I'm back.
I need a reality check from the collective here.
Im neither mathematician nor aerodynamicist but it seemed counterituitive that the Spit would be less aero than the Geo. (Incidently, my garage CD calculations indicate that the Spit's overall number is about .39, rather than the published numbers which vary from .38 to .42). Based on CD alone, the Geo wins.
Admittedly I was looking for support for my thinking, but when I searched for it I actually found some info which was quite profound.
A lot of aerodynamicist types downplay he CD aspect unless it is compared against frontal area. The equation can be pretty complex, but in simplest form you can just multiply the drag coefficient by the frontal area, and that constitutes a more realistic view of a car's aerodynamic potential.
Once again, in stock form the Geo wins, but only by a slight margin. I used the published numbers for each:
Geo: 19.2 sq. ft. X .32 CD= 6.144
Spit: 15.2 " " X .42 " = 6.384
If we begin with stock vehicles, then reduce the overall CD it starts to get more interesting. Let's say we reduce the overall CD of the Spit to something like .36, which seems doable with some pretty basic aero mods, maybe by simply replacing the 5 mph bumpers:
15.2 X .36= 5.47
We have already beaten the Geo (at .32) in the real world, yet the Spit still has a higher CD of .36.
If this is correct, The Geo will never catch up to the Spit, mod-for-mod. In fact things will only improve exponentially against the Geo, and if all other factors are the same, he car that begins with the least frontal area will always win the aero game.
Anyone care to shoot holes in this? I got no dog in this fight, either. Just stuff from the 'net.
__________________
__________________
Everyone wants to live inTheory. Because everything works THERE.
|