82.91966 mpg (US) over 818.5 miles.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 12:54 AM   #20 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
sjgrimsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 21

Trans Am - '82 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
90 day: 20.84 mpg (US)

Explorer - '95 Ford Explorer XLT
90 day: 19.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
What I've gathered so far is the C5, C6 and base coupe C7 all have front air dams and all have a large amount of panelling underneath. C5 are bottom feeders like my car for cooling and the C6 has a front grille but needs the air dam to create that low pressure area behind the radiator to draw air through it. But the C7 has a nice front grille and vents radiator heat through the hood vents, reason for radiator tilted forward. However, after further reading, the C7 with the Z51 performance package does not have the air dam which I found puzzling. The base coupe doesn't need the air dam for cooling since it vents through the hood.

I have read a quote supposedly from a GM exec that by removing the air dam and allowing air to flow under the car, the hood vent was able to pull more of that up and over the top, increasing downforce. I'm unsure of if that works or not. Seems logical with the Z51 package being more track oriented.

Please excuse my rambling. Lol. Just for reference, C5 1997-2004, C6 2005-2013, C7 2014+

__________________

Fully sequential port fuel injection
406 sbc 350hp @4800 425lb-ft @3600
4L60e trans .70 OD, 3.23:1 rear, 26" dia. tire, 1,600rpm @55, 2,050rpm @70
  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