home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU!tedebear
- From: tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen)
- Subject: Re: open-wheel drag (Re: F1 Stuff)
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.094510.7294@leland.Stanford.EDU>
- Sender: news@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mr News)
- Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
- References: <1992Nov12.155018.28582@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> <1992Nov12.165946.21499@pixel.kodak.com> <BxMEru.Ks1@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 09:45:10 GMT
- Lines: 20
-
- In article <BxMEru.Ks1@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cjp53999@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Cory James Padfield) writes:
- > I recently saw on this group a Cd of .98 to 1.1, depending on whether
- >the car was a long oval, short oval, or road course car.
- >
- >Compare this to my '82 RX-7 which is .34.
- ...
- > What minivan has a Cd lower than .34. I know the Mercury Villager,
- >Nissan Quest, and Chrysler XXXX are fairly aerodynamic, but I haven't
- >seen for sure anything around .34. Just curious.
-
- Cd is only part of the equation. you also need to know the frontal
- area. a minivan might have a Cd of .34 or whatever, and it would
- have more aerodynamic resistance than a small car with the same Cd.
- the drag is proportional to the Cd and to the frontal area.
- i think the GM minivans (lumina APV, olds silhouette, pontiac trans sport)
- have pretty low Cds, but they definitely have more frontal area than an
- RX-7.
-
- -teddy
- a rec.autos.driving voyeur
-