What is the most aerodynamic car ever
What is the most aerodynamic car ever
Author
Discussion

johnnybegood

Original Poster:

149 posts

177 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
As title really which car is the most aerodynamically efficient (i.e. least drag coefficient value)?

kambites

69,918 posts

238 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
Do you mean most efficient for its frontal area (lowest CD) or generating least drag (lowest CDA)?

Lordbenny

8,715 posts

236 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
This one?



As far as production cars go I think the Mercedes E-Class coupe has the lowest drag coefficient: with a Cd-figure of just 0.24.

Edited by Lordbenny on Thursday 20th October 10:13

Some Gump

12,997 posts

203 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all


This one?

TeaNoSugar

1,402 posts

182 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
The original Honda Insight must be one of the best (if we're talking about production cars). Low drag coefficient, and as it's a very small car I would imagine its Overall drag would be quite low too?

kambites

69,918 posts

238 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
TeaNoSugar said:
The original Honda Insight must be one of the best (if we're talking about production cars). Low drag coefficient, and as it's a very small car I would imagine its Overall drag would be quite low too?
Yes, it's near the top as far as road cars go on both fronts. The GM EV1 is probably highest on both, I think.

Wikipedia has a list, if anyone can be bothered finding it.

andrewrob

2,913 posts

207 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
Wikipedia reckons
0.26 Mercedes-Benz E-Class 2002-2009
0.26 Nissan GT-R 2010–present
0.26 Opel Calibra(8 valve version) 1989
0.26 Toyota Prius 2004–2009
0.25 Audi A2 1.2 TDI 2001
0.25 Honda Insight 1999, 2003, 2005
0.25 Toyota Prius 2010
0.26 Mercedes-Benz B-Class + eco-package 2012-
0.24 Mercedes E 220 CDI Blue Efficiency European version only, other E-Class Coupe 0.28(0.25 sedan)( 2009
0.212 Tatra T77A 1935[64][65] [66] [67]
0.195 General Motors EV1 1996

kambites

69,918 posts

238 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
I assume that's CD; there's no way something as big as the Merc would be that near the top on CDA.

johnnybegood

Original Poster:

149 posts

177 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
suprised that non of the super cars are slippery or it that because they require down force to stay planted at high speeds.
Also suprised merc are up there also.

ZOLLAR

19,914 posts

190 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
Surely this!, it must cut through the air like a knife through butter hehe


kambites

69,918 posts

238 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
johnnybegood said:
suprised that non of the super cars are slippery or it that because they require down force to stay planted at high speeds.
Also suprised merc are up there also.
Supercars tend to be horrendously inefficient because they need to move air around a lot for cooling and downforce. I'm quite surprised the GTR is so high up the list, to be honest.

CraigyMc

17,919 posts

253 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
johnnybegood said:
As title really which car is the most aerodynamically efficient (i.e. least drag coefficient value)?
Depends on your definition of "car".

Do you count:
  • cars which cannot be driven on the road?
  • things which weren't mass produced?
  • solar eco challenge cars?
  • LSR cars?
  • cars which were mass-produced but never sold (only leased)? (eg. GM's EV1 test/technology cars- they made just over 1000 of them, I think)
  • cars which have a very low frontal area? (making them not really "cars" in the sense of being usable day to day?
If you're talking road car, with sensible proportions, which was sold to the general public like any other, then I think you'd need to look at a Honda Insight.

The shape of a current mercedes E220 BlueEfficiency gives it a Cd of 0.24, which is pretty remarkable, but I think the insight has quite a bit smaller frontal area, so probably has less aero drag.

C

Snowboy

8,028 posts

168 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
I think there's more than one way to calculate aerodynamics and drag and stuff.
However,

Wasn't the old Ford Sierra supposed to have almost no drag.

I also think the Allegro was more aerodynamic when driven backwards – but this could be an urban legend.

RenesisEvo

3,790 posts

236 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
Snowboy said:
Wasn't the old Ford Sierra supposed to have almost no drag.
0.34 according to Wikipedia. It was based on the Ford Probe III concept, which did have very low drag - 0.22, but not a production vehicle.

durbster

11,475 posts

239 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
I seem to remember Mercedes producing a concept car based on a fish (seriously smile) and although it didn't look like it, it had an extraordinarily aerodynamic shape.

Ah yes, this is it:

CraigyMc

17,919 posts

253 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
Snowboy said:
I also think the Allegro was more aerodynamic when driven backwards – but this could be an urban legend.
Lots of cars from the time had the same property. The Allegro is just one example (Top Gear popularised this).



BarnatosGhost

31,608 posts

270 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
Big saloon cars are helped by having a low frontal area:length ratio.

I think the A2 achieves an amazing figure given how tall it is in comparison to its length. If it was 2' longer or 6" shorter I imagine it would win hands-down.

TooLateForAName

4,891 posts

201 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
andrewrob said:
0.212 Tatra T77A 1935
That *is* impressive.

Randy Winkman

19,367 posts

206 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all

k15tox

1,680 posts

198 months

Thursday 20th October 2011
quotequote all
Isn't the c5/c6 vette suppose to be pretty good?

Also the caymans and the 911's?