4 ms·

Not sure that's true. Low drag is incredibly important to the top speeds of those cars. For example a `03 Golf has a CdA of 6.89[1] while a new Ferrari 458 is 0

Not sure that's true. Low drag is incredibly important to the top speeds of those cars. For example a `03 Golf has a CdA of 6.89[1] while a new Ferrari 458 is 0.330[2]. Also, most modern supercars have active aerodynamics to create more downforce at higher speed. [1]http://ecomodder.com/wiki/index.php/Vehicle_Coefficient_of_Drag_List http://ecomodder.com/wiki/index.php/Vehicle_Coefficient_of_D... [2]http://www.autozine.org/Archive/Ferrari/old/458.html http://www.autozine.org/Archive/Ferrari/old/458.html

seanp2k2 10y ago
Why not have both? The answer is active aero, which is also expensive to design, implement, and test. Unless it'll be on a track, be cornering at >1G, or going >140mph, it's pretty moot. A cheaper car wouldn't do any of these.
mhandley 10y ago
You're comparing CdA for the Golf with Cd for the Ferrari. According to that table, the '03 Golf has a Cd of 0.32, actually lower than 0.33 Cd of the Ferrari. Without knowing the frontal area of the Ferrari, I don't know if its CdA is higher too.