15 ms·

German car that was super-aerodynamic but impractical

153 points by davesailer 5y ago

smolder 5y ago
This is very reminiscent of Buckminster Fuller's 3 wheeled rear-steering car.
jacquesm 5y ago
That's a beauty, shape is reminiscent of the Dymaxion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlLZE23EJKs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlLZE23EJKs
black6 5y ago
Similar in appearance, drivetrain layout, and problems as the Dymaxion Car.
- cpcallen 5y ago
  Though the Dymaxion car at least did not put the engine _behind_ the rear wheels…
aliswe 5y ago
8l / 100km? thats in the ballpark of my prius 2006, that consumes around 7l/100km. but this was 1939 ... have we come so non-far? whats in play here? weight? fuel quality? engine? ...
- pengaru 5y ago
  You don't even need to go to this crazy extreme to find relatively modern levels of fuel efficiency. The classic 60s-era Mini could get ~40mpg with a plain old carburetor. As ICEs became more fuel efficient, the vehicles became both larger and heavier, negating the gains. Modern ICE vehicles have become so overweight they've managed to make EVs look somewhat average in the weight department.
- sxates 5y ago
  No doubt this car would have weighed a fraction of what a modern Prius weighs.
  - other_herbert 5y ago
    Yes… manual everything… brakes, steering, transmission and a suspension system that would barely be passable for a trailer now
- kingkongjaffa 5y ago
  Your Prius is in another galaxy regarding safety and infotainment, that’s why. Also likely cruise speed in 1939 was much slower, and drag is a function of velocity^2
  - jjtheblunt 5y ago
    > drag is a function of velocity^2 i have to explain that to (fellow but new) EV drivers, that blasting down a highway at high speed for a fixed distance seems to drain the battery, because of drag, far more than travelling the exact same distance at slow speed. I still feel like i've not sorted out the equations involved.
    - deelowe 5y ago
      I did an experiment on the interstate and drove at highway speeds to see if the mpg was comparable. It wasn't, so there's definitely another factor there. Here they cut groves in the concrete pavement on the interstate where as the highways are smooth asphalt. I've wondered if maybe rolling resistance is also a factor here. It was a pretty huge difference. Like more than 10% IIRC.
      - Tade0 5y ago
        I don't have reliable numbers on this, but rolling resistance appears to be the main factor up to about 60-80km/h, above which drag takes its place. Looking at the fuel consumption in my hybrid it's around 50-60% higher at an average speed of 100km/h than at 70km/h. The difference would have been 2x if was just due to drag.
      - toast0 5y ago
        For EVs it's pretty simple, the faster you go, the more power you use, and the more air resistance, and the less miles / kWh. The more power you use, the more power is lost in wiring, the hotter the batteries get and less efficient they are, etc. There's probably some minimum efficient speed, but as you go faster, everything works against you to make things less efficient. For gas engines it's quite a bit trickier, because a hotter engine gets more complete combustion and more power out the driveshaft per gallon (also more NOx, see VW) and there's a small range of RPMs where power output is best, combined with a transmission gear where efficiency is best, combined that gets you a target speed for best fuel to power at the wheels. But air resistance does get worse as you go faster. So you've got some things pushing you to go faster (sometimes much faster), and other things pushing you to go slower.
- HPsquared 5y ago
  Most of the innovation in engine design over the decades has been in increasing "dynamic range". That is, the ability to produce high power when required without being super inefficient in the other 99% of the time when you're just cruising or coasting. A small, simple old-tech engine will have similar fuel economy to a modern engine when cruising but will have much less peak power and refinement, and produce more noxious fumes from the tailpipe.
- AdrianB1 5y ago
  Weight, that is mostly coming from safety requirements (NCAP starts come with heavy weight and increased fuel consumption). That car with a modern engine can go as low as 3 liters/100 km, I did drive regular cars with 3.5l/100km over a 200km trip.
- vvillena 5y ago
  Your Prius is more reliable, needs less maintenance, is easier to drive, has much more grippier tires, is safer if you crash, has more storage and passenger space, and is infinitely more comfortable.
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
Random question: how were very accurate curves like that machined in the 1930s? What was the process for creating the tooling that could create that kind of curved aluminum so accurately back then?
- anamax 5y ago
  For small production runs, an English Wheel would be appropriate. (The car doesn't have any sharp corners.)
- zardo 5y ago
  It's a one-off, the tooling was at most wooden forms.
- LeifCarrotson 5y ago
  To create curved parts, an operator would roll a piece of metal between two hard wheels on a machine called an English Wheel. The wheels apply significant pressure, and make the metal become thinner where you roll it. The same volume of metal is still present, so to become thinner it must spread out. If you expand the center of a piece, but leave the perimeter the same, then it will become domed. If you'd like to see the machine in operation, here's a video by Ron Covell, a masterfully skilled sheet metal craftsman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omRlIBONJAM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omRlIBONJAM A craftsman can carefully shape the metal to whatever shape was desired. But accurate? Who said anything about accurate? It's likely that everyone's paneling was of slightly different curvatures. They'd machine the mounting holes after the fact, so those would all match and be replaceable, but why would anyone care (how would anyone know?) if the curvature of the fender was a few millimeters different from another fender?
