h a l f b a k e r yExpensive, difficult, slightly dangerous, not particularly effective... I'm on a roll.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Many cars are not very aerodynamic. For example, the much hyped "hypercar" created by Amory Lovins, the Pope of efficiency, is not superiorly aerodynamic. [see link] Amory Lovins should know better.
My car is very aerodynamic. By a simple change in configuration: 1 seat in the front, 2 in the middle,
1 in the back. This way you can make a much better car.
It is not the most sexy car, but with Peak Oil awaiting us, who needs sexy.
I have made a picture of the very simple change in the configuration. Please find it in the links.
Voilà, this is a very simple idea. Maybe it's baked, maybe not.
Hypercar
http://www.hypercar.com/
The hypercar is not very hyper-aerodynamic [django, May 19 2006]
More aerodynamic configuration
http://i3.photobuck...iddiesel/bullet.jpg
1 front, 2 middle, 1 back [django, May 19 2006]
Seen from the top
http://i3.photobuck...iesel/bullettop.jpg
It's more aerodynamic [django, May 19 2006]
Bucky's Dymaxion car
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_car
[nihilo, May 20 2006]
The BoxFish
http://www.worldcar...607.004/country/gcf
Mercedes looks for car shapes in nature... [RayfordSteele, May 20 2006]
Aptera
http://en.wikipedia...i/Aptera_hybrid_car
Aptera hybrid car. 300+ mpg, 850 lbs, Cd=0.06 [kevinthenerd, May 31 2006]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
so whats the new Idea here. Efficient shapes for cars is not a new idea. Also your design would not be very stable at speed as it will tend to float. Aerodynamics in cars is far more complicated than simply reducing the drag. You still need down force and suspension geometry and passenger Safety systems(bumpers, glass, crumple zones etc). Look at the design of Landspeed record cars and concept cars and you will find many similar ideas to what you are presenting. |
|
| |
Really the idea is the seat configuration--your idea has a lousy name. At any rate, I claim to have had the same idea myself, but that's not worth anything. I don't actually know of anybody who has "officially" declared this concept, so I'll remain neutral on this. |
|
| |
Incidentally, nice renders. |
|
| |
I initially read this title as 'More Aerodynamic Cat.' Frankly, I'm a tad disappointed. However, I would buy one of these cars just for the look. |
|
| |
But can it fly, like supercar? |
|
| |
Cars have way too many competing demands on them in order to satisfy any single one of them perfectly. |
|
| |
Yeah, nice renders. But the wheels are out in the breeze, which is gonna make drag. |
|
| |
Burt Rutan built an airplane with seating somewhat like that. They called it the Catbird, as the pilot could be said to be sitting in the catbird seat. |
|
| |
there are many answers for decreasing oil consumption. one could be eliminating traffic jams (that's what i had in mind when i imagined those crazy traffic lights). but on the other hand, if you're taking a long trip and want to ride with 100mph (it's the only situation aerodynamics gets to be a factor) and give consumption some consideration, than you should know that the main decelerating friction is the tire's friction when they roll. (the tire is slightly deformed by the car's weight, it gets somewhat flattened in the lower part, and each rotation of the wheel involves friction between the molecules of the tire because of that flattening).
This process is the main reason why cars need considerable amount of gas in order to maintain constant speed. The pressure inside the tires has a much more important influence on fuel consumption that aerodynamics do. So, with a given car, the more rigid your wheels are, the less gas you need for a long trip. Now when it comes to developing the most efficient tires, that's a whole different story. |
|
| |
[sweet] I know this post is some seven years old, but that information has *never* been correct. |
|
| |
Aerodynamics accounts for half of the average cars' fuel consumption from 60km/h (37mph). You get to 70mph and it's scarily close to 90%. Naturally the figures are different for each car, but it's certainly the dominant load when at speed unless you're driving through water deeper than you should. |
|
| |
Of course the last person I was talking to who said that was used to aeroplanes, which are already a well developed thing and didn't realise just how horrible cars still are... |
|
| |
Just put all the seats in line. That's going to be more
efficient, but it's not real popular. The original
version of the Volkswagen XL1 had this design. So
did many others, but none of them have been
commercially successful. |
|
| |