HPP

Anyone have this?

I read a really cool article on F-Body aerodynamics that focused on the 2nd Gen T/As. Pointing out how it was really well engineered from that perspective and better than the Camaro, even better than the C3 really.

I also saw something on spoiler testing on the 1st Gen Camaros.

I'd love to see something like that on the 4th Gen Trans Ams (3rds too). A thorough study on all 4 - LT1 WS6 and non, LS1 WS6 and non. Not just Cd, though that too, but things like lift vs downforce at various speeds, and any other effects of speed. How stable would each be at their upper limits, where are the weak points, etc.

One specific thing I've been wonderin about is the cliff at the back of the WS6 hood. The base of the windsheild is normally a high pressure area. Would putting a cavity there add drag? (any cavity or low pressure area adds drag, but one right near a natural high pressure area has me curious. And even if it does add drag there cowl induction would give a benefit for the detriment, like a supercharger, but since we don't have cowl induction.....)

raven4960

iTrader: (1)

I recall one of the car mags doing a small write-up comparing the 4th gen camaro, bird and the, then new, C5. The C5 had the lowest drag with the bird coming in a very close 2nd. Nothing detailed though...ttt

HPP

Bump++

This data has to exist. Google is such a mess (and a pay to place engine) that it is next to impossible to find anything useful anymore. :/

DesertFox

iTrader: (2)

I have seen windtunnel footage of the lt1 birds being tested on TV, but i also have been unable to find any useful info on this subject. Maybe some of the hardcore drag car builders might know, i mean some of those guys are approaching 150 mph, and aero might be important enough for them.

Josh

VIP1

I found it: 0.32 Cd
Google is your friend:
http://www.internetautoguide.com/car...tiac/firebird/
http://www.automotive.com/2002/12/po...pecifications/

The Camaro is either 0.32 or 0.34
Here are two different listings:
http://www.automotive.com/2002/12/ch...pecifications/
http://www.gazette.net/autosource/ar...evycamero.html

Here is something funny. The 360 Modena is 0.33, which is higher than the Firebird by 0.01 (lower is better for aerodynamics).
http://www.cars.com/carsapp/national...60_modena.tmpl

The C5 Corvette is 0.29
The C6 Corvette is 0.28
https://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2005/index.shtml

Here is an interesting bit of Trivia:
Which is longer, the Corvette C6 or the Porsche 911?
.
.
.
I bet you'll get it wrong
.
.
.
.
The Corvette C6 is shorter in length by one inch.

DONAIMIAN

iTrader: (18)

Now im thinking of ways to get better aerodynamics besides just lowering the car, lol.

HPP

VIP1, nice bit of google-fu, thanks.

But that's just Cd. And it was just for the Firebird, not the Trans Am. I'm a little surprised to see that the LS1-era Firebird has the same Cd as the '84 Trans Am. I thought that it would be dirtier. But certainly the LS1 Trans Am would have to be, the hood, spoiler, and front vents would almost certainly add drag.

I was hoping to see more of a break down/study of the aerodynamics of the last Trans Ams. I just tried to find the page I mentioned as an example but it must be on my home machine.

VIP1

The mid-80's TransAms did have better aerodynamics.
I saw some places saying between 0.299 and 0.32
I'll have to search again later.

HPP

I have an ad for the 84 Trans Am and it was touting it's .32Cd. In 85 they got a wrap around spoiler and in 86 they got the hood louvers. I would think it would be getting worse from 85 on.

Surprisingly, that perfectly flat spoiler on the 82-84 was functional. So the Firebird would be a bit cleaner with a flat hood and no spoiler. But .29 from .32? Sounds a bit steep.

Redneck Z

iTrader: (3)

I'd be curious to see how a trans am compares to a mustang.

VIP1

Here is where I saw 0.299 to 0.32:
http://ohok.com/82recaro/history.html
I have not been able to confirm those numbers.

1982 Trans AM -- 0.32:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~acorn/sam/thecar.html

Plenty of info here:
http://www.globalcar.com/datasheet/P...acFirebird.htm
Check ou the list at the bottom.
Not much on Cd though.

Interesting....the 1988 Pontiac Grand Prix SE had a 0.299 Cd:
http://www.globalcar-parts.com/datas...randPrixSE.htm
(I wonder if thats a typo)

VIP1

1994 Mustang -- 0.32 Cd:
http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicl...ws/wk9413.html

2003 Mustang Mach 1 -- 0.36 Cd:
http://www.mustangworks.com/articles...ch1/specs.html
(This number seems a bit off.)

2004 Mustang -- 0.33 Cd:
http://www.automotive.com/2004/12/fo...pecifications/

Redneck Z

iTrader: (3)

Thats better than I expected for the 94 and 04 mustangs. I thought they'd be closer to the .36 of the mach.