Ehninger1212

Well-known member
First Name
Jake
Joined
Dec 18, 2019
Messages
777
Reaction score
1,324
Location
Houston, TX
Vehicles
Audi A3 E-Tron - 2005 Land Rover LR3 - T-Bucket - 1951 chevy 3100
Occupation
Architect/Fabricator
Country flag
When did Elon claim .35? thats pretty freaking good.
 

TheLastStarfighter

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
224
Reaction score
500
Location
Canada
Vehicles
Dodge Challenger
Occupation
Engineer
Country flag
When did Elon claim .35? thats pretty freaking good.
He didn't... he said .3

I expect a big part of the size reduction on the final vehicle will be more standard wheels that fit inside the arches. You can trim a couple inches there, and get rid of a lot of the noise in the diagram above.
 

cyberhunter

Well-known member
First Name
Heath
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
84
Reaction score
157
Location
Texas
Vehicles
2017 Ram 2500, Cybertruck preorder
Country flag
the fact that EVs can have virtual smooth undercarriage contributes a decent amount to their lower drag coefficient. For the CT the sloped rear helps a bunch. A sideways teardrop is an excellent aero shape for a vehicle and the CT is very similar (although angular) to a sideways teardrop.
 

Diehard

Well-known member
First Name
D
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
288
Reaction score
453
Location
U.S.A.
Vehicles
Oldsmobile Aurora V8, Saturn Sky redline, Nissan Frontier,...
Country flag
I wanted to see this bad. Thanks for sharing. I always thought of rigging something for long highway travel like a triangle up front and in the back. Now I am not sure how much of a difference it makes in front but it looks like it would definitely help reduce turbulence and drag in the back.
 
Last edited:

Cyberman

Well-known member
First Name
Adam
Joined
Apr 7, 2020
Messages
315
Reaction score
508
Location
San Diego
Vehicles
F150,F550, Escape
Occupation
Cybercontractor
Country flag
Nice. Wish I had something smart to say about it, but I don't really know what it means. But it's pretty cool. I think. It's another feather in the CT cap. Yeah, less wind drag than its dino cousin, the F150.
 

Jhodgesatmb

Well-known member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
879
Reaction score
890
Location
San Francisco Bay area
Vehicles
Lexus Rx450H Tesla Model 3
Occupation
Researcher
Country flag
Nice. Wish I had something smart to say about it, but I don't really know what it means. But it's pretty cool. I think. It's another feather in the CT cap. Yeah, less wind drag than its dino cousin, the F150.
A couple of things. When Elon Musk was interviewed recently he spoke about the coefficient of drag and mentioned a couple of these factors. I do not recall him giving a value. When he unveiled the CT he said the value might go as low as 0.30 which would be really, really low for a truck. Seeing this calculation and having it be very close to what Elon Musk said about it tells me 2 things: (1) it increases the likelihood that Elon Musk knows what he is talking about, and (2) it increases the likelihood that this value is in the right ballpark. As for what the value means, it means that the predictions that Elon Musk made for CT range are probably achievable since drag has a lot to do with efficiency and subsequently range.
 

Diehard

Well-known member
First Name
D
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
288
Reaction score
453
Location
U.S.A.
Vehicles
Oldsmobile Aurora V8, Saturn Sky redline, Nissan Frontier,...
Country flag
Do you guys think CT is lighter at higher speed due to having less air pressure on top like aircraft wings? Or you think the impact is negligible because there is a lot less surface area and speed?

Edit: By ”lighter” I am referring to reduction of vertical stress on tires due to lift.
 
Last edited:

Jhodgesatmb

Well-known member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
879
Reaction score
890
Location
San Francisco Bay area
Vehicles
Lexus Rx450H Tesla Model 3
Occupation
Researcher
Country flag
Do you guys think CT is lighter at higher speed due to having less air pressure on top like aircraft wings? Or you think the impact is negligible because there is a lot less surface area and speed?
An aircraft's weight doesn't change just because there is a lifting force on it, and the lifting force is the result of different pressures on the bottom and top of the airfoil. I have never done an analysis of a vehicle shape. Maybe the OP has.
 

Diehard

Well-known member
First Name
D
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
288
Reaction score
453
Location
U.S.A.
Vehicles
Oldsmobile Aurora V8, Saturn Sky redline, Nissan Frontier,...
Country flag
An aircraft's weight doesn't change just because there is a lifting force on it, and the lifting force is the result of different pressures on the bottom and top of the airfoil. I have never done an analysis of a vehicle shape. Maybe the OP has.
I probably should have worded it better. The question is, would it reduce energy consumption due to reduced stress (and may be contact area) on the tires?
 

Crissa

Well-known member
First Name
Crissa
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
2,901
Reaction score
3,013
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
2014 Zero S, 2013 Mazda 3
Country flag

Diehard

Well-known member
First Name
D
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
288
Reaction score
453
Location
U.S.A.
Vehicles
Oldsmobile Aurora V8, Saturn Sky redline, Nissan Frontier,...
Country flag
What you're asking for is 'is there gravity reduction on the tires because of aerodynamic lift?'

^-^

-Crissa
More like Friction reduction. If the lift works against the weight, theortetically there would be less contact. It would be like having more air in the tire or smaller economical tire. Bothe of those usually result in better gas millage.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top