  - ajsnigrutin 5y ago
    > Who said anything about accurate? Sometimes they had wooden shape templates... roll the part between the wheels until it seems ok, put it on the template, see where it's not quite right, back on the rollers, back on the template, back on the rollers, until the part was accurate enough.
tromp 5y ago
This modern take on the super-aerodynamic shaves another 30% off the Schlörwagen's already low drag coefficient of 0.186: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDMqEmUGxX4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDMqEmUGxX4
anonymousisme 5y ago
Is that Elon Musk in the photo?
WalterBright 5y ago
> Schlörwagen was a wing on wheels. Meaning it will lift at higher speeds. Oops!
WalterBright 5y ago
> very vulnerable to crosswinds So was the VW bus. I know from experience. It's a very dangerous car on the highway when you've got a stiff crosswind. You have to cant the steering wheel into the wind. If you drive through a cut, the car will veer into the wind, and leaving the cut, it'll will veer the other way. If you're not anticipating this, you can find yourself in the other lane facing oncoming traffic. I don't miss that beast.
- mhh__ 5y ago
  I'm not familiar with the history of the VW bus so this maybe unfair, but it's interesting reading books on the evolution of the aeroplane and comparing them with the evolution of the car. It took much longer for the production car to start to be engineered holistically and it's dynamics considered in the same manner one would if developing an aircraft. That being said even formula 1 teams get caught out by the interaction of aero and (say) steering angle sometimes, so perhaps the problem is harder.
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    In the late 60's F1 cars started showing the effects of aerodynamic testing and development. Wings were added, not for lift, but to create downforce. Airplanes do not fly at all unless designed holistically, which is why the Wright Flyer flew and the other attempts did not.
    - mhh__ 5y ago
      You might like to gawk at a modern F1 bargeboard, which have become astonishingly complicated recently. https://external-preview.redd.it/bQ1FPpXTfqPTgZr82m7mFNIRYEx9T-F1uX2VgczK0A0.jpg?auto=webp&s=feec6a26471375d1fbcd582ab509307d39ff7a60 https://external-preview.redd.it/bQ1FPpXTfqPTgZr82m7mFNIRYEx... The point about steering angles was, if I recall correctly, McLaren's 2018 car's steering disrupting the airflow to the sidepod and bargeboard i.e. they got the placement slightly wrong so when the car was cornering the airflow would inst One thing that's kind of amusing, is that if you ask older members of FSAE (student racing car competition) teams, nearly everyone has a story about either themselves or a competing team designing an aero part only to discover that the part was basically just for the designer's curiosity/ego than any real aerodynamic performance on the car.
mhh__ 5y ago
Is the "bionic fish car" mentioned on Top Gear descended from it? https://youtu.be/ri3CUzsv7Gg https://youtu.be/ri3CUzsv7Gg
camillomiller 5y ago
> In 1942, engineers took a 130-horsepower Russian aircraft motor and bolted it to the back of the car for some test runs. The good old “warum nicht?” of Nazi engineers…
- _carbyau_ 5y ago
  I love that someone did it. But I also wonder what they thought they were going to get...
  - hnbad 5y ago
    The Nazi high command loved its claims of "wunderwaffen" as part of the propaganda effort but mostly failed to deliver on them. Most of the "wunderwaffen" that saw actual use ended up being a horrific waste of resources and impractical to use if they didn't fail outright. Contrary to its claims the most important factor was the "blitzkrieg" strategy of overwhelming an unexpecting enemy's defenses to force a surrender -- a strategy that only worked at the beginning of the war when the other parties involved didn't know that they were going to participate in it. If you're wondering why Nazi scientists attempted these moonshots the answer is simply that there was an increasing demand to be able to deliver on the claims of having a "wunderwaffe" and incrementalism wasn't going to produce it. That said, it's unlikely the Nazis could have produced a working nuclear weapon (the only actual "wunderwaffe" that could have turned the tides at that point) and the Nazis weren't the only side producing technical innovations during that war.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      The V-series did pretty good in instilling fear by being able to attack across the channel virtually without risk to the Germans. They didn't do an enormous amount of physical damage but the psychological effects were immense.
    - _carbyau_ 5y ago
      Thank you for this wonderful explanation of the mindset behind this. Kind of like the google moonshot idea but with the desperation of the times. The engineers themselves must've been in the position of having to say "Yes sir!" while all the time knowing it wasn't going to amount to anything. I guess you could have multipart projects where each engineering party thinks their bit is useless but together it amounts to something. And that is why I wonder .. what was the person behind this bit of wunderwaffen actually conceiving. Did they think they'd get a flying car? Or a 300kmhr supercar? What were they possibly dreaming up? We'll never know. I look at this and see - at best - a fast-ish car that would experience enough aerodynamic effects to have miserable handling but nowhere near enough to take off.
undebuggable 5y ago
Before entering the post I was certain it's about Tropfenwagen [1] displayed in e.g. Technikmuseum in Berlin. Either way for the newly constructed highways they indeed shifted to aerodynamic cars with the body extending over the front wheels, but to the model ...cough... "borrowed" from Czechoslovakian Tatra [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumpler_Tropfenwagen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumpler_Tropfenwagen [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87
- bernulli 5y ago
  I don’t understand your comment. Neither the Tropfenwagen nor the Schlörwagen look anything like the Tatra you linked to.
  - undebuggable 5y ago
    Bodies of 77/87 Tatras were probably the most aerodynamic compromise suitable for mass production at that time. Just compare them with Fords from 30s and 40s [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_vehicles#1930s%E2%80%931940s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_vehicles#1930s%E2...
  - dotancohen 5y ago
    He probably meant to link to the Tatra 77, which some people say was the first aerodynamic production car. Though, I believe a dozen other cars also get that title, for varying definitions of aerodynamic.
    - bernulli 5y ago
      That one https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_77 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_77 also doesn’t look like either Tropfenwagen or Schlörwagen. I don’t doubt there are many cases of blatant copying in technology, but I am having trouble to see any connection between either Tatra and the cars discussed in the post. Also: the “Czechoslovakian” Tatra linked to was designed by an Austrian and a Hungarian.
  - 5y ago
formerly_proven 5y ago
Another overly aerodynamic car from a few years earlier - Mercedes-Benz W 125, which set a speed record that wasn't outdone for some 80 years. Incidentally, someone tried to outdo them and killed themselves in doing so, which ended car manufacturers going for new records. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W125_Rekordwagen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W125_Rekordwagen
- fifilura 5y ago
  And also the Ur-SAAB (original SAAB). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Ursaab https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Ursaab Saab was originaly an airplane manufacturer so it was natural for them to reach for the wind-tunnel when tasked with designing a car. The Ur-SAAB was never in series production but the (at least in Sweden) very popular production cars took a lot of inspiration from it. We had one of these when I was a kid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_96 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_96 This is an earlier model with even more similarities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_92 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_92
markvdb 5y ago
Two various tidbits: - The inventor apparently managed to rescue several jewish people [0] when designing and prototyping for the Wehrmacht in Riga, Latvia. - This immediately made me think of the little known Volkswagen 1-litre car [1]. Something like that with an electric drivetrain would be close to my ideal car... [0] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Schl%C3%B6r_von_Westhofen-Dirmstein https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Schl%C3%B6r_von_Westhofen... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
- capitainenemo 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors#Production_plans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors#Production_plans Aptera seems to have resurrected... similar form.
  - sovreign 5y ago
    Hope the Aptera safety testing comes back better than these older cars. Aptera and similar aerodynamic, (hopefully) inexpensive cars are really a nice middle ground between hefty Teslas and EV motorcycles.
    - bagels 5y ago
      Modern engineering and modern materials. Shouldn't be hard to do better in a crash than something designed before seat belts and crumple zones were implemented in cars.
      - capitainenemo 5y ago
        One warning is they deliberately chose 3 wheels to qualify as motorcycle and thus lower requirements (probably in interests of weight and to allow more innovative technologies - I remember design #1 had issues with wanting to use cameras instead of mirrors for more streamlining, but bikes had to have mirrors too, at least at the time). But, yeah, overall the design seems good and certainly far better than a typical 3 wheel motorbike.
rkagerer 5y ago
Those aesthetics! Looks like the type of vehicle Apple would design.
- pvaldes 5y ago
  Looks much like a black keeled slug. And change tires on route would be difficult also.
wfme 5y ago
This looks vaguely similar to the Volkswagen XL1 [0] - similar internal layout but with a much longer nose. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
gerdesj 5y ago
"In 1942, engineers took a 130-horsepower Russian aircraft motor and bolted it to the back of the car for some test runs." "Test runs" is likely a euphemism for "got drunk and nearly killed themselves playing silly buggers". That thing is a steampunk precursor of the insanity that was the ME 163 Komet - just add wings and a leather flying hat with goggles!
- nelox 5y ago
  Jay Leno would love it! https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/jay-lenos-airplane-engine-collection-180977799/ https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/jay-lenos-airplane-...
- imadethis 5y ago
  The first flight of the Komet was in 1941, so it seems the insanity was concurrent. At least the train never melted anyone.
  - gerdesj 5y ago
    I was playing fast and loose with dates and ... facts! I made a model of the ME163, whilst living in West Germany back in the 1980s. Not to mention the rest of them: Spitfires, Lancs, Dorniers, Focke Wulfs, Heinckles (111) Arado (234) Blenheims, Bristols, Mossies and more. The ME163 was an absolutely insane thing. It took off on a weird cradle and was powered by an incredibly nasty fuel. One of its pilots was dissolved by the stuff (see the WP page for details)
    - dotancohen 5y ago
      No Mustang?!? I'm appalled! Seriously, I miss my model planes so bad that my children know about them, decades after they we "disposed" of against my will. The hours of glue and sanding and paint. If you have any pics I'd love to see them.
      - gerdesj 5y ago
        My sincere apologies for getting a little introspective (I'm British)! I did make at least one Mustang and Lightnings - beautiful aircraft all, and rather a lot of {B(n): n ∈ (US bomber designations)}. My Enola Gay was pretty decent. I made it with undercart down and with unusual foresight, I used plasticine and a ball bearing to weight the nose behind the cockpit so it sat correctly (bloody tricycle undercarriage - honestly, aero designers have no idea what trials they put modellers through 8) The ball bearing in question was given to me by a friend in West Germany, whose dad was a ociffer in the Royal Tank Regiment. It was a ball bearing from a Chieftain tank (probably mark I - this was 1976ish). I still have one of the really big BBs from one of those beasts somewhere - it's about 2.5" diameter. This one was about 0.5" so it fitted inside the fuselage. From memory, I made two Musties. One was nearly all silver with some black upper surfaces and another was the original UK build. I didn't realise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang that it was oriniated from here. What a cracking gift from our mates over the seas. That aircraft was an absolute belter. Not quite as pretty as a Spitfire (depending on your point of view, but that oval wing shape on the Spit is pretty iconic) but could give an FW 190 a right good kicking with a decent run up. The Mustie had a brilliant cockpit design from day one that started with the canopy - huge visibility. Later Spits and other fighters copied that, I think. Later on the Lightning (US) and the Mosquitto (UK) showed what happens if you make the fighter a bit bigger and deploy seriously manly weaponry on a platform that has much longer legs. Our Mossies were counted as two kills by the Axis, if they managed to shoot one down.
clouddrover 5y ago
A present day German car with a drag coefficient of 0.200: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/2022-mercedes-benz-eqs-ev-most-aerodynamic-car/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/2022-mercedes-benz-eqs-ev... A present day American three-wheeler with a drag coefficient of 0.13: https://www.aptera.us/ https://www.aptera.us/
- aidenn0 5y ago
  I had forgotten that Aptera was showing signs of life again. Unlike a decade ago, I'm not currently in a position where I can buy a two-seater so I haven't followed them as closely.
_ea1k 5y ago
This reminds me a lot of what Aptera is doing. It really pushes efficiency to the extreme limits of what might be practical.
_carbyau_ 5y ago
My first thought is "based on a wing? That'd give it uplift..." I love the curved glass on these cars though. I recently fell in love with the Alfa Stradale 33, one aspect being the curved glass. But then I have other ideas/desires with cars, not all of them compatible with either sensibilities/reality/each-other.
- worik 5y ago
  Upside down wing?
  - _carbyau_ 5y ago
    Ideally yes. But looking at the images I am not sure they did that. Unless there is some Aston Martin Valkyrie level of hiding underside aero...
amelius 5y ago
I've seen bicycles with a hull shaped like this. E.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIsa0L5UNgs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIsa0L5UNgs
tppiotrowski 5y ago
“consumed 8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers – 20 and 40 percent less fuel than the reference vehicle.” How efficient are modern vehicle designs in terms of drag? Are we 90% efficient or do we sacrifice a lot of mpg’s for attractive body styling?
- bagels 5y ago
  Nowhere near 90% efficient. Door handles, side mirrors, vents, grilles, exposed wheels, several inches of ground clearance.
  - tppiotrowski 5y ago
    Nice that EVs don’t need grilles. Hopefully the Tesla door handles catch on as well.
    - Plasmoid2000ad 5y ago
      Interesting to me that even what initially looks to someone largely ignorant to aerodynamics like me as a very low effort design, like the Nissan Leaf, actually has some fancy aero design hiding in plain sight. The handles are distinctly non-Tesla style, very pronounced, but they've tackled the wing mirrors actively by shaping the air with the headlights. https://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=6836 https://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=6836 I expect as we see more small EVs (Small by non-US car sizes) built on native EV platforms, we'll start to see more adventurous designs for aerodynamic reasons as you can't hide a large battery in a small cheap car.
  - mnw21cam 5y ago
    How are you measuring efficiency? Because as I see it, when travelling along a level surface, 100% of the engine power is going towards overcoming drag, so the efficiency should therefore be 0%. What is that 90% a proportion of?
    - bagels 5y ago
      The question was not really well defined. But just looking at drag force, there are a lot of things that can be done to reduce it by more than 10%, they're just unpalatable, impractical, or simply haven't been implemented. Also a lot of energy is lost to heat, even in electric cars if you're looking at the whole car and not just the aerodynamics.
dghughes 5y ago
I watched a video about EVs and it mentioned aerodynamics. It compared a new EV to a Tesla the EV discussed had a drag coefficient of 0.2 the Tesla was 0.2008. That tiny difference meant the non-Tesla had 50km more range all things equal (except the drag coefficient).
- bagels 5y ago
  Drag force is proportional to the drag coefficient. Power is proportional to force. That tiny fractional difference doesn't seem like it could account for a 50km range difference all else equal.
  - whazor 5y ago
    Typo from poster, Tesla model S should be 0.208. Also there should be the double effect, once you improve efficiency with a small step then you get to reduce the battery size which gives less weight and more range. I am looking forward to hyper efficient electric cars, currently most EVs are enormous. With efficient in-wheel motors, good aerodynamics, and very low weight will result in a much smaller battery and therefore a cheaper car. Solar cars like Lightyear One use these principles in order to become viable.
    - dotancohen 5y ago
      > Also there should be the double effect, once you improve efficiency with a small > step then you get to reduce the battery size which gives less weight and more range. Also known at the tyranny of the rocket equation. Which brings the discussion about the Tesla vehicle full circle, as that company is closely associated with (and actually shares a material engineering lab with) an extraordinarily innovative rocket company.
    - bagels 5y ago
      Even at the 0.208 vs 0.2 cd all else equal, a 50km difference implies a range of 1,300km, which the Tesla does not have.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
olivermarks 5y ago
I always thought the Schlörwagen would make a great BEV
TylerE 5y ago
The Tatras,starting with the 87, were a more practical take... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87
perl4ever 5y ago
Based on the headline, I thought of this from 1939, before the Porsche cars that most people recognize: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_64 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_64 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/VW_Typ_60_K_10_-_Porsche_Typ_64_%28Berlin-Rom-Wagen%29%2C_Bj.1939.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/VW_Typ_6...
dotancohen 5y ago
The Germans have had many super aerodynamic, but otherwise impractical cars over the years. Of recent note is the VW XL1, a recent production car with two people sitting diagonally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
- nmehner 5y ago
  The same guy also did the aerodynamics for the Milan velomobile (https://www.velomobileworld.com/product/milan-sl/ https://www.velomobileworld.com/product/milan-sl/ ) with a CW value of 0.1. This one is actually quite practical and fun to cycle. Also it starts sailing in strong cross winds.
  - bjourne 5y ago
    It's a shame no one has been able to figure out how to cheaply mass produce carbon fiber frames yet. Otherwise the Milan - with our with electric assisst - would be a great vehicle for almost everyone. €10,000 is a little steep.
- ithkuil 5y ago
  I was puzzled at what sitting diagonally means. Turns out the passenger seat is pushed a little bit back
  - k8sToGo 5y ago
    You are also sitting diagonally in the Citroën Ami (or Opel Rocks-E) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_Ami_(electric) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_Ami_(electric)
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
OneTimePetes 5y ago
Imagine for a moment using the ground effect to reduce transport load- and re-engage with the ground on need for breaking and steering.
rapnie 5y ago
I saw a documentary the other day ("Tegenlicht" [0]) about full-solar cars and the quest of Lightyear One [1] to maximize aerodynamics while still being a comfortable family car. Early models still come with hefty price tag, but I really liked the design. [0] (Dutch) https://www.vpro.nl/programmas/tegenlicht/kijk/afleveringen/2021-2022/Rijden-op-zon.html# https://www.vpro.nl/programmas/tegenlicht/kijk/afleveringen/... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightyear_One https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightyear_One
otsdr 5y ago
Also somewhat related, the Persu Streamliner (1923): http://www.dwrenched.com/2014/03/dwrenched-special.html http://www.dwrenched.com/2014/03/dwrenched-special.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurel_Persu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurel_Persu
2dvisio 5y ago
Apparently quite similar to what Alfa tried much earlier on https://www.museoalfaromeo.com/it-it/collezione/Pages/A-L-F-A--4060-HP-Aerodinamica.aspx https://www.museoalfaromeo.com/it-it/collezione/Pages/A-L-F-...
bookofjoe 5y ago
Buckminster Fuller's 1933 Dymaxion car: https://www.washedashore.com/projects/dymax/pictures.html https://www.washedashore.com/projects/dymax/pictures.html
pepoluan 5y ago
Reminds me a bit of Citroen DS, which was also revolutionary aerodynamic. Yet practical. And VERY popular. Here's a video about the DS's aerodynamics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD1_WQQAwzw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD1_WQQAwzw

153 points by davesailer 5y ago

This is very reminiscent of Buckminster Fuller's 3 wheeled rear-steering car.

That's a beauty, shape is reminiscent of the Dymaxion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlLZE23EJKs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlLZE23EJKs

black6 5y ago

Similar in appearance, drivetrain layout, and problems as the Dymaxion Car.

cpcallen 5y ago
Though the Dymaxion car at least did not put the engine _behind_ the rear wheels…

aliswe 5y ago

8l / 100km? thats in the ballpark of my prius 2006, that consumes around 7l/100km. but this was 1939 ... have we come so non-far? whats in play here? weight? fuel quality? engine? ...

pengaru 5y ago
You don't even need to go to this crazy extreme to find relatively modern levels of fuel efficiency. The classic 60s-era Mini could get ~40mpg with a plain old carburetor. As ICEs became more fuel efficient, the vehicles became both larger and heavier, negating the gains. Modern ICE vehicles have become so overweight they've managed to make EVs look somewhat average in the weight department.
sxates 5y ago
No doubt this car would have weighed a fraction of what a modern Prius weighs.
- other_herbert 5y ago
  Yes… manual everything… brakes, steering, transmission and a suspension system that would barely be passable for a trailer now
kingkongjaffa 5y ago
Your Prius is in another galaxy regarding safety and infotainment, that’s why. Also likely cruise speed in 1939 was much slower, and drag is a function of velocity^2
- jjtheblunt 5y ago
  > drag is a function of velocity^2 i have to explain that to (fellow but new) EV drivers, that blasting down a highway at high speed for a fixed distance seems to drain the battery, because of drag, far more than travelling the exact same distance at slow speed. I still feel like i've not sorted out the equations involved.
  - deelowe 5y ago
    I did an experiment on the interstate and drove at highway speeds to see if the mpg was comparable. It wasn't, so there's definitely another factor there. Here they cut groves in the concrete pavement on the interstate where as the highways are smooth asphalt. I've wondered if maybe rolling resistance is also a factor here. It was a pretty huge difference. Like more than 10% IIRC.
    - Tade0 5y ago
      I don't have reliable numbers on this, but rolling resistance appears to be the main factor up to about 60-80km/h, above which drag takes its place. Looking at the fuel consumption in my hybrid it's around 50-60% higher at an average speed of 100km/h than at 70km/h. The difference would have been 2x if was just due to drag.
    - toast0 5y ago
      For EVs it's pretty simple, the faster you go, the more power you use, and the more air resistance, and the less miles / kWh. The more power you use, the more power is lost in wiring, the hotter the batteries get and less efficient they are, etc. There's probably some minimum efficient speed, but as you go faster, everything works against you to make things less efficient. For gas engines it's quite a bit trickier, because a hotter engine gets more complete combustion and more power out the driveshaft per gallon (also more NOx, see VW) and there's a small range of RPMs where power output is best, combined with a transmission gear where efficiency is best, combined that gets you a target speed for best fuel to power at the wheels. But air resistance does get worse as you go faster. So you've got some things pushing you to go faster (sometimes much faster), and other things pushing you to go slower.
HPsquared 5y ago
Most of the innovation in engine design over the decades has been in increasing "dynamic range". That is, the ability to produce high power when required without being super inefficient in the other 99% of the time when you're just cruising or coasting. A small, simple old-tech engine will have similar fuel economy to a modern engine when cruising but will have much less peak power and refinement, and produce more noxious fumes from the tailpipe.
AdrianB1 5y ago
Weight, that is mostly coming from safety requirements (NCAP starts come with heavy weight and increased fuel consumption). That car with a modern engine can go as low as 3 liters/100 km, I did drive regular cars with 3.5l/100km over a 200km trip.
vvillena 5y ago
Your Prius is more reliable, needs less maintenance, is easier to drive, has much more grippier tires, is safer if you crash, has more storage and passenger space, and is infinitely more comfortable.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

Random question: how were very accurate curves like that machined in the 1930s? What was the process for creating the tooling that could create that kind of curved aluminum so accurately back then?

anamax 5y ago
For small production runs, an English Wheel would be appropriate. (The car doesn't have any sharp corners.)
zardo 5y ago
It's a one-off, the tooling was at most wooden forms.
LeifCarrotson 5y ago
To create curved parts, an operator would roll a piece of metal between two hard wheels on a machine called an English Wheel. The wheels apply significant pressure, and make the metal become thinner where you roll it. The same volume of metal is still present, so to become thinner it must spread out. If you expand the center of a piece, but leave the perimeter the same, then it will become domed. If you'd like to see the machine in operation, here's a video by Ron Covell, a masterfully skilled sheet metal craftsman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omRlIBONJAM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omRlIBONJAM A craftsman can carefully shape the metal to whatever shape was desired. But accurate? Who said anything about accurate? It's likely that everyone's paneling was of slightly different curvatures. They'd machine the mounting holes after the fact, so those would all match and be replaceable, but why would anyone care (how would anyone know?) if the curvature of the fender was a few millimeters different from another fender?
- ajsnigrutin 5y ago
  > Who said anything about accurate? Sometimes they had wooden shape templates... roll the part between the wheels until it seems ok, put it on the template, see where it's not quite right, back on the rollers, back on the template, back on the rollers, until the part was accurate enough.

tromp 5y ago

This modern take on the super-aerodynamic shaves another 30% off the Schlörwagen's already low drag coefficient of 0.186: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDMqEmUGxX4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDMqEmUGxX4

anonymousisme 5y ago

Is that Elon Musk in the photo?

WalterBright 5y ago

> Schlörwagen was a wing on wheels. Meaning it will lift at higher speeds. Oops!

WalterBright 5y ago

> very vulnerable to crosswinds So was the VW bus. I know from experience. It's a very dangerous car on the highway when you've got a stiff crosswind. You have to cant the steering wheel into the wind. If you drive through a cut, the car will veer into the wind, and leaving the cut, it'll will veer the other way. If you're not anticipating this, you can find yourself in the other lane facing oncoming traffic. I don't miss that beast.

mhh__ 5y ago
I'm not familiar with the history of the VW bus so this maybe unfair, but it's interesting reading books on the evolution of the aeroplane and comparing them with the evolution of the car. It took much longer for the production car to start to be engineered holistically and it's dynamics considered in the same manner one would if developing an aircraft. That being said even formula 1 teams get caught out by the interaction of aero and (say) steering angle sometimes, so perhaps the problem is harder.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  In the late 60's F1 cars started showing the effects of aerodynamic testing and development. Wings were added, not for lift, but to create downforce. Airplanes do not fly at all unless designed holistically, which is why the Wright Flyer flew and the other attempts did not.
  - mhh__ 5y ago
    You might like to gawk at a modern F1 bargeboard, which have become astonishingly complicated recently. https://external-preview.redd.it/bQ1FPpXTfqPTgZr82m7mFNIRYEx9T-F1uX2VgczK0A0.jpg?auto=webp&s=feec6a26471375d1fbcd582ab509307d39ff7a60 https://external-preview.redd.it/bQ1FPpXTfqPTgZr82m7mFNIRYEx... The point about steering angles was, if I recall correctly, McLaren's 2018 car's steering disrupting the airflow to the sidepod and bargeboard i.e. they got the placement slightly wrong so when the car was cornering the airflow would inst One thing that's kind of amusing, is that if you ask older members of FSAE (student racing car competition) teams, nearly everyone has a story about either themselves or a competing team designing an aero part only to discover that the part was basically just for the designer's curiosity/ego than any real aerodynamic performance on the car.

mhh__ 5y ago

Is the "bionic fish car" mentioned on Top Gear descended from it? https://youtu.be/ri3CUzsv7Gg https://youtu.be/ri3CUzsv7Gg

camillomiller 5y ago

> In 1942, engineers took a 130-horsepower Russian aircraft motor and bolted it to the back of the car for some test runs. The good old “warum nicht?” of Nazi engineers…

_carbyau_ 5y ago
I love that someone did it. But I also wonder what they thought they were going to get...
- hnbad 5y ago
  The Nazi high command loved its claims of "wunderwaffen" as part of the propaganda effort but mostly failed to deliver on them. Most of the "wunderwaffen" that saw actual use ended up being a horrific waste of resources and impractical to use if they didn't fail outright. Contrary to its claims the most important factor was the "blitzkrieg" strategy of overwhelming an unexpecting enemy's defenses to force a surrender -- a strategy that only worked at the beginning of the war when the other parties involved didn't know that they were going to participate in it. If you're wondering why Nazi scientists attempted these moonshots the answer is simply that there was an increasing demand to be able to deliver on the claims of having a "wunderwaffe" and incrementalism wasn't going to produce it. That said, it's unlikely the Nazis could have produced a working nuclear weapon (the only actual "wunderwaffe" that could have turned the tides at that point) and the Nazis weren't the only side producing technical innovations during that war.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    The V-series did pretty good in instilling fear by being able to attack across the channel virtually without risk to the Germans. They didn't do an enormous amount of physical damage but the psychological effects were immense.
  - _carbyau_ 5y ago
    Thank you for this wonderful explanation of the mindset behind this. Kind of like the google moonshot idea but with the desperation of the times. The engineers themselves must've been in the position of having to say "Yes sir!" while all the time knowing it wasn't going to amount to anything. I guess you could have multipart projects where each engineering party thinks their bit is useless but together it amounts to something. And that is why I wonder .. what was the person behind this bit of wunderwaffen actually conceiving. Did they think they'd get a flying car? Or a 300kmhr supercar? What were they possibly dreaming up? We'll never know. I look at this and see - at best - a fast-ish car that would experience enough aerodynamic effects to have miserable handling but nowhere near enough to take off.

undebuggable 5y ago

Before entering the post I was certain it's about Tropfenwagen [1] displayed in e.g. Technikmuseum in Berlin. Either way for the newly constructed highways they indeed shifted to aerodynamic cars with the body extending over the front wheels, but to the model ...cough... "borrowed" from Czechoslovakian Tatra [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumpler_Tropfenwagen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumpler_Tropfenwagen [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87

bernulli 5y ago
I don’t understand your comment. Neither the Tropfenwagen nor the Schlörwagen look anything like the Tatra you linked to.
- undebuggable 5y ago
  Bodies of 77/87 Tatras were probably the most aerodynamic compromise suitable for mass production at that time. Just compare them with Fords from 30s and 40s [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_vehicles#1930s%E2%80%931940s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_vehicles#1930s%E2...
- dotancohen 5y ago
  He probably meant to link to the Tatra 77, which some people say was the first aerodynamic production car. Though, I believe a dozen other cars also get that title, for varying definitions of aerodynamic.
  - bernulli 5y ago
    That one https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_77 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_77 also doesn’t look like either Tropfenwagen or Schlörwagen. I don’t doubt there are many cases of blatant copying in technology, but I am having trouble to see any connection between either Tatra and the cars discussed in the post. Also: the “Czechoslovakian” Tatra linked to was designed by an Austrian and a Hungarian.
- 5y ago

formerly_proven 5y ago

Another overly aerodynamic car from a few years earlier - Mercedes-Benz W 125, which set a speed record that wasn't outdone for some 80 years. Incidentally, someone tried to outdo them and killed themselves in doing so, which ended car manufacturers going for new records. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W125_Rekordwagen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W125_Rekordwagen

fifilura 5y ago
And also the Ur-SAAB (original SAAB). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Ursaab https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Ursaab Saab was originaly an airplane manufacturer so it was natural for them to reach for the wind-tunnel when tasked with