So either the eight track was in a very small car, or it brings into question the musical tastes of the driver - !
Aerodynamics - ?
- Thread starter simongt
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Landsurfer
Veteran
So ..on LEJOG a few years ago … we stopped at a campsite at the top of that huge hill leading into Inverness ..
the next morning … off we set , climbing up to the A9 … then miles downhill to the bridge … I was the tallest of the 9, the heaviest, ok fattest … and as a professional Aircraft Engineer, the most aware of aerodynamics …. I was the last to get onto the drops, but halfway down the hill I was in the lead .. well in the lead …..
Boiled Egg on a Bike aerodynamics…. RESULT ! ! !
the next morning … off we set , climbing up to the A9 … then miles downhill to the bridge … I was the tallest of the 9, the heaviest, ok fattest … and as a professional Aircraft Engineer, the most aware of aerodynamics …. I was the last to get onto the drops, but halfway down the hill I was in the lead .. well in the lead …..
Boiled Egg on a Bike aerodynamics…. RESULT ! ! !
gbb
Squire
- Location
- Peterborough
Tastes evolve, design evolves, people evolve, nothing stays the same. That said, I look at the BMW EVs at work and think, surely, surely they could have come up with something more appealing (and aerodynamic ) than a slab shaped front.
Profpointy
Legendary Member
For stylish aerodynamics, the Citroen DS range is up there with the best - !
At the risk of derailing a legit debate, the DS, and the Maserati engined exotic version are lovely as well as genuinely aerodynamic. The
Maserati one was not far from us, and the plain DS was in Oxford.
But at least they made an effort !
gbb
Squire
- Location
- Peterborough
But you do get improvement, more legroom, headroom, safety..perhaps more. It just depends what your idea of 'improvement' is.
I'd say legroom is debatable, headroom maybe... safety - for whom?
Cars are the biggest and heaviest they've ever been; carrying more energy into a crash for a given speed and while this might be less relevant for others in similar vehicles, not everyone chooses to drive a high-rise two-ton box and there have been no improvements in safety devices or crash structures fitted to pedestrians and cyclists.
There's also the visibility argument for third parties who have to negotiate these monstosities.
I certainly don't view this bizarre trend of cars getting bigger, heavier and generally more obnoxious as an positive development.
Last edited:
Electric_Andy
Heavy Metal Fan
- Location
- Plymouth
Agree, but anything a car hits these days is thought of as an occupational hazard. There's no money in making smaller,safer cars that the majority of the public won't buy. Unless of course there is a huge shift in the type of vehicles legally allowed to be bought and sold in the UK.
I agree to a point, however as previously suggested I think modern marketing manufactures demand; it's the embodiment of change for change's sake to justify and incentivise continued spending... much of which is entirely unnecessary and underpinned by growing amounts of debt.
cyberknight
As long as I breathe, I attack.
- Location
- Land of confusion
i think that was more to do with mass than aerodynamics
gbb
Squire
- Location
- Peterborough
OK, think about it this way....think of the first car you really enjoyed owning, what was it you really liked, style ? performance ?, even aerodynamics ? It wasn't always that way, it evolved from something else. So was it an abomination because it was different to what came before ? Of course not.
If aerodynamics is so important for so many , why aren't we all driving that Audi with a coefficient of blah blah, or a lotus so close to the ground you struggle to get in. Because
its not what some people ( most people it seems) want.
Don't get me wrong, the slab fronted cars we see now do seem an abomination, counterproductive, inefficient...but there's something about them that appeals to people, even if it's just being different for different sake. I don't know what it is but there you go, people buy them.
5 years, 10 year time, we will be looking at (and complaining about ) something different again...its just evolution. Some is good, some is..not so.
Otherwise, we'd all be driving about in Model Ts
I'm of the opinion. ( generally in life) live and let live, I don't (try to) judge, just see things for what they are...and live with it.
If aerodynamics is so important for so many , why aren't we all driving that Audi with a coefficient of blah blah, or a lotus so close to the ground you struggle to get in. Because
its not what some people ( most people it seems) want.
Don't get me wrong, the slab fronted cars we see now do seem an abomination, counterproductive, inefficient...but there's something about them that appeals to people, even if it's just being different for different sake. I don't know what it is but there you go, people buy them.
5 years, 10 year time, we will be looking at (and complaining about ) something different again...its just evolution. Some is good, some is..not so.
Otherwise, we'd all be driving about in Model Ts
I'm of the opinion. ( generally in life) live and let live, I don't (try to) judge, just see things for what they are...and live with it.
Jameshow
Veteran
Anybody remember when car adverts gave the car's CD, Audi 80 rings a bell
Vauxhall calibra 0.26 cd!
Completely pointless bit of information, how I remember that but not last week's password I don't know.
OK, think about it this way....think of the first car you really enjoyed owning, what was it you really liked, style ? performance ?, even aerodynamics ? It wasn't always that way, it evolved from something else. So was it an abomination because it was different to what came before ? Of course not.
If aerodynamics is so important for so many , why aren't we all driving that Audi with a coefficient of blah blah, or a lotus so close to the ground you struggle to get in. Because
its not what some people ( most people it seems) want.
Don't get me wrong, the slab fronted cars we see now do seem an abomination, counterproductive, inefficient...but there's something about them that appeals to people, even if it's just being different for different sake. I don't know what it is but there you go, people buy them.
5 years, 10 year time, we will be looking at (and complaining about ) something different again...its just evolution. Some is good, some is..not so.
Otherwise, we'd all be driving about in Model Ts
I'm of the opinion. ( generally in life) live and let live, I don't (try to) judge, just see things for what they are...and live with it.
People will buy whatever the marketing people persuade them to buy. Give it another few years and they'll have come up with something else to persuade people they need to upgrade.
gbb
Squire
- Location
- Peterborough
Of course, that's the way it works. It's human nature. And it's not necessarily a good thing, but you can apply the same to bikes...anything at all. Why aren't we all riding around on bone shakers...because they evolve all the time, same with just about everything you can think of.
I can get a bit stubborn sometimes arguing a point. For me, it's simple evolution, everything changes, all the time. I didn't like the jelly mould design of the Sierra when it first came out, we're all different, plenty did like them. Yet the jelly mould was the essence of many cars from that point on you could argue
That said I do wonder about exactly WHY the slab fronted style has evolved.
Is it just something as simple as the desire to be different, that happens all the time.
Is it cost, is it cheaper to design and manufacture ?
Is it the weird thought that as EVs (as they particularly have this feature) that they run on renewable, therefore its in a sense free, so waste of the energy driving them doesn't matter. ?
All just theories, probably not right in the slightest and it's irrelevant anyway. People buy them, I don't like it, see the point of it, wouldn't see myself buying one, but hey ho,