I-spy an Ugly SUV

This is the place for posts that don't fit into any other category.

Moderator: RichardW

Online
User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 49620
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 6181

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by CitroJim »

myglaren wrote: 19 Feb 2018, 10:06 Just shows how much notice I take - I thought the Princess and Ambassador were the same except for the badge - and I had a Princess :oops:


I suppose you could call the Ambassador a face-lifted Princess gone very badly wrong...

Yes, according to Wikipedia the CX has a Cd of 0.36!!
Jim

Runner, cyclist, time triallist, duathlete, Citroen AX fan and the CCC Citroenian 'From A to Z' Columnist...
wheeler
Posts: 6885
Joined: 21 Sep 2002, 19:07
x 730

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by wheeler »

wurlycorner wrote: 18 Feb 2018, 10:52
white exec wrote: 17 Feb 2018, 19:04 And another Nissan - the Elgrand - not actually available in UK.
Unsafe at anything over 50mph and gas-guzzling, although luxuriously equipped inside.
Back end as attractive as a Rodius.

Nissan Elgrand.JPG

Image


I agree, it's not in the slightest a looker, but it does have one massive redeeming feature... The 240 (or 300) bhp 3.5l V6 engine! For such a big bus, the thing moves like s**t off a shovel...


:rofl2:

(it also has a massive following and very active owners club)

Yes the Elgrand's are actually quite popular here & many are converted to campervans. They don't look that great on the outside but are usually very high spec.
User avatar
Stickyfinger
(Donor 2016)
Posts: 10433
Joined: 28 Mar 2013, 22:05
x 1289

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by Stickyfinger »

Let's be fair to Suv's, that is just a big Van
Alasdair
Activa, the Moose Rider
3x C5x7 Steering racks and counting
User avatar
NewcastleFalcon
Posts: 24712
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 11:40
x 6881

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by NewcastleFalcon »

The SUV made it into a couple of episodes of the Simpsons at least.....Homer bought a Canyonero

http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Canyonero

Nice comment in this one! "Don't worry about the SUV's there's a gentle curve up ahead!"



Regards Neil
Only One AA Box left
687 Trinity, Jersey
User avatar
Stickyfinger
(Donor 2016)
Posts: 10433
Joined: 28 Mar 2013, 22:05
x 1289

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by Stickyfinger »

LOL
Alasdair
Activa, the Moose Rider
3x C5x7 Steering racks and counting
harryp
(Donor 2022)
Posts: 687
Joined: 07 May 2011, 16:03
x 73

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by harryp »

Interestingly, a wedge has a better drag coefficient with the square end leading into the airflow than the thin pointy end :shock: - very strange I thought. I can only think that the difference was miniscule.
Regards, Harry

2000 Nov Forte HDI 110 hatch in Wicked Red; currently SORN
2000 Mar Exclusive HDI hatch in Quartz; currently SORN
2013 C4 Picasso Excl E
Peugeot 207cc 1.6 Roland Garros
wurlycorner
Posts: 1366
Joined: 30 Oct 2012, 23:37
x 66

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by wurlycorner »

I can't remember back 20 years to when I last did thermodynamics et al, so can't remember what is considered in calculating CD... But if you take the literal meaning of drag, it's not that surprising that blunt end leading would be better...
Blunt end at the back will create a void (area of low pressure) immediately behind the shape as the air passing over the shape flows off the back of it, which will in effect 'drag' the thing back.
Blunt end leading will leave a nice clean flow off the back with no 'void' to create an area of low pressure. It will result in a bow wave of high pressure in front, which isn't aerodynamicaly efficient, but isn't technically 'drag' either?
--
Iain

1x '85 CX GTi Turbo s1 (metallic blue)
2x '85 CX GTi Turbo s2 t1 (metallic silver & grey)
'88 CX GTi Turbo s2 T2 (metallic light blue)
CX DTR T2 Safari (silver)
2x '96 Xantia Activa (Black & metallic green)
'01 C5 2.0 HDi LX Estate (Blue)
User avatar
myglaren
Forum Admin Team
Posts: 25456
Joined: 02 Mar 2008, 14:30
x 4917

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by myglaren »

CitroJim wrote: 19 Feb 2018, 10:38
myglaren wrote: 19 Feb 2018, 10:06 Just shows how much notice I take - I thought the Princess and Ambassador were the same except for the badge - and I had a Princess :oops:


I suppose you could call the Ambassador a face-lifted Princess gone very badly wrong...

