ok i missed a lot of stuff that went on in here. i will keep it pretty short and stay out of the details

first off, who here has experience in computational fluid dynamics?
thats what aerodynamics comes down to (in analyzing it that is)


the comment about the bullet being the most aerodynamic thing out there is bs. the reason is is shaped as it is because it needs a flat surface on the rear so the explosion has a surface applying its force to as it propels it out of the gun.

there was another comment about how f1 cars and stuff aren't very aerodynamic and stuff. another bs comment. go do some cfd on an f1 car. you will find out that the front end is designed to make the air naturally flow right over the tires causing little drag. it is true that the tires are one of the weaker parts of the cars aerodynamically (if thats a word)

i don't really have time to go into any detail now since i am at work, but i can always bust out my old textbooks when i get home and get into all the differential equations and whatnot that govern aero.

 

No, the link didnt say anything about stationwagons....but it demonstrated how the air flowing off of the roof of a car (any car) gets pretty turbulent.....but then IF the trunk lid is high enough and long enough the air rejoins the main airstream behind the vehicle much more smoothly, as the surface of the trunk will reduce some of that turbulence.....this is the same effect of the air coming off the roof of a stationwagon....except the air doesnt have a trunklid or anything to smooth the airflow after it comes off the roof.


wrx ish - I dont have any experience with the actual mathematical equations....but I understand how aerodynamics work, plus a little research here and there helps out too....but like the Bernoulli's (SP?) effect....thats all pretty logical, and you dont really need to know the exact mathematical theories behind it, rather how they are applied to the shapes/sizes of objects that are meant to be used for different areas of aerodynamics. Although, I wouldn't mind seeing some of your really technical stuff....that always interests me.....there's always room for new knowledge.

-Ted

 

I agree but I pose this to you. Here is why I feel the sedan is more aerodynamic than a Wagon, as you have said the wagon leaves a lot of turbulence behind it compared to the sedan. In some essence the wagon creates a vaccum behind it (a volume/area of lower pressure) than the sedan. A sharp knife cutting through the air takes less effort than a flat block of steel. Now given both cars feel a certain amount of wind resistance up front and the sedan has less of a vaccum pulling it back. In some ways it is like the difference in pressures between the front and the back of both cars (kind of like a difference in potential). In my opinion the sedan would have less of a potential difference due to air resistance and aerodynamics and would be able to go faster .... Although in the real world of driving this would probably amount to very little difference .... I guess some of the most boxy/flat faced and unaerodynamic cars can go faster than others simple by using a more powerful engine, gears, etc ....
Damn I'm to lazy to type my other thoughts ... =)