Testing an aerodynamic boat tail – 15% better MPG – Geo Metro

by admin on June 17, 2010


For more info see: ecomodder.com 15% better fuel economy at 90 km/h (56 mph). On-road yarn tuft testing and fuel economy testing of an aerodynamic “boat tail” mockup on the back of a 1998 Geo Metro (Pontiac Firefly) hatchback. The tapered form dramatically reduces drag and improves efficiency by minimizing the size of the car’s wake.

No related posts.

{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }

josephdupont June 17, 2010 at 12:05 pm

is it really legal??

evlogix June 17, 2010 at 12:14 pm

As AndY1ksi stated, the efficiency gain is actually greater at higher speeds if you consider the energy outputted. The motor, however, *might* be less efficient at 70 mph as opposed to 56 mph, but that will ultimately depend on your gearing.

sonicballer8888 June 17, 2010 at 12:50 pm

@Yeltuh888
the reason fuel prices went up is because you guys are still buying them with your expensive bad for the environment cars. so blame yourselves.

BarakAbrama June 17, 2010 at 1:35 pm

Aaahahahaha! :-) ))) THe ugliest aerodynamic body kit ever! :-) )) No offence! Stop torturing poor Pontiac!! It’s not gonna save fuel while in traffic or when you drive in city :-) )) The Hydrogen Booster Kit for the engine may do the trick. Anyway driving 56 mph (to save 15%) in 70mph speed zone doesnt sound like fun :-) ))))) КG/AM

DanFrederiksen June 17, 2010 at 2:15 pm

very interesting experiment.
I think the tail has to be flat to the ground side though since you can’t suck in air from the ground. will only create a vacuum with turbulence.
plastic sheet cover under the car might also improve the drag.

what we really need though to really explore aerodynamics is a good freely available virtual vindtunnel software. they either suck or cost a trillion or only works under some obscure linux bullshit.

a windows application running on GPU. now!

DanFrederiksen June 17, 2010 at 3:08 pm

@Yeltuh888 no fuel prices should go up and up. gas car has to go

Yeltuh888 June 17, 2010 at 3:39 pm

generally speaking
or to myself..

mr82769 June 17, 2010 at 4:04 pm

Erhm… Who are you talking to when you say “bring down the fuel prices” ?

AndY1ksi June 17, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Excellent testing!

The fuel consumption difference would be even higher, at higher speeds.

The power to move (throttle) an object through the fluid (air) increases by the power of 3 in regards to speed.
The energy (consumption) required to move the object from A to B increases by the power of 2 in regards to speed.

Crodon June 17, 2010 at 5:40 pm

You actually belive that shit Danich? You’re a fool.

Yeltuh888 June 17, 2010 at 6:14 pm

I don’t wanna take off…
just drive forwards.. and just as spitfire1983 says (thank you btw) just fill it up! now bring down the damn fuelprices! please..

spitfire1983 June 17, 2010 at 6:51 pm

Nice for you that you established such a fuel reduction.

But I don’t give shit about fuel consumption, just fill it up and put the pedal to the metal.

ThomasD1962 June 17, 2010 at 7:47 pm

Lower the a car about 1,5 inch and raise the tail a bit and hey presto! Another 10%!

ChrisvdH88 June 17, 2010 at 8:25 pm

Smile, je staat op Geenstijl!

danich45 June 17, 2010 at 8:58 pm

this is butt ugly and un safe to drive. no state will allow it to pass safety inspection but it’s also worthless since the chevy volt gets the equivellent og 230 plus mpg and soon 300 to 400 mpg without the dorkmobile look

monstrera June 17, 2010 at 9:43 pm

boeie

darkwizzard June 17, 2010 at 10:24 pm

very cool man would like some music added even if it’s just the youtube supplied ones though.

rickylarch June 17, 2010 at 10:33 pm

Nice work, and lot’s of it. Inspirational. Can’t wait to see the final version.

O4b

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: