3 ms·
Isn’t this a function of wind resistance physics that can’t be solved, just mitigated? Yes, this is fundamental; roughly power required is proportional to cube
by ska 8y ago
Isn’t this a function of wind resistance physics that can’t be solved, just mitigated?
Yes, this is fundamental; roughly power required is proportional to cubed velocity. Improved coeff of friction helps, but you can't get away from this.
Eventually air friction is the completely dominant force. So at highway speeds, absent some rare gearing issues causing inefficient fueling, faster means less efficient.
This is also why the fastest "hypercars" are pushing on order of 1000 hp.
At lower speeds, all sorts of other issues kick in (and idling is its own issue)
- mywittyname 8y agoA demonstration of this fact can be found in a list of fastest production cars in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production_car_speed_record https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production_car_speed_record The RUF (Porsche) needs 460hp to break 213mph. The next record breaker needs 618hp to break 221mph. The 241mph record is made with 806hp. This continues incrementally until the current record holder, which needs 1350hp to hit 278mph. It took three times as much power and three decades of computational advancement to build a car that could go a mere 65mph faster than the 1983 record breaker. Side note: the listed horsepower numbers before 1980s are basically made up. You can safely assume SAE J2723 horsepower (what cars use today) is ~60-75% of published value for cars older than 1980 (and about ~80-95% for cars between 1980 and 2005).