Date:         Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:24:50 -0700
Reply-To:     Steven Dodson <steven@EPOCHDESIGN.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Steven Dodson <steven@EPOCHDESIGN.COM>
Subject:      Re: aerodynamics, was: 101 MPH Vanagon!
In-Reply-To:  <200410170007.1cj2jW3iF3Nl5tB0@aurelius.mspring.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

This doesn't surprise me, seeing that convertibles have the worst
coefficient of drag of nearly any vehicle. The swept windscreen crates a
negative pressure behind it and the open cockpit creates tons of big
turbulence. The pointiest front means nothing if you don't deal with the
vortex in the rear. The Alfa Duetto Coupe with headlight covers would be
another story altogether; very aerodynamic. I can see how a wing forcing air
behind the Vanagon would improve it's Cd. The skirts will only work well if
you lowered the van and the skirts cover equally all around the van. Put
belly pans on the Vanagon and that would improve the Cd even more.

-Steven Dodson
Kneeland, CA
"Inga" the 87 Syncro


>Date:    Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:05:59 -0700
>From:    Mike Miller <mwmiller@CWNET.COM>
>Subject: Re: aerodynamics, was: 101 MPH Vanagon!

>As I understood it way back in the day my Renault R -10 had a better Cx and
>Ct than the Alfa Romeo spyder.  Weird if true.