Ren: My '92 Civic

[Sven7]

New entry-level Caterham Seven to get turbo'd Suzuki 3-cylinder - Autoblog

:drool:

Edit, emailed on the VX and it's already sold

[drainoil]

Originally Posted by Sven7

Oh, god. I really want that. The body is toast, though. We'll see

(Rainx blades work ok but the real trick is using actual rainx on the windshield. the combo is fantastic)

No real updates at this point. The new tires aren't giving me the MPG I'd hoped for, but maybe they need to be worn in a bit.

Edit, you know, I could go out in Cali and get clean VX's all day... not for that kind of money, but they're much more plentiful. Hmmm. Time to save up, but for what? VX? Or a Miata, MR2, S2000 or Boxster? Do I want 50mpg or a RWD sports car? Tough decision.

Ever though of auto crossing? Fast corners and still good mpgs in a dd. My little Civic can hold its own in a cloverleaf at speed lol. Might be a handfull on a course though with no power steering.

[Sven7]

There was one yesterday but I didn't want to drop $40. Besides, I have been busy rebuilding a '56 Schwinn

[HypermilerAX]

Originally Posted by Sven7

With Kammback

1:01.2
1:00.6
1:00.5
1:00.9

AVERAGE- 1:00.8

Without Kammback

1:03.4
0:57.1
0:57.2
0:58.6

AVERAGE- 0:59.1

That works out to be a 3% increase in coasting time with the kammback. Does that mean it's a 6% drag reduction?

You can't determine the drag reduction just out of the increased costing time. I made an excel sheet to calculate the Cd with a coast down test.
I don't know the exact values for your car but I took :
m = 1100 kg
Cr : 0,010
A : 1,9 m²

The result is -0,022 for the Cd. I can give you the result with the actual values of your car.

edit : Must have done something wrong. Change is more around -0,008.

[WD40]

Originally Posted by HypermilerAX

You can't determine the drag reduction just out of the increased costing time. I made an excel sheet to calculate the Cd with a coast down test.
I don't know the exact values for your car but I took :
m = 1100 kg
Cr : 0,010
A : 1,9 m²

The result is -0,022 for the Cd. I can give you the result with the actual values of your car.

I'd love to have a copy of that excel sheet if you can find a way to post it

[HypermilerAX]

I had made a thread about this.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...tor-24478.html

The file is attached in the first post. Go on the Cd/Cr tab. You'll probably have much higher Cd values than reality. That's due to the various frictions (bearings, brake drag, gearbox...) that are not taken into account and since their forces are linear with speed, you can add them up to the Cr.
Example with m = 1000 kg, Cr = 0,010 and A = 2 m². 25 seconds to coast down from 120 to 80 km/h gives Cd = 0,373 but you know your car is around 0,30. Increase Cr so that Cd is approx. 0,30. In this case 0,017 (0,010 for tires and 0,007 for various frictions). Then, play with the time to see Cd reduction.
The tool is good to calculate relative Cd decrease but not the absolute value.

[Sven7]

All my known car info is in my "garage" entry just below my avatar

I do think the test was invalid, though

<----

[benphyr]

Originally Posted by Sven7

I do think the test was invalid, though

<----

Better than the operator being an invalid

Sven, truly enjoying every minute of your posts. Keep sharing your creativity and obvious fun-loving spirit.

-benphyr

[sheepdog 44]

Your left side mirror. How did you finish it? Just bondo straight over the foam then paint? The (convex?) mirror looks like the small generic ones at walmart or the dollar store? Is it adjustable from the inside?

[Sven7]

No bondo- just primer, primer, primer, paint, paint, paint over the foam. Suppose you could bondo if you wanted to. Mirror is store-bought. You don't need to adjust it due to the wide field of view. Besides, it's spherical so turning it does nothing.

Remember if you use urethane foam that 10# will be easiest to work with. If you use 20# foam, you'll be sanding until next year.