Aerodynamic enhancements ?

secla · Post by **secla** » Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:05 pm

RattyMcClelland wrote:Without being put into a wind tunnel it will all mean jack jobby.

From experience in model making and them putting them in a wind tunnel, what you think might improve aero actually make things way way worse. My whole Uni class were stumped as we all though of those ideas above and all made it worse. Small wing mirrors for example made it worse on the rear. Repositioning and part restyling is the key. Under car paneling to rear diffuser worked well though.

5th Gen front end has the same drag surface area as a 4th Gen so its a mute point.

This. You will have no idea if your making things better. Theorys may be sound but in reality you may be making things worse without a way of testing it you wont know

Post by **RattyMcClelland** » Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:08 pm

Red motegi wrote:Did you try a vortex generator ratty?

No. There are hundreds of way of generating votexs and this is one. Usually its the mirrors and front spiltters.

Mudgey · Post by **Mudgey** » Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:16 pm

That'll be great. As well as chasing HP figures I also think its fun to chase F/E figures too, I enjoy tinkering and modding cars in general and as my Lude is a daily I want to try everything I can to make it as fuel efficent as possible.

Also, vortex generations only increase F/E when placed on dirty designs, they work better on large square backed vehicles where vortices going over a trailing edge are less draggy than lamina flow. Unless we have massively racked rear windows its not worth ftitting them.

'92 Si VTEC · Post by **jjmartin349571** » Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:56 pm

Out of interest what's the CD on a 4th gen and a 5th gen? Also would need to know the car's frontal surface area and the CL for the figures to be fully appreciated

The main reason I'm interested:

It'd be interesting to know what advances Honda made since the 80's - also it's proof that blocky cars can be aerodynamic too!!

Red motegi · Post by **Red motegi** » Thu Apr 18, 2013 7:36 pm

Sorry mudgey I didn't read your original thread properly (been a long day) when you said aerodynamic enhancements I thought you meant better streamlining with increased downforce and the like, hence i rattled on about canards (no use in your case) and vortex generators (absolutely no use in your case) but now I've activated grey matter I'll still do link on another thread for those interested,,, ok buddy

Post by **RattyMcClelland** » Thu Apr 18, 2013 8:48 pm

The older cars are more aerodynamic than todays cars.
Reason.......
Because in the 80s Aerodynamics was a big craze. I remember the Audi A2 being one of the most efficient.

Also cars are becomming much much larger and its the frontal face surface area that has a huge impact. Old cars are much smaller.

mart609 · Post by **mart609** » Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:22 am

Doesn't it have alot to do with safety too these days? To stop further damage when hitting pedestrians? They have to design the front ends of cars to compensate? This is what I was told anyway.

Post by **RattyMcClelland** » Fri Apr 19, 2013 11:25 am

Yer the front overhand has to be a certain distance from the wheels unless chassis crumple zones are optimized. Like BMW are good at this as their front overhangs are small.
One compromise to another.