Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, just want to start off with some drag coefficient values:

Nissan R32 GTR = 0.4 Cd

Nissan R33 GTR = 0.35 Cd

Nissan R34 GTR = 0.34 Cd

Subaru Impreza STi 2004 = 0.33 Cd

Nissan Cube = 0.35 Cd

A freaken Impreza (peanut/tear drop eye) STi with it's massive scoop, 4 doors, bulky appearance is better than the aerodynamics of the R32, despite the sleek look. I feel that on the freeway i gotta give it a bit more gas than my previous Impreza because of the drag is creates. Is the aerodynamics a big issue for anybody else? How important is this in motorsport/track days? Just feel that the R32 has so much more potential if it were more aerodynamic.

Edited by TyresBro
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/335727-how-come-r32s-have-such-crappy-drag/
Share on other sites

It certainly effects them a lot, but the issue is also that at that point the car had to be designed to work on the race track with out any body modifications, and race cars need down force, which creates drag, this is my theory. Pretty sure the other reason might be that it was not to well thought out or designed..... I am actually thinking about removing rear wing and trying reduce drag a bit next time I go to the strip to see what diff it makes

You're comparing a 1989 shape car with a 2004 impreza???

I think there's your answer.

Cd is more than just a sleek look. eg Lambo Countach - 0.42

That aside though, I've honestly never felt it. And I'm going to a 32 GTR from a car with a 0.27Cd - V35 Coupe.

lol Dewds, I can pick out a lot of cars made around 1992 for a lot less Cd (eg. RX-7, Supra as mentioned, Civic, 180SX etc). It's just that there seem to be 2 different types of Cd, one for crappy body design, and the other is downforce. Read around and apparently the area of the front has a major role in aerodynamics too. Feels like such a handicap...

On the other note, would LOVE to see some wind tunnel testing of an R32 to determine if it's putting the Cd to good use.

Edited by TyresBro

Even if the R32 has a slightly high drag co-efficient, it would make shit all difference at speeds up to maximum legal speed limit of 110km/h. Drag co-efficients only REALLY come into play when you are talking about serious top-end drag racing (ie 7secs and lower) or serious circuit racing like the FIA GT1 champs etc.

I highly doubt you would be able to feel the difference on the freeway.

......Feels like such a handicap...
Even if the R32 has a slightly high drag co-efficient, it would make shit all difference at speeds up to maximum legal speed limit of 110km/h. Drag co-efficients only REALLY come into play when you are talking about serious top-end drag racing (ie 7secs and lower) or serious circuit racing like the FIA GT1 champs etc.

I highly doubt you would be able to feel the difference on the freeway.

Completely agree, and what i was trying to get at. I connot feel the difference at all between the V35 and the R32. (see my post above for the difference in the two)

And thats both cars on the track at both Wakefield and Oran Park, really don't know how the OP sees it as "such a handicap"

Regardless of the Cd rating they still handed the V8 Falcons & Holdens their asses at Bathurst & every other type of vehicle they raced against when they were released-including the Cosworth Sierra's.

I dont believe that its such a handicap tho-look at Victor Bray in that old school Chev, has the aerodynamics of a house brick but it still hauls ass ,so is it really that important considering the car was made in '92

The mainly noticable differences are on the freeway and downhills. The moment you let go of the accelerator, the car starts slowing down where as other cars start coasting or even roll faster. I'm not saying it like it's running on 3 wheels, but as the air drag increases as a square of speed, it exponentially increases the resistance and feel at higher speeds. That is where we have the disadvantage compared to other cars or similar class.

Regardless of the Cd rating they still handed the V8 Falcons & Holdens their asses at Bathurst & every other type of vehicle they raced against when they were released-including the Cosworth Sierra's.

I dont believe that its such a handicap tho-look at Victor Bray in that old school Chev, has the aerodynamics of a house brick but it still hauls ass

<facepalm>

The mainly noticable differences are on the freeway and downhills. The moment you let go of the accelerator, the car starts slowing down where as other cars start coasting or even roll faster. I'm not saying it like it's running on 3 wheels, but as the air drag increases as a square of speed, it exponentially increases the resistance and feel at higher speeds. That is where we have the disadvantage compared to other cars or similar class.

so many other things be coming into play there than aerodynamics. you could have a slightly sticking brake piston, poor wheel alignment, crappy wheel bearings, tight diff, etc. the gear ratios could also come into it because of how the engine responds when just left on compression braking. the higher the revs the more it will slow down when you lift off. the width and tread pattern of tyres can also come into play.

you would really need to compare your car to another car with all the same mods and then see how it performs.

cant believe a cube has better aerodynamics than a 32. LOLZ.

but as mentioned. everything else on and about your car will have more affect than the CD at freeway speeds.

your tyres for example. wide, sticky, agressive tread pattern. that will slow you down. gearing, that will do it. fat gf, that will definitely do it. ask boz. :)

cant believe a cube has better aerodynamics than a 32. LOLZ.

but as mentioned. everything else on and about your car will have more affect than the CD at freeway speeds.

your tyres for example. wide, sticky, agressive tread pattern. that will slow you down. gearing, that will do it. fat gf, that will definitely do it. ask boz. :)

baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahaha

*wipes away tear

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha

A freaken Impreza (peanut/tear drop eye) STi with it's massive scoop, 4 doors, bulky appearance is better than the aerodynamics of the R32,

Quite simple, really

Subaru >> Nissan :)

Seriously though, the aerodynamics are really onlu going to have a significant impact at speeds above 150km/h or so. At 100, you're chewing up less than 20kW in overcoming the aerodynamic drag.

Having said that, reducing drag has a much bigger impact on top speed than increasing power. A doubling of power would increase top speed by about 13% (rough rule of thumb figures - obviously a lot of other things come into play)

The CD figure is a pretty basic number used to define a car's overall aerodynamic drag. Essentially it is saying how much drag your car has compared to a house brick with the same frontal area as your car (putting it simply).

CD is a comparison of the car's actual drag to the theoretical drag which is calculated from stagnation pressure (1/2 x air density x speed^2) x frontal area. This calculation gives a drag coefficient of 1:1. Your car's drag coefficient is the actual drag divided by the theoretical (house brick) drag

edit: this is my recollection from studying this stuff 25 years ago, so I might have missed some fine details.

Edited by warps
Quite simple, really

Subaru >> Nissan :D

Seriously though, the aerodynamics are really onlu going to have a significant impact at speeds above 150km/h or so. At 100, you're chewing up less than 20kW in overcoming the aerodynamic drag.

Having said that, reducing drag has a much bigger impact on top speed than increasing power. A doubling of power would increase top speed by about 13% (rough rule of thumb figures - obviously a lot of other things come into play)

The CD figure is a pretty basic number used to define a car's overall aerodynamic drag. Essentially it is saying how much drag your car has compared to a house brick with the same frontal area as your car (putting it simply).

Thanks-that clears things a lil :D

I dont know much about this type of stuff-am hoping to understand it all a little

More to the point I guess is there any proven way to improve the cars performance with 1 type of body kit over another or perhaps or even paint finishings.

ie Kiwi yachtsmen use lanolin on their hulls to improve the boats slip through the water & powerboaters use it for better fuel economy-not possible on the car but??????????

clearly it has nothing to do with a sleek 'looking' shape - the LS400 when released had the lowest drag coefficient of any production car at the time 0.29 - and that thing has a front end on it like a tugboat.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yep, pretty much what you said is a good summary. The aftermarket thing just attached to the rim, then has two lines out to valve stems, one to inner wheel, one to outer wheel. Some of the systems even start to air up as you head towards highway speed. IE, you're in the logging tracks, then as speeds increase it knows you're on tarmac and airs up so the driver doesn't even have to remember. I bet the ones that need driver intervention to air up end up seeing a lot more tyre wear from "forest pressures" in use on the highway!
    • Yes, but you need to do these type certifications for tuning parts. That is the absurd part here. Meaning tuning parts are very costly (generally speaking) as well as the technical test documentation for say a turbo swap with more power. It just makes modifying everything crazy expensive and complicated. That bracket has been lost in translation many years ago I assume, it was not there.
    • Hahaha, yeah.... not what you'd call a tamper-proof design.... but yes, with the truck setup, the lines are always connected, but typically they sit just inside the plane of the rear metal mudguards, so if you clear the guards you clear the lines as well. Not rogue 4WD tracks with tree branches and bushes everywhere, ready to hook-up an air hose. You can do it externally like a mod, but dedicated setups air-pressurize the undriven hubs, and on driven axles you can do the same thing, or pressurize the axles (lots of designs out there for this idea)... https://www.trtaustralia.com.au/traction-air-cti-system/  for example.... ..the trouble I've got here... wrt the bimmer ad... is the last bit...they don't want to show it spinning, do they.... give all the illusion that things are moving...but no...and what the hell tyre profile is that?...25??? ...far kernel, rims would be dead inside 10klms on most roads around here.... 😃
    • You're just describing how type certification works. Personally I would be shocked to discover that catalytic converter is not in the stock mounting position. Is there a bracket on the transfer case holding the catalytic converter and front pipe together? If so, it should be in stock position. 
    • You talking about the ones in the photo above? I guess that could make sense. Fixed (but flexible) line from the point up above down to the hubcap thingo, with a rotating air seal thingo. Then fixed (but also still likely flexible) line from the "other side" of the transfer in the hub cap thingo up to the valve stem on the rim. A horrible cludge, but something that could be done. I'd bet on the Unimog version being fed through from the back, as part of the axle assembly, without the need for the vulnerable lines out to the sides. It's amazing what you can do when you have an idea that is not quite impossible. Nearly impossible, but not quite.
×
×
  • Create New...