Aerodynamic drag and why a coupe is better

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
Smartbear said:
I read that driving with the windows down was worse for economy than driving with the ac on, I should think that top down driving’s far worse than just windows down :?
Rob
A glue-on spoiler's worst. Especially on a yellow car. :wink:
 
BadgerDog said:
Busterboo said:
A glue-on spoiler's worst. Especially on a yellow car. :wink:
Whomever could you POSSIBLY be talking about hmmmm?

Well I love it...gives it a nice pert look..much like the E85s...the standard E89 bottom looks like a 60 year old grandma’s slightly overweight bum, especially in some of the bland colours.. :thumbsup:

I agree that non colour matched spoilers look really naff, and some look naff even colour matched.. :tumbleweed:

Judging by how many unprompted positive comments the car gets compared to other E89s the public seem to like it...

Now that Busterboo has been enlightened to switch off signature graphics he doesn’t need to use his dark sunglasses any more :thumbsup:
 
Thrashed at least once a week, my 35iS did 26.4 mpg from 20k to 65k miles with few long runs and no commuting.

It then had a new battery and the figure fell immediately to 24.5. Now, at 70k miles, it's creeping over 26.0 again.
 
Pbondar said:
I get about 28mpg measured over 3,000 miles..and generally that’s a pretty rapid pace...with lots of acceleration and braking due to the nature of the roads where I potter ... :driving:

Your obc should also have the average speed over those miles :roll: bet its nearer 30mph than 60mph :wink:
 
mr wilks said:
Pbondar said:
I get about 28mpg measured over 3,000 miles..and generally that’s a pretty rapid pace...with lots of acceleration and braking due to the nature of the roads where I potter ... :driving:

Your obc should also have the average speed over those miles :roll: bet its nearer 30mph than 60mph :wink:

Mr Wilks true ..41.3 mph ..
 
Busterboo said:
Thrashed at least once a week, my 35iS did 26.4 mpg from 20k to 65k miles with few long runs and no commuting.

It then had a new battery and the figure fell immediately to 24.5. Now, at 70k miles, it's creeping over 26.0 again.
All on 95RON, of course. :wink:
 
Busterboo said:
Busterboo said:
Thrashed at least once a week, my 35iS did 26.4 mpg from 20k to 65k miles with few long runs and no commuting.

It then had a new battery and the figure fell immediately to 24.5. Now, at 70k miles, it's creeping over 26.0 again.
All on 95RON, of course. :wink:

So are you now telling us new batteries are heavier and gradually lose weight as you use them? :poke: :D
 
Pbondar said:
flybobbie said:
3 and 4 looks a bit draughty in the back seats.
What kit plane did you get 155kts on 100hp, Pulsar by any chance.

I'm still waiting to try out a Glasair in the hanger.

Dyn Aero Banbi MCR01
You would get on well with my mates dad, he restores/builds P51 Mustangs from scratch at full scale and also reduced scale.
 
enuff_zed said:
Busterboo said:
Busterboo said:
Thrashed at least once a week, my 35iS did 26.4 mpg from 20k to 65k miles with few long runs and no commuting.

It then had a new battery and the figure fell immediately to 24.5. Now, at 70k miles, it's creeping over 26.0 again.
All on 95RON, of course. :wink:

So are you now telling us new batteries are heavier and gradually lose weight as you use them? :poke: :D
:lol: :lol:
 
If on the rare occasion I use my car for work, I tend to drive it exactly the same, regardless of roof up or roof down. Not heavy driving, but not dithering about either.

Same round trip with the roof up, just under 1/4 of a tank,
Roof down, just over 1/4 of a tank

It works about at just under 2 Litres of burn difference across the two comparisons over 150 mile round trip.

It might also be worth noting that if I don’t have the roof down, it’s usually because it is a lot cooler, or raining, and both of those factors will only make a petrol engine run better, so not entirely down to drag in my case.
 
I bought a roadster because I could put the roof down, not so worry about how much fuel I'm using.

You can't put a price on a nice summers night drive with the roof down. An experience a coupe driver can only dream of.
 
srhutch said:
I bought a roadster because I could put the roof down, not so worry about how much fuel I'm using.

You can't put a price on a nice summers night drive with the roof down. An experience a coupe driver can only dream of.

Well now I know another reason to stick to Coupes! Must be why my MC is currently showing 26.9mpg average, although that may be more to do with being gentle with it for now as the bearing shells have only just been replaced.

As for driving with no roof the only sort of dream that conjures up for me is a nightmare. :lol: :fuelfire:
 
I don't make a point of monitoring my fuel consumption. It is not the reason I bought the car. Average is maybe 25 mpg. I did notice a few weeks ago that on a trip down south to my brothers new gaff I went through half a tank which worked out to roughly 37 mpg. I think for most of the tie the roof was down. Now, the caveat is Mrs Stevo was accompanying me and she adopts the brace position whenever I change down a gear so I was being extremely gentle. Suffice to say on to returning to the homestead I made an excuse to pop to the shop for something medicinal and blew the snot out of it. :rofl:
 
Mr Tidy said:
srhutch said:
I bought a roadster because I could put the roof down, not so worry about how much fuel I'm using.

You can't put a price on a nice summers night drive with the roof down. An experience a coupe driver can only dream of.

Well now I know another reason to stick to Coupes! Must be why my MC is currently showing 26.9mpg average, although that may be more to do with being gentle with it for now as the bearing shells have only just been replaced.

As for driving with no roof the only sort of dream that conjures up for me is a nightmare. :lol: :fuelfire:

Mine is showing an average of 18 mpg :evil: :driving:

Thanks for the interesting article Pbondar :thumbsup:
 
BMWZ4MC said:
Mr Tidy said:
srhutch said:
I bought a roadster because I could put the roof down, not so worry about how much fuel I'm using.

You can't put a price on a nice summers night drive with the roof down. An experience a coupe driver can only dream of.

Well now I know another reason to stick to Coupes! Must be why my MC is currently showing 26.9mpg average, although that may be more to do with being gentle with it for now as the bearing shells have only just been replaced.

As for driving with no roof the only sort of dream that conjures up for me is a nightmare. :lol: :fuelfire:

Mine is showing an average of 18 mpg :evil: :driving:

Thanks for the interesting article Pbondar :thumbsup:

Your welcome..the original point if the article was not to justify or not the extra cost of roof down motoring simply to rationalise in part differing fuel consumptions...plus the confirmation that wind deflectors and some spoilers have a benefit for top down motoring :driving:
 
It was said the Princess was more aerodynamically efficient going back wards, at least until the steering ball joint broke off!
 
This is what you get when you spend the first 1000 miles of ownership warming her up and driving your favourite b roads :o Screenshot_20200912-011007.png
 
Back
Top Bottom