Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:42:22 -0800
Reply-To:     Alistair Bell <albell@SHAW.CA>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Alistair Bell <albell@SHAW.CA>
Subject:      Re: van aerodynamics, was Re: BenT's dream vanagon now for sale
Comments: To: Jim Felder <jim.felder@GMAIL.COM>
In-Reply-To:  <4d1b79351001210710o5c98f7f2q7b4b82c4fc43a156@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

look again at those windtunnel pics, see how nicely the flow moves
over the hightop?

one thing to remember, its the shape and frontal area combined....
moving the pop top back does not decrease the frontal area (head on
view). But it might place that part in a low pressure region.

And again, the 600 pound gorilla in the corner is the rear end. Back
to the bustle concept.

Alistair


On 21-Jan-10, at 7:10 AM, Jim Felder wrote:

Another possible improvement that removing the luggage rack could make
AERODYNAMICALLY (and not in any other way, such as utility) is that
the front of the van would have "a finer point of entry" and smaller
"frontal area" which I am told aerodynamicists are always looking for.
 From what little I know about aerodynamics, removing that six inches
up front and moving it back to mid-cabin would probably be an
aerodynamic improvement. The discussion, even if I knew what I was
talking about, would still be academic because of the vanagon/westy''s
many other aerodynamic shortcomings.

I agree with the poster who said that the seals would probably not
protect from the elements with the front removed.

One of my one-of-these-days projects is to create a cover for that
luggage sump up top, hinged at the front so that if you filled it with
stuff, the thing would act as a deflector over the cargo. I even
picked up a front fiberglass section from Unca Joel once to fulfill
that project with without messing up my car in the process of
experimentation. Haven't gotten too far with it yet.

Jim