Rounded forms not necessarily the most aero

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Oh no, I disagree! Look at the VW 1L for example: The first one was clearly done by engineers while the later ones benefitted greatly from the stylist's touch.




It can be argued that it is the stylists, as much or more so than the engineers, that really got things going as far as automotive streamlining back in the Art Deco movement, when EVERYTHING had to be "streamlined".

Who can argue against stylists when they create something awesome like this:



... sleeker than the "engineered" cars of the time.

The key is to have stylists that are savvy to engineering; stylists and engineers that work together well as a team; management and marketing departments that allow aerodynamics to be a priority; or all of the above.

But purely engineer designed stuff is oftentimes... well.... unappealing.

Frank,with all due respect,the point I was leaning at,was that 'stylists' have retarded aerodynamic development since at least the 1920s.
Certainly,there are many actors in this play,however from a pure engineering standpoint,today's low performance automobiles are a testament to the folly of styling within an industry of such global reach.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Sularus

Frank Lee has a point. Look at the USAF F-117 stealth fighter. The plane's body was designed entirely by electronics engineers for radio wave reflectivity. It is horrendous looking. I think stylists guided, or at least babysat, by engineers is how we get efficient, good looking vehicles.

J

I believe the F-117 was constructed to respect certain parameters laid out by the Russian mathematician who is given credit as the father of stealth technology.This particular aircraft is totally aerodynamically unstable,and completley un-flyable without extremely sophisticated flight computers and pilot-input-limiting ,fly-by-wire protocols for all axis.
With respect to 'efficient',perhaps we could better define this term?

[Frank Lee]

Stylists gave us long 'n' low in the '50s and '60s, but the stupid consumer psyche went to pseudo rugged outdoorspersons and/or belligerent turf marking in the late '70s and really picked up steam in the '90s. Consumers went away from sleek. Don't put that on stylists.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Stylists gave us long 'n' low in the '50s and '60s, but the stupid consumer psyche went to pseudo rugged outdoorspersons and/or belligerent turf marking in the late '70s and really picked up steam in the '90s. Consumers went away from sleek. Don't put that on stylists.

Frank,I have to give some credit to Harley Earl and such.For a 'deeper' conversation I'm afraid we'll have to take it to the 'Lounge',as it's going to require stuff which is far afield of aerodynamics,and I don't want Darin to chastise is here.

[Frank Lee]

One final comment then: stylists don't run the show, marketing and mgmt does. The stylists have to give 'em what they want. Period.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

One final comment then: stylists don't run the show, marketing and mgmt does. The stylists have to give 'em what they want. Period.

Alfred P. Sloan Jr.,in his book,My Years with General Motors,intimated that the Sales Division was really the driver behind their product mix.And they were,early on,extremely concerned that all cars would end up looking alike.
The Executive Committee made it corporate policy that from about 1926-on,that it would be the official policy of General Motors to force style diversity among and within divisions,honoring "Paris-fashion'.
Sloan talks of the 'flop' of the 1929 'Pregnant Buick' which was pulled from the showrooms as fast as a replacement could be produced.Manufacturing pushed Earl's 1-1/2-inch body camber to over 5-inches without his knowledge,consumers hated it and it bombed.
Sloan also mentions the debaucle of the 'over-streamlined' 1934 Chrysler Airflow.
Walter Chrysler told R.Buckminster Fuller exactly why his Dymaxion Car could never be allowed.That discussion centered around the banking community.
Complex corporate dynamics.

[Frank Lee]

I know. I used to be a designer.

Many of them are not engineering savvy at all. But some are.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I know. I used to be a designer.

Many of them are not engineering savvy at all. But some are.

Frank,did you know Jack Telnack? Alex Tremulis hired him at Ford,told some funny stories about all that.Alex and his wife were very proud of what Jack did with the Taurus/Sable.It was very risky for Ford but a big hit,and altered the design course for the entire industry until the SUVs came in.
I think your Tempo is an offspring of all that.

[Frank Lee]

I've never met Jack but of course I know his name.

Actually the Thunderbird was the first of the Jellybean Fords, followed closely the next year by the Tempo/Topaz. Those successes emboldened them to get a bit more "radical" for the Taurus.

[arcosine]

I agree, look at birds, very aero but have pointy beaks.