Why have the Automakers refused the boat tail design?

[shovel]

Originally Posted by DonBarletta

So they are typically very conservative, adverse to risk, and inclined to only make cars that would hopefully have mainstream appeal and generate massive profits.

That's a big part of the Aztek drum I keep beating... it was a big risk, and if everyone gets over their opinion about its looks it's actually a very easy machine to live with (the two friends I know with Azteks love theirs, and I envy.. they do almost everything I do in a grand cherokee but with more cargo room, an easier to clean/configure interior, less fuel used and better road manners)

A similar thing goes with the Isuzu Vehicross.. when it was introduced it looked like nothing on the road and few people liked it, and Isuzu is now gone entirely from America - but today's latest generation of small SUV's look a heck of a lot like Vehicrosses.. Granted the Vehicross isn't so easy to live with (my brother in law has one) and few people grok that it's more Wrangler than WRX..

The Nissan Juke brings America a tiny, turbocharged engine (isn't that something we applaud here?) and highly controversial looks - again they don't seem to sell well, I never see 'em on the road.

Automakers don't take many risks because the public doesn't reward those risks, we're addicted to buying nostalgia like Mustangs and Camaros and Challengers and Power Wagons because we once rode in our older cousin's and it was kool.. and whole cultures of luddism appear throughout motoring culture, get on any Jeep board and you'll here a bunch of cave men grunting that no real man drives an automatic, and half of them will argue that carburetors are better than fuel injection or electronics, even to the point of citing their own unwillingness or inability to understand modern systems as the main reason for this opinion (but it's the electronics' fault, for being too... moderny... ) .. so many people are stuck in the past or dreamy-eyed about how things used to be, romanticising whatever crap was good enough 30 years ago because nothing better had yet come into existence. It's an idea that permeates culture so much that even when I actively acknowledge the fallacy I find myself falling for it from time to time.

So until such time as the public is willing to buy the future with their money, the future won't happen.

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by shovel

It's not that they don't make "boat-like" tails, it's that manufacturers can't always get people to buy them. Many of the 70s and 80s hatchbacks have awful reputations these days, because some sort of negativity got associated with them and it stuck.
(kinda has a prius-like profile)

Pontiac tried to aero the tail end of a minivan, but like the Pinto, the Pacer, the Scirocco, the Escort.... the Aztek was a highly functional car that everyone decided they hated because to the buying public automotive coolness is inversely proportional to practicality.

It's not as though there is zero boat action going on today though, many of the newest hot hatches are finishing a bit narrower in the greenhouse than the windshield - leaving the car itself short and easy to park, the cargo area tall enough to easily access and fill, enough head room in the back... yeah it's not a basjoos or anything but it's not ignorant of aero:
[

I don't think we'll see a full on submarine for the road... cities aren't getting any more spacious and while a few people are willing to make boat tail compromises, it would be naive to deny that the compromises exist.

shovel,
I have always been a fan of the vw fox wagon:


Not sure if it is very aero.....but it certainly fits the 'utilitarian' mold!

the white sciroco's roof line is MUCH lower than the prius

[shovel]

I got a freakish number of miles out of a 93 Fox. Mom bought it brand new in 1995, having been an unpopular color/option combo and the odometer stopped working around 330k miles, i drove it a couple more years after that and sold it in running shape to a girl who wrecked it during the test drive... - the thing which struck me back then was how tiny the radiator was, and how despite that there was really not much heat under the hood - probably in part because the odd longitudinal engine + front wheel drive configuration meant tons of room for air cooling. It got decent fuel mileage, maybe because it didn't turn so much gasoline into heat.

The weirdest thing was that it felt like the gear ratio for 4th and 5th seemed pretty much the same, you'd shift 1-2-3-4-5 and it felt like shifting out of 4th, and then right back into 4th again. I did really like the way they did the shoulder belts in the front doors... worked really well and had no way of failing like those damn attack belts that Tempos and Accords once had..

