Air deflector vs. Full aero?

[DrivenByNothing]

I've been thinking about the 69.7mpg civic hatch on here and how it's a little on the extreme side as far as aesthetics. I'm all for function over form, but there is a point at which I draw the line.

I'm wondering if it's possible to create a tear drop path for the air via carefully placed deflectors as opposed to running material over the entire path.

Does this make any sense?

Matt

[lunarhighway]

makes sense to me. while i like how far some people will go in altering the shape of their car , for most people it's not an option (if only for legal or practical reasons).there's a certain point where "improving you car" turn to "inventing a new one".

i find the concept of "deflectors" more intriguing. the problem of course is that the "virtual" shape of your car, the path the air will travel around it, if far more dificult to predict and test than how it would on a physical shape. also the effect of small single air deflectors would be hard to test, but when it all adds up i think these things can make a significant difference.

i intent to try some front wheel fairings when i can finally get them installed and perhaps some more turbulators

[trebuchet03]

Originally Posted by DrivenByNothing

I've been thinking about the 69.7mpg civic hatch on here and how it's a little on the extreme side as far as aesthetics. I'm all for function over form, but there is a point at which I draw the line.

I'm wondering if it's possible to create a tear drop path for the air via carefully placed deflectors as opposed to running material over the entire path.

Does this make any sense?

Matt

That is what the kammback shape is based off of. It's a cut off teardrop shape. But, taking the traditional boxy, inorganic, car shape to any form of teardrop is big compromise with aesthetics. That is of course, if you don't like the teardrop shape. Personally, I love the organic smooth shapes - and if nature intended a car, I guarantee there won't be any visible straight lines or crisp edges :P

The first thing that comes to mind is:



But notice that it's not really a deflector (it doesn't protrude into flow). It's more of channel of where flow should go. Not exactly viable for the typical sedan shape - but that's not to say it won't help (testing will tell you that).

[Snax]

Well that is apparently what Subaru was thinking about with the latest WRX STi. Having owned an 04 STi, I'll say that keeping the rear window clear at speed probably wasn't the issue. There is however seperation of laminar flow over the rear window at speed without the deflector, but I don't know if that cures it.

[trebuchet03]

Originally Posted by Snax

Well that is apparently what Subaru was thinking about with the latest WRX STi. Having owned an 04 STi, I'll say that keeping the rear window clear at speed probably wasn't the issue. There is however seperation of laminar flow over the rear window at speed without the deflector, but I don't know if that cures it.

I've noticed that too... It seems like the designers either go for an organic shape (Luigi Colani being a master at this) where flow moves smoothly over the vehicle OR they go for a clean cut separation. I've noticed subtle lips and such on quite a few of the newer model designs :P I guess better than nothing - but still capable of being improved on :P

[The Toecutter]

(Luigi Colani being a master at this)

I LOVE the Colani GT.




Sooo small and fast.