Smooth Body

[kach22i]

Someone at GM still likes rear engined cars!

http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/oct99/features/smooth/smooth.html

The ideal aerodynamic shape is a raindrop, of course. Yet, forcing that shape upon a functional car body posed a bit of a problem. Squashing the nose made very little space available to an engine, and stretching the tail added a fair amount of weight in unused structure. A rear-mounted engine could relieve a host of concerns. Because it could be mounted transversely between the two nonsteerable rear wheels, an engine in the rear would allow the frontal area to shrink. Frontal area would then depend on the needs of the passengers alone, not the demands of the drivetrain.

As another benefit, a rear-mounted engine would eliminate an exhaust system that spanned the car's entire length. No long, heavy pipe, catalytic converter, or muffler would dangle in the airstream. Thus, the new sedan could retain the flat underbody of the EV1 along with its minimal ground clearance.

Perhaps the biggest benefit of an engine in the rear, though, would be how it could eliminate front air intakes and underbody discharges. Such major surface features cost dearly on the CD ledger. Instead, the engine heat exchanger would take its air as needed through inlets along the rear fender surfaces. Exhausting cooling air out the back would actually help efficiency by filling the wake.

By wearing its cooling-air intakes on the rear fenders—a benefit that comes with mounting the engine in back—the new shape borrows from sibling EV1's success with low ram air

[targa911S]

Damn I thought this was a thread about hair removal!

[Tobra]

I was thinking unmolested old kraut kar

[Drago]

Originally posted by targa911S
Damn I thought this was a thread about hair removal!

How's the wifes Christmas gift coming along?

[targa911S]

You have a memory like a steel trap!

[Drago]

Originally posted by targa911S
You have a memory like a steel trap!

No, I just spend WAY to much time in here.

[oldE]

Say goodbye to the trend of ever bigger wheels and tires. It will take a while, but in trying to improve aerodynamic performance, engineers will be shrinking those pesky round things and trying to tuck them out of the airflow.
You know, kind of like a Citroen DS..from the late 50s.
Ah the pendulum swings again.
Les

[techweenie]

When I saw the thread title, I thought you might've posted the photo of Eliza Dushku from the web today.

I figured Z-man would have it down in a millisecond. Anyone who knows who she is and will promise they they are over 18 can e-mail me for the picture.

[pikey7]

Wow. I'm impressed.

A car with the same configuration, for the same reasons as a little VW that a certain Herr Porsche designed in the 40's. and a real advance in aerodynamics! Teardrop indeed. whoever thought of that as an aerodynamic shape?

What next, reinventing the wheel!?

I guess GM don't have sufficient funds to design a radical car though, just to copy old designs, cover them in plastic, stick big numbers in front of them, and pass them off as a technological advancement (that bit they probably "borrowed" from the Japanese anyway). Pathetic.

Next month they'll come out with a small front wheel drive hatchback and stick a GTi badge on the back. Now there's an idea......

[kach22i]

Originally posted by pikey7
Next month they'll come out with a small front wheel drive hatchback and stick a GTi badge on the back. Now there's an idea......

You are right in many ways, just remember the article was written back in 1999.

I am always amazed that GM has the most forward long range "big idea" concepts, yet markets the same old same old in the showroom.

Someone at GM still has the heart of a dreamer and true car guy, but with little ablity in that organization to follow though and get it to us.

[legion]

Originally posted by kach22i
Someone at GM still has the heart of a dreamer and true car guy, but with little ablity in that organization to follow though and get it to us.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

One of the writers for Automobile Magazine used to work at GM (David E. Davis?). I remember him once saying something like: "The GM system is so obtuse that if they had Stradivarius making violins for them, they could only reward him by making him a plant manager."

I still think they should have made 100 Cadillac Sixteens and sold them for $1 million apiece. That would have done wonders for the Cadillac brand. Mind, you, Cadillacs have quietly gotten better by leaps and bounds in the last few years--the other necessary part for this to work.

I hate to start this debate again, but the UAW helps to enforce a very rigid structure inside of GM--but so does GM's management. The way I see it, is this rigid structure served GM very well through the 50's, 60's, and 70's. It hurt GM in subsequent decades, but not enough to be considered their biggest problem. Both management and the UAW have gotten very used to how GM works. Even though other automakers have figured out how to do things better, both of these entrenched camps are very resistant to change.

[masraum]

Is it just the pic of her in the dress with the sheer section where she's standing sideways? You've gotta look really close and don't really see all that much, but it's still a tittilating glimpse.

You could always just go to egotastic.com and scroll to the bottom of the page.