[TurboDieselInjection]

ok if the goal is to save fuel , then your driving habits and vehicle you choose to preform the majority of your driving duties is the biggest piece of the puzzle, if you drive 4000+ pound large displacement car truck suv and want to feel the acceleration you will burn more fuel..... if you place the imaginary egg under the gas pedal (and brake pedal for that matter) you would likely have better mpg's vs a boat tail . then try changing to a fairly small or mid sized 4 cyl with a turbo /diesel , and keep in mind driving with the mass of your vehicle and what it takes to accelerate that mass. then existing technology (or older tech) can be very good on fuel , without constructing large difficult and costly body modifications (though dont stop modding just pick your battles)

[312]

Originally Posted by TurboDieselInjection

ok if the goal is to save fuel , then your driving habits and vehicle you choose to perform the majority of your driving duties is the biggest piece of the puzzle...

Exactly. When you look at a car, the engine isn't spending a majority, even a plurality of the energy removed form the fuel to overcome the fluid force of the air around the car. The engine is devoting most of the fuel to heat up metal near it. Then, when everything is heated properly, the engine can start providing torques to the drivetrain.

Automakers sneak the boat tail shape into their product through hatchbacks and Kamm-backs, and that's really all that needs to happen.

[fusion210]

From my own private polling (casual gas saving discussion) people can't even handle the looks of a Prius! Not it's slowness, nor efficiency, it's technology or price, their problem is the look of it. Humans are doomed.

[Cd]

I often wonder how a design like this one got accepted by the public.
This car certainly resembles a 'submarine' yet people bought it.

Sad that all that swoopy style was overdone, and the Cd actually stayed the same as the previous generation ( actually worse .32 vs .29 on a Sable ) All the angles were wrong for good aero on that car.

[NeilBlanchard]

People like the looks of the Tesla Model S, generally, and it is lower Cd than the Prius of the original Insight.

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by TurboDieselInjection

ok if the goal is to save fuel , then your driving habits and vehicle you choose to preform the majority of your driving duties is the biggest piece of the puzzle, if you drive 4000+ pound large displacement car truck suv and want to feel the acceleration you will burn more fuel..... if you place the imaginary egg under the gas pedal (and brake pedal for that matter) you would likely have better mpg's vs a boat tail . then try changing to a fairly small or mid sized 4 cyl with a turbo /diesel , and keep in mind driving with the mass of your vehicle and what it takes to accelerate that mass. then existing technology (or older tech) can be very good on fuel , without constructing large difficult and costly body modifications (though dont stop modding just pick your battles)

Another well stated observation

[aerohead]

Hucho credits Daimler-Benz with the revival of boat-tailing as of the late 1970s Mercedes-Benz cars.
I've been thinking about this thread since it was posted,and while out on material runs I'll stroll past the tails of vehicles as I walk to and from the store.
I see more boat-tailing than ever.Sure it's embryonic but it's there.
As a 'Valley Boy,' growing up in Southern California,I,along with many friends observed that features we'd see on 'custom cars' taking form in many a open- door garages,would in a few years time,show up on production cars from the Big-Three.
Anything the Speed Equipment Manufacturers Association was selling to a teen or young adult 'today',would end up in the auto showrooms in a few years time.And they'd get their 'price premium' for the added features.Low down payment and low payments.
It looks like there are 'drivers' in the market.If boat tails are ever perceived as high-performance equipment,we might see the 'Fast and the Furious' phenomenon take off with relation to real aerodynamics.
Substance could overshadow 'appearance.'
Bonneville should be interesting.The T-100 garnered much interest and photographs.Even George Poteet's crew turned camera it's way.
If JethroBodine and I (any others?) can actually make it out there and run,it could affect how the 'girly-man' boat tail is perceived.
Coming home from an aborted testing trip (foiled by hurricanes) a few years back I tailed a U.S.Homeland Security Chevy Tahoe at 107-mph for quite a few miles before I could figure out who the --l these sons-of-b------- were,while they emptied America's oil stockpiles single handedly.
The truck will 'run'! It's faster than many smaller cars of greater horsepower.Hope to know the end of the envelope in September.After which,a bunch of folks will 'know' what these silly things can do.
Tip of the iceberg?