Drag & Aerodynamics

You Suck At Aerodynamics - read the corrections though!

Coefficients Of Drag Of Old Cars

Wikipedia's list of drag coefficients (but no frontal areas) for your amusement.

Some basic maths nicked from Landyzone - of course maths found on the internet is highly trustworthy!

Taking your average family runabout as an example, the Bugatti Veyron has a drag coefficient of 0.36 and a frontal area of 2.07m^2 (according to Wikipedia).

At 250mph (i.e. 111.76m/s) the aerodynamic drag will therefore be:
0.5 * 1.23 * 0.36 * 2.07 * 111.76^2
Assuming an air density of 1.23kg/m^3

That comes out at 5724N, which translates to a drag power of;
5724 * 111.76 / 1000 = 639.7kW

Assuming a driveline efficiency of 94%, that’s equivalent to an engine power requirement of;
639.7 / 0.94 = 680.6kW or 913bhp.

If Bugatti wanted to increase Vmax by (say) just 10mph, from 250 to 260mph, the new engine power requirement is:
0.5 * 1.23 * 0.36 * 2.07 * 116.23^3 / (1000*0.94) = 765.6kW or 1027bhp

So the extra 10mph on top speed would require an additional 114bhp from the engine!

Phil

Note - This ignores rolling resistance drag (generally taken as around 1.5% of the vehicle weight) because this is insignificant at high vehicle speeds compared with aerodynamic drag – though it is significant at low vehicle speeds.

Some examples

This was found at https://www.liquisearch.com/automotive_aerodynamics/drag_coefficient

Drag coefficient (Cd) is a commonly published rating of a car's aerodynamic smoothness, related to the shape of the car. Multiplying Cd by the car's frontal area gives an index of total drag. The result is called drag area, and is listed below for several cars. The width and height of curvy cars lead to gross overestimation of frontal area. These numbers use the manufacturer's frontal area specifications from the Mayfield Company Homepage.

Drag area Year Automobile
Imperial (Cd x Ft2) Metric (Cd x M2)
3.95 0.367 1996 GM EV1
5.10 0.474 1999 Honda Insight
5.40 0.502 1989 Opel Calibra
5.54 0.515 1980 Ferrari 308 GTB
5.61 0.521 1993 Mazda RX-7
5.61 0.521 1993 McLaren F1
5.63 0.523 1991 Opel Calibra
5.64 0.524 1990 Bugatti EB110
5.71 0.530 1990 Honda CRX
5.74 0.533 2002 Acura NSX
5.76 0.535 1968 Toyota 2000GT
5.88 0.546 1990 Nissan 240SX
5.86 0.544 2001 Audi A2 1.2 TDI 3L
5.92 0.550 1994 Porsche 911 Speedster
5.95 0.553 1994 McLaren F1
6.00 0.557 1970 Lamborghini Miura S
6.00 0.557 1992 Subaru SVX
6.06 0.563 2003 Opel Astra Coupe Turbo
6.08 0.565 2008 Nissan GTR
6.13 0.569 1991 Acura NSX
6.15 0.571 1989 Suzuki Swift GT
6.17 0.573 1995 Lamborghini Diablo
6.24 0.580 2004 Toyota Prius
6.27 0.583 1986 Porsche 911 Carrera
6.27 0.583 1992 Chevrolet Corvette
6.35 0.590 1999 Lotus Elise
6.77 0.629 1995 BMW M3
6.79 0.631 1993 Corolla DX
6.81 0.633 1989 Subaru Legacy
6.96 0.647 1988 Porsche 944 S
7.02 0.652 1992 BMW 325I
7.10 0.660 1978 Saab 900
7.13 0.662 2007 SSC Ultimate Aero
7.48 0.695 1993 Chevrolet Camaro Z28
7.57 0.703 1992 Toyota Camry
8.70 0.808 1990 Volvo 740 Turbo
8.71 0.809 1991 Buick LeSabre Limited
9.54 0.886 1992 Chevy Caprice Wagon
10.70 0.994 1992 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer
11.63 1.080 1991 Jeep Cherokee
13.10 1.217 1990 Range Rover Classic
13.76 1.278 1994 Toyota T100 SR5 4×4
14.52 1.349 1994 Toyota Land Cruiser
17.43 1.619 1992 Land Rover Discovery
18.03 1.675 1992 Land Rover Defender 90
18.06 1.678 1993 Hummer H1
20.24 1.880 1993 Land Rover Defender 110
26.32 2.445 2006 Hummer H2

Calculations

Finding the above info led me to naturally run some numbers in a spreadsheet - let's do a normal everyday comparison between an average-ish Defender (using Cd * FtM2 = 1.8) and a Bugatti Veyron:

MPH KPH HP Required (at wheels)
Defender Veyron
10 16 0.1 0.1
20 32 1.1 0.4
30 48 3.6 1.5
40 64 8.6 3.6
50 80 16.8 7
60 97 29 12
70 113 46.1 19.1
80 129 68.8 28.5
90 145 98 40.6
100 161 134.5 55.7
110 177 179 74.1
120 193 232.4 96.2
130 209 295.4 122.3
140 225 369 152.8
150 241 453.8 187.9
160 257 550.8 228
170 274 660.6 273.5
180 290 784.2 324.7
190 306 922.3 381.8
200 322 1075.7 445.3
210 338 1245.3 515.5
220 354 1431.8 592.8
230 370 1636 677.3
240 386 1858.8 769.6
250 402 2101 869.8

Drivetrain losses in a clunky old 4WD like a Defender could easily be 20% so the TL;DR is that if someone tells you their 200TDi Defender can do 100mph they need their speedo recalibrated or are just full of crap :thefinger: as that would be asking for ~170HP out of the thing on a good day with a following wind :ph34r: