Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Another thread mentioned the lack of advancement in the high tech world of vehicle heating systems.
When loading groceries in my PT Cruiser today, I noticed another area of vehicle design that is sadly lacking....
Aerodynamics!
Can somebody explain why design engineers have not yet designed a method of controlling air flow around, over, and under a vehicle so that all the crud on the road is not deposited on the back of the vehicle? Remember, the license plate is supposed to be visible and readable. A coating of road grime is a violation of the law!
How about an explanation of the positioning of the cabin air intake so that it blows snow into the vehicle, no matter how carefully the area is swept??
How about a reason why the doors are no longer designed so that snow doesn't fall onto the seat, no matter how carefully it is swept off the top of the vehicle? My 1941 Buick didn't do that. Neither did my 1952 Kaiser Manhattan or my 1953 Ford.
I can only surmise that the current crop of designers have never lived where there is bad weather; rainy or snowy!
The PT Cruiser was not exactly a paragon of function over form. It was made to look like a '30s paddy wagon first. Cheapness was second, and quality a distant third, and I doubt that aerodynamics ever played into the equation.
The PT Cruiser was not exactly a paragon of function over form. It was made to look like a '30s paddy wagon first. Cheapness was second, and quality a distant third, and I doubt that aerodynamics ever played into the equation.
So, instead of addressing the issues, you choose to denigrate my choice of vehicles?
It figures.
Of course, the 2016 Suburban that my son rented recently has the same problems.
So does my Dodge 1500 pickup.
So does EVERY vehicle I see in the various parking lots in town.
I guess they must all be poor quality cheap vehicles...
By the way, my PT is a turbo convertible. It does not look like a '30s paddy wagon!
The PT Cruiser was not exactly a paragon of function over form. It was made to look like a '30s paddy wagon first. Cheapness was second, and quality a distant third, and I doubt that aerodynamics ever played into the equation.
Prius is one of the most aerodynamic vehicles on the road. But just like any other hatchback they get filthy at the back. That is not a sign of poor aerodynamics. Designing to keep the rear clean doesn't get priority over efficiency.
You should be judging vehicles by the amount of crud on the front of the car and not the back of the car. Poor aerodynamics and the crud wouldn't even make it to the back of the car.
A design that eliminated the vacuum at the rear of the vehicle (which is what sucks up all the road grime) would be more efficient than what is out there now.
They have started designing 53 foot long-haul semi trailers to be more aerodynamic along the bottom and in back. Sure, they aren't pretty, but it seems to be working.
I guess auto and light truck designers can't figure out how to make them efficient and good looking.
That's too bad...
I mentioned three distinct issues, and so far all I have read is excuses and bad-mouthing my PT Cruiser!
OK, some of you don't like PT Cruisers. so be it, no big deal.
The problems I mentioned are common to ALL modern vehicles, not just hatchbacks!
WHY??
So, instead of addressing the issues, you choose to denigrate my choice of vehicles?
It figures.
Of course, the 2016 Suburban that my son rented recently has the same problems.
So does my Dodge 1500 pickup.
So does EVERY vehicle I see in the various parking lots in town.
I guess they must all be poor quality cheap vehicles...
By the way, my PT is a turbo convertible. It does not look like a '30s paddy wagon!
The convertibles are just as tall as the wagons, and in fact would likely have inferior aerodynamic qualities due to the fabric tops.
The PT Cruiser was also classified by the EPA as a light truck, which is subject to lower fuel economy regulations than regular passenger cars.
Expecting something like a Dodge half-ton or a Suburban to have excellent aerodynamic qualities sounds like wishful thinking.
The convertibles are just as tall as the wagons, and in fact would likely have inferior aerodynamic qualities due to the fabric tops.
The PT Cruiser was also classified by the EPA as a light truck, which is subject to lower fuel economy regulations than regular passenger cars.
Expecting something like a Dodge half-ton or a Suburban to have excellent aerodynamic qualities sounds like wishful thinking.
Have you had any experience with vortex generators to control airflow?
I have, on fire bombers, to keep the slurry from coating the tail of the aircraft. They work.
How about the after-market wings/spoilers to divert airflow? They work, too, to a certain extent. Why are they not built in? There ARE ways to accomplish keeping the back of the vehicle clean, or at least cleaner.
There are ways to create a boundary layer of air without greatly increasing drag.
I would think that safety is a priority over all..
Cars have high, flat backs to reduce injury and more contact area in the rear in the event of a collision.
These arent race car prototypes.
We associate sleek aerodynamics with sports car and ultra efficient cars.....where safety is not a huge concern.
Look at Porsche, the most beautiful design in the history of mankind, was design over 50 years ago. I think that's what you're looking for
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.