That is stunning. I want that, exactly as it is, on my driveway. Just magnificent. It's funny how the patinated bare metal highlights its shape far better than the silver paint job from the images at the top of the page.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRs8Md-F7W8 It even works<VIDEO class=video-stream data-youtube-id="CRs8Md-F7W8" x-webkit-airplay="allow" src="http://o-o.preferred.virginmedia-lhr4.v18.lscache6.c.youtube.com/videoplayback?upn=h6ZUh4HBd9Y&sparams=cp%2Cid%2Cip%2Cipbits%2Citag%2Cratebypass%2Csource%2Cupn%2Cexpire&fexp=903802%2C907217%2C907335%2C921602%2C919306%2C922600%2C919316%2C920704%2C912804%2C913542%2C919324%2C912706&ms=au&itag=18&ip=82.0.0.0&signature=401D4745D782122E6711399ADE6DFBDD5E2EC663.7309A6E72FB39C08A611BDFE44B78DE840F224E5&sver=3&mt=1339777816&ratebypass=yes&source=youtube&expire=1339802827&key=yt1&ipbits=8&cp=U0hSTlhLUF9HUUNOMl9QRVRJOlpVYW1UUVJhUTJM&id=091b3c31df85ed6f"></VIDEO>
What about Tatra. Hitler banned his officers from driving these because they were too fast, they'd easily cruise at 100 mph. Air cooled v8 in the back.
Hitler banned his officers from driving them because they were not only fast but also diabolical on a wet road. From about 1930 on there was this sort of popular consensus that the Car of the Future was going to be a long, rear-engined teardrop. That lasted until enough of that ilk were built that a fair number of people had had the opportunity to drive them. It was not for nothing that the front-engined layout has persisted to the present day. That looks like a post-war Tatraplan (flat-four), by the way. Here's the other end: This seems to be a later model, with twin glass rear windows. The tailfin was an attempt to shift the centre of lateral wind pressure rearward, as early ones were even more prone to vicious oversteer in crosswinds.
I'm a big fan of Tatras, very technically advanced if a little flawed in the dynamics department. The problems of a streamlined shape with a fairly far forward centre of pressure, coupled to a heavy engine (even if it is a magnesium air cooled V8) hung out behind a swing axle don't lead to one of the best handling cars in the world. I wonder how the car would have handled if given a front engine and solid rear axle - it even has a hood in front ready to accept it. I seem to remember reading that Tatras aerodynamics are one of those cases where the model in the wind tunnel was doing much better than the real car ever did. They were very good, but not the physics beating wind cheaters the wind tunnel results suggested. The fullsize Rumpler Tropfenwagen however, was tested in the 80s and showed a drag coefficient of 0.28 Looks kinda like a three way cross of an airship gondola, a San Fransisco cable car and a tuna.
Me too, make no mistake: it's one of those despite-rather-than-because-of situations. I was thinking the same thing regarding a front engine, even if liquid-cooled with a rear-mounted radiator drawing from underneath the car. A lot of these early rear-engined experiments are a lot better with the engine at the front. It may well be said that a Steyr Type 50/55 was a better Beetle than the Beetle. I like that!
I was wondering when the Rumpler would show up on here. IIRC, it was recognized as the first example of true streamline design in a production car.
I think the Rumpler has a lot of potential from the aerodynamics point of view. Cars are difficult to achieve low drag coefficients with (as opposed to aircraft, airships etc) because of the ground. The ground plane has the effect of reducing a vehicle's aerodynamic efficiency, altering the flow pattern over the car. I reckon the Rumpler achieves a low drag coefficient because its design (tall and thin, instead of low and wide) reduces the interaction with the ground and hence its negative effect. I'd be interested to see what a 'plank on edge' tandem seat open wheel machine would be capable of - where's that picture of Lockhart's car gone . . .
Not to mention delivering a profile that looks much better to Vintage-oriented tastes. Minimizing the implicit ground-plane intersection suggests cross-sections along the lines of truncated shield shapes, i.e. getting a bit narrower to the bottom - more Vintage shapes. In the end it's a case of designing fenders ...
I guess nothing's new. This looks an awful lot like my current drawing iteration: Leston Special If this auto looks more like an airplane than a car, it’s because owner L. Leston is a London dealer in aircraft spare parts. What started him designing this model was an extra set of curved plastic panels from the cockpit of an old reconnaissance machine. The Special is built on the chassis of a pre-war 20-hp Jaguar roadster and stands only three feet three inches high. Further aircraft influence can be found in the body frame built from light steel members of channel and T-section and then covered with aluminum. Not removable roof panel, left, and plastic windows, right.
The exhibit on aerodynamics is open at the Petersen now. Nothing much that hasn't been seen before, but it's a very interesting array of deliberate attempts at streamlining. Emphasis is more American than European, and more road cars than true streamliners.
Here's a 1950 machine that hasn't been mentioned, the Briggs Cunningham Cadillac Le Monstre. I see no reason this couldn't be immediately taken out on the street There are elements of this car that I like but overall - well, Monster isn't a bad name for it. Closed wheels and teardrop rear appeal to me, and I'm a sucker for head fairings. But I don't know if I could live with a face like that - err, if you see what I mean. I also like the side exhaust, I'm willing to sacrifice a tiny bit of efficiency if I can get a nice rich-running smoke trail down the side of the car (I clearly spent too much time ogling warbirds as a child). Aero screens and twin head fairings are an option if I can figure a way out to 'close' the top and wind shield effectively. Images: http://images.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2012/06/LeMonstre_02_1200.jpg http://mycarquest.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Le-Monster.jpg
No, it's the Fageol Supersonic, and it has a VERY strange history. Look here: http://www.kustomrama.com/index.php?title=Fageol_Supersonic
The Norman Timbs Special has to be one of the top scratch-built cars ever. I can just stare at it all day.
surprized nobody has mentioned Jocko's liner An areo engineer once told me that "If it looks aerodynamic it probably isn't"
You could probably build something similar to the Ralph Schenck Streamliner or "The Golden Submarine" with lights and flat glass and get it on the road. I've seen old pictures of early aero bodies on Model T's (supposedly, it was on that ecomodder site) that were somewhat similar.
I recently posted this on another thread, 1926 Renault 40CV record car: If Sylvian can propose a later Cord, I can counter late '30s Streamline coachwork by Thrupp & Maberly: Barker: Park Ward:
The search for that lot ^^^ turned up this: Airship designer Sir Dennistoun Burney's rear-engined experiments.
The Jalopy Journal