Yes, according to Wikipedia the CX has a Cd of 0.36!!


I thought I remembered 0.27 but then thought it couldn't be that low.
User avatar
white exec
Moderating Team
Posts: 7445
Joined: 21 Dec 2015, 13:46
x 1752

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by white exec »

I thought 'drag' was a measure of the reluctance of the object to move through air, and this was a combination of high pressure 'ram' at the front and low pressure 'back-drag' at the rear, along with other resistances. Interesting how a wedge would behave differently, depending on which way it's moving, and that blunt-end forward could be better . . . really anti-intuitive!
Chris
User avatar
NewcastleFalcon
Posts: 24712
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 11:40
x 6881

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by NewcastleFalcon »

An unlikely contender for the worst drag co-efficient in motoring! (according to wiki)
While the car's frontal area is small, the Lotus Seven has the highest drag coefficient of any known production car—ranging from 0.65 to 0.75, depending on bodywork.[citation needed]
Image
1965LotusSevenSeriesII [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], by dave_7 (Flickr), from Wikimedia Commons

regards Neil
Only One AA Box left
687 Trinity, Jersey
User avatar
myglaren
Forum Admin Team
Posts: 25456
Joined: 02 Mar 2008, 14:30
x 4917

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by myglaren »

That just reads all wrong when current Audis are around 3.0.
User avatar
white exec
Moderating Team
Posts: 7445
Joined: 21 Dec 2015, 13:46
x 1752

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by white exec »

XM is 2.8 / 3.0
Chris
User avatar
Paul-R
Donor 2023
Posts: 6929
Joined: 07 May 2009, 16:24
x 1377

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by Paul-R »

I don't understand where some of these figures are coming from. All the Cd figures I've ever seen are between 0 and 1 with most in the 0.3 region.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobil ... efficients

So, these other figures of 2.something and 3.something are confusing me. Are they simply a misplaced decimal point or are they quoting something different?
As I get older I think a lot about the hereafter - I go into a room and then wonder what I'm here after.

Inside every old person is a young person wondering what the hell happened.

"Trying is the first step towards failure" ~ Homer J Simpson​
User avatar
NewcastleFalcon
Posts: 24712
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 11:40
x 6881

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by NewcastleFalcon »

Not sure what the drag co-efficient of the Canyonero is...bit boxy but then again "The Federal Highway Commission has ruled the Canyonero unsafe for highway or city drining" so its aerodynamics are not a problem :-D

Hank Williams Jr supplies the song!



Regards Neil
Only One AA Box left
687 Trinity, Jersey
harryp
(Donor 2022)
Posts: 687
Joined: 07 May 2011, 16:03
x 73

Re: I-spy an Ugly SUV

Post by harryp »

Apologies, I had the decimal point in the wrong place - of course they are all below 1.0.
Not at all surprised that the co-efficient for the Lotus7 is so high looking at is bitsa construction. In my biking days (long, long ago) friend of mine reckoned that in the wet a motorbike was drier; concluding that on a bike at least you were dressed for it :-D . Apparently, water used to drive through the floor and insinuate itself up his trouser leg :shock: . Oh the fun to be had in those far off days :rofl2: ,
Following on from earlier comments, that Lexus looks very Darth Vader - back to kids toys? Seems that the streamlined design of aerodynamically efficient cars is a thing of the past :cry: .
Regards, Harry

2000 Nov Forte HDI 110 hatch in Wicked Red; currently SORN
2000 Mar Exclusive HDI hatch in Quartz; currently SORN
2013 C4 Picasso Excl E
Peugeot 207cc 1.6 Roland Garros