Speedholes in your car do increase average mileage

jmke · 23rd October 2009, 16:21

The show's team completely covered a last-gen Ford Taurus with modelers clay and figured out that it would achieve about 26 mpg at a constant 65 mph. They then went about adding over 1,000 dimples to the car's exterior. To keep the experiment consistent, all 1,082 dimples removed from the clay exterior were put in a box and set in the back seat so that the car would weigh exactly the same as before dimpling. The theory is that, like a golf ball, the dimples would reduce the car's drag through the air, thus allowing it to travel the same distance at the same speed using less fuel. The result? Over 29 mpg.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/22/m...-dimpling-mpg/

The Senile Doctor · 23rd October 2009, 19:22

and it looks stunning (-ly ugly)

jmke · 23rd October 2009, 19:27

In black you won't notice it that much

23rd October 2009, 20:34

(Without watching the episode) I wonder how many mpg they lost just by adding all of that modeling clay? =P

jmke · 23rd October 2009, 20:42

Without clay: 26 MPG
With clay: 26 MPG
With clay & dimples: 29 MPG

23rd October 2009, 23:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

(Without watching the episode) I wonder how many mpg they lost just by adding all of that modeling clay? =P

They measured mileage from the car already "at speed", so weight doesn't affect the mileage numbers.

The clay weighed almost 900lbs

25th October 2009, 01:59

Kougar,

Have you forgotten your algebra ??

E=MC(squared)

If you increase mass, the energy require to travel at the same constant speed increases.
To ACCELERATE the additinoal mass also requires more energy.

The question is... if the additional energy required is significantly offset by the savings in fuel consumption byu reducing surface drag.

25th October 2009, 04:24

I think you misunderstand how they conducted their test.

Higher mass - It takes more energy to get up to 60mph
Lower mass - It takes less energy to get up to 60mph

Their tests were conducted after already at 60mph.

Apply Newton's First law, not Einstein's E=MC^2 theory.

Regardless of weight, once at 60mph the fuel consumption stays the same... weight doesn't affect air resistance, only marginally tire friction. The greater the mass, the greater the inertia, therefore the less impact tire friction will have.

23rd October 2009, 16:21	#1
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,024	Speedholes in your car do increase average mileage The show's team completely covered a last-gen Ford Taurus with modelers clay and figured out that it would achieve about 26 mpg at a constant 65 mph. They then went about adding over 1,000 dimples to the car's exterior. To keep the experiment consistent, all 1,082 dimples removed from the clay exterior were put in a box and set in the back seat so that the car would weigh exactly the same as before dimpling. The theory is that, like a golf ball, the dimples would reduce the car's drag through the air, thus allowing it to travel the same distance at the same speed using less fuel. The result? Over 29 mpg. http://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/22/m...-dimpling-mpg/ __________________

23rd October 2009, 19:22	#2
The Senile Doctor Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is Posts: 3,171	and it looks stunning (-ly ugly) __________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world

23rd October 2009, 19:27	#3
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,024	In black you won't notice it that much __________________

23rd October 2009, 20:42	#5
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,024	Without clay: 26 MPG With clay: 26 MPG With clay & dimples: 29 MPG __________________

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
If You Don't Want Your Car Stolen, Make It Pink	jmke	WebNews	3	28th July 2010 19:30
Apple iPad is like a car without a motor	jmke	WebNews	29	4th February 2010 17:02
Remotely Start Your Car Using A Cellphone	jmke	WebNews	0	20th January 2010 17:02
Drive a Volvo S60 Concept car for free!	jmke	WebNews	0	22nd April 2009 16:43
A Mini MotherBoard Designed Just for Car PCs	jmke	WebNews	0	18th April 2009 10:44
Build your own street-legal solar-powered electric car	jmke	WebNews	1	24th March 2008 08:26
VIA and Mini-box Announce First Sub-$300 Car PC Kit	jmke	WebNews	0	3rd October 2005 23:10
Rusty Wallace 2001 Ford Taurus Winston Cup Car machine	Mister 4x4	Hardware Overclocking and Case Modding	15	1st August 2004 00:42

23rd October 2009, 20:34	#4
Oberon Posts: n/a	(Without watching the episode) I wonder how many mpg they lost just by adding all of that modeling clay? =P

25th October 2009, 01:59	#7
MENINBLK Posts: n/a	Kougar, Have you forgotten your algebra ?? E=MC(squared) If you increase mass, the energy require to travel at the same constant speed increases. To ACCELERATE the additinoal mass also requires more energy. The question is... if the additional energy required is significantly offset by the savings in fuel consumption byu reducing surface drag.

25th October 2009, 04:24	#8
Kougar Posts: n/a	I think you misunderstand how they conducted their test. Higher mass - It takes more energy to get up to 60mph Lower mass - It takes less energy to get up to 60mph Their tests were conducted after already at 60mph. Apply Newton's First law, not Einstein's E=MC^2 theory. Regardless of weight, once at 60mph the fuel consumption stays the same... weight doesn't affect air resistance, only marginally tire friction. The greater the mass, the greater the inertia, therefore the less impact tire friction will have.