Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihuxl!seifert From: seifert@ihuxl.UUCP (D.A. Seifert) Newsgroups: net.auto Subject: Re: Drag Coeff Information - (nf) Message-ID: <958@ihuxl.UUCP> Date: Wed, 7-Mar-84 09:39:05 EST Article-I.D.: ihuxl.958 Posted: Wed Mar 7 09:39:05 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 8-Mar-84 07:39:31 EST References: <6057@uiucdcs.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 37 The 928 was designed before Cd became a big advertising game. *Maybe* (anybody *know* ?) the designers traded off some drag for downforce. This is definitly the case in the M1. BMW went for the most stable design they could get, and sacrificed some drag to get it. Anyone who thinks drag is more important than stability is invited to drive a VW Beetle (or better yet, the bus) on a windy day. Yes raingutters, body seams, etc. count, at least a little bit. Look at the Audi 5000 with it's super-flush side windows (they had to use a sunroof type mechanism to lower them), and various other tricks. Whether fixing up little tiny details is worth the extra cost is another question. Another problem which crops up as we approach super-aero designs is providing sufficent cooling for engine, brakes, exhaust, etc. Yes, low-drag is a good thing. The designers just have to be careful not to throw away something more important to get it. And yes, there are 'tricks' to get a low number for advertising. Lower the car, remove mirrors, antennas, etc. GM did a *lot* of this to get the numbers they did for the new Firebird a couple years ago. Not all windtunnels give identical figures, either. The car mags had articles on all this about the time the new Firebird came out. keep the shiny side up, -- _____ /_____\ Have you hugged your beagle today? /_______\ Snoopy |___| ____|___|_____ ihnp4!ihuxl!seifert