ultimate007
Banned
I have to differ with your first point. How do you see this,
http://www.chrysler.com/300/features/exterior_photos/img/photo_3.jpg, as rounded in every direction . The grille is virtually standing vertical. The car ressembles a big block and is in no way as aerodynamically efficient as the 99 Mustang. I haven't done my calculations but I do agree that the major difference will be considerable at higher speeds.
Still, a difference no matter how negligeable it is still affects the way the car is moving and how power is dispersed.
So for the sake of argument, you have to admit by just looking at, the 99 Mustang body style is more aerodynamic than the new design despite the intakes which, due to their low profile, wouldn't disrupt the boundary layer that much.
By the way, I have taken the fluid dynamics class 2 years ago. I am a Chemical engineer.
http://www.chrysler.com/300/features/exterior_photos/img/photo_3.jpg, as rounded in every direction . The grille is virtually standing vertical. The car ressembles a big block and is in no way as aerodynamically efficient as the 99 Mustang. I haven't done my calculations but I do agree that the major difference will be considerable at higher speeds.
Still, a difference no matter how negligeable it is still affects the way the car is moving and how power is dispersed.
So for the sake of argument, you have to admit by just looking at, the 99 Mustang body style is more aerodynamic than the new design despite the intakes which, due to their low profile, wouldn't disrupt the boundary layer that much.
By the way, I have taken the fluid dynamics class 2 years ago. I am a Chemical engineer.