Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/08/2023 6:02:09 AM PST by Red Badger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Red Badger

Fiat Turbina may have a lower drag coefficient, but the Chery (Cherovlet, China?) doesn’t look like it wants to tongue kiss you.


2 posted on 11/08/2023 6:08:51 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

All of these, including the Chery, were concept cars. I remember the Ford Probe that actually made it to market had a very good rating. It never took off, and you don’t see them any more.


3 posted on 11/08/2023 6:23:14 AM PST by Dr. Sivana ("If you can’t say something nice . . . say the Rosary." [Red Badger])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Somebody got their Chery popped...


4 posted on 11/08/2023 6:25:55 AM PST by moovova ("The NEXT election is the most important election of our lifetimes!“ LOL...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

I believe the AMC Pacer was the most aerodynamic car ever made...


6 posted on 11/08/2023 6:44:52 AM PST by Common Sense 101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger
”the Fiat Turbina from 1954 had 0.14”

Wikipedia: Fiat Turbina

Looks like something from the Speed Racer cartoon.

10 posted on 11/08/2023 7:09:04 AM PST by UnwashedPeasant (The pandemic we suffer from is not COVID. It is Marxist Democrat Leftism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

With that front end it appears to have more coefficient drag than 1953 Studebaker commander.


13 posted on 11/08/2023 9:08:18 AM PST by Vaduz (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger
The Most Aerodynamic Car Ever?


24 posted on 11/08/2023 1:37:25 PM PST by Libloather (Why do climate change hoax deniers live in mansions on the beach?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Aerodynamics isn’t that big a deal. At normal highway speeds, good vs bad aerodynamics might give you ±2-3 mpg. Stacking a bunch of bikes on your roof (terrible!) and hitting 100 mph, you might half your mileage. But most vehicles (even older ones) have enough of a decent aerodynamic design that all you can really do is make small improvements that aren’t that noticeable. Underinflated tires is going to do more damage to your numbers.

And really, would you rather have a badass looking Mustang or Corvette from the 60s (obviously with today’s improved engines and all), or the sleek-ish all-look-alike ones from today? Can a non-car guy even tell the difference between the Camaro or the Charger or the Challenger or even the Mustang?


26 posted on 11/13/2023 7:11:30 AM PST by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson