

| Subject: | Re: aerodynamics, was: 101 MPH Vanagon! |
| From: | Bruce Nadig |
| Date: | Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:08:36 -0500 |
O.K., I've seen all sorts of formulas and explanations for aerodynamics and drag. What I haven't seen is actual numbers for a Vanagon. Does anyone know the actual coefficient of drag for a Vanagon? Does anyone know what frontal area of a Vanagon is? Without this information, all the formulas in the world are pretty useless for us. Inquiring minds want to know. Cheers, Bruce motorbruce motorbruce@hotmail.com >From: jimt <wetwesty@TACTICAL-BUS.INFO> >Reply-To: jimt <wetwesty@TACTICAL-BUS.INFO> >To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM >Subject: Re: aerodynamics, was: 101 MPH Vanagon! >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 06:29:47 -0600 > >The formula for drag through a medium is: > >Drag = 1/2 D x Cd x A x Vsquared > >D = density of medium (in this case air) >Cd= drag coefficient (slipperiness) (need to know this value or get a wind >tunnel) >A = the frontal area >V = velocity > >Note where the coefficient and area are in the equation. >Then comes the kicker. Note that velocity gets squared. >With squaring there is always a point where the squared item goes from >insignificant to very significant. In this case the velocity we are >traveling at. > >This number is then added to the rolling drag. Computed from weight volume >and resistance items. Then you get your total drag or resistance to >movement. > >0.00255754 1 16 1 0.04 >0.00255754 0.5 30 1 0.04 > >Above shows that a flat box surface presented in direct resistance comes up >with the same value as the lower slippery vehicle that has about twice the >area presented. > >���������������������������������������� >jimt >Planned insanity is best. >Remember that sanity is optional. >http://www.tactical-bus.info (tech info) >http://www.westydriver.com > > > >On 10/18/04 5:39 AM, "Eric Zeno" <vw4x4@FYI.NET> wrote: > > > Aerodynamically everybody seems to be missing one thing. > > If I have a very unslippery vehicle with a coefficient of 1 (flat >surface) > > and a slippery vehicle of .5 and the surface area in question on the .5 > > vehicle is 3 times the area of the vehicle with a rating of 1, the .5 > > vehicle is much higher in resistance than the vehicle with a rating of >1. > > > > > > Interesting! By what critera is the surface area measured? > > I've never seen spec's > > on this. Eric > > > > > > jimt wrote: > > > >> On 10/17/04 8:53 PM, "Stan Wilder" <wilden1-1@SBCGLOBAL.NET> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> With less than 100 hp the dream of 100 in a Vanagon is just a dream >unless > >>> you drive off cliff and read your airspeed indicator on the way down. > >>> I think Bruce just dropped the hammer on his hybrid toy to see how > >>> everything behaved and reached that 101 as part of the test but that >brings > >>> up the speedometer error that is about 10% and that means he was only >doing > >>> 92 mph. Well within reasonable speeds for Texas Highways for all >Pickup > >>> trucks, SUVs, MPVs, 18 wheelers, and Rice Rockets of both the two and >four > >>> wheel varieties. > >>> > >>> Stan Wilder > >>> High Performance Ceramic Coatings > >>> www.engineceramics.com > >>> > >>> > >> Last year after a proper breakin on my subie mod I took it out on the >flats > >> on i70 towards kansas. Took it up to just under 6k on the tach. At >that > >> speed my speedo is definitely off by very close to 15 percent. (only >goes > >> to 85). However 5.8 x 18 is comfortably (uncomfortably) over 100mph. >Havent > >> done it since and don�t plan on it. Even at a moderate 80mph a >crosswind is > >> not nice in a vanagon or any slabsided vehicle. For a regular vanagon >to > >> hit those speeds is right at the cutoff. The subie electronic cutout >is at > >> about 6.2k the vanagon electronics cuts out at about 5.8k plus or >minus a > >> little. I am told that the last couple years of the vanagon the ecu >cutout > >> at 6k but no change was made to part numbers. > >> > >> Aerodynamically everybody seems to be missing one thing. > >> If I have a very unslippery vehicle with a coefficient of 1 (flat >surface) > >> and a slippery vehicle of .5 and the surface area in question on the .5 > >> vehicle is 3 times the area of the vehicle with a rating of 1, the .5 > >> vehicle is much higher in resistance than the vehicle with a rating of >1. > >> > >> > >���������������������������������������� >jimt >Planned insanity is best. >Remember that sanity is optional. >http://www.tactical-bus.info (tech info) >http://www.westydriver.com
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »