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