Why is coefficient drag bad in S2000?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,899
Likes: 1
.38/.42 numbers agree with every publication I have. Also, to answer the question about "lift" - according to the "Sports Auto" test (at 200kph) against BoxsterS, the S2000 has 60kg of lift (at the back) comapred to BoxsterS's 24kg. Then take a car like Lotus Exige and that has -58kg of lift!!
Not great but not rally that bad either. I think any rear spoiler will help.
Not great but not rally that bad either. I think any rear spoiler will help.
for sideways and i'll keep searching to find the initial info
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 22,888
Likes: 3
From: Covington WA, USA
Originally Posted by Soul Coughing,Nov 26 2007, 10:07 AM
BTW, i went to school in boston, do you miss the charles and the city?
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,409
Likes: 0
Yes, you have to take both elements in to consideration.
For example, sport bikes have relatively poor aerodynamic properties. Their cd is worse than a sports car's. However, a 120hp sport bike can still achieve 160mph where as a 120hp car can barely achieve 120mph. As I understand it that's because the frontal area is still much smaller regarding the sport bike.
For example, sport bikes have relatively poor aerodynamic properties. Their cd is worse than a sports car's. However, a 120hp sport bike can still achieve 160mph where as a 120hp car can barely achieve 120mph. As I understand it that's because the frontal area is still much smaller regarding the sport bike.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,209
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by ace123,Nov 25 2007, 08:37 PM
doesn't the small planform of the s2000 help somewhat?
It has nothing to do with the planform area. It has to be with the characteristics of the car. The drag coefficient (or any coefficient for that matter) has no units. Meaning that if you made a scale model of the car, it would still yield the same Cd.
Lift and Drag coefficients are multiplied by .5*rho*v^2*(Effective Area)
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
i thought this thread was going to die a long time ago, but i guess people are interested in drag 
when i ran simulations in matlab, i used a Cd of .38 and effective area provided by Honda specs. i got very reasonable results. the accuracy of Cd and effective area independently are not as important as the force that results from the entire equation (shown many times above).
as for the roadster windshield, it IS like that of an SUV, but the S experiences less drag because it has way less effective area. same logic for the bike.
question for the aero guys (or girls)...is Cd usually a calculated or measured value? i can see how it can be either, but i wonder which one is usually presented. for example, with top speed and estimated top speed claimed by manufacturers, there could be some discrepancy.
when i ran simulations in matlab, i used a Cd of .38 and effective area provided by Honda specs. i got very reasonable results. the accuracy of Cd and effective area independently are not as important as the force that results from the entire equation (shown many times above).
as for the roadster windshield, it IS like that of an SUV, but the S experiences less drag because it has way less effective area. same logic for the bike.
question for the aero guys (or girls)...is Cd usually a calculated or measured value? i can see how it can be either, but i wonder which one is usually presented. for example, with top speed and estimated top speed claimed by manufacturers, there could be some discrepancy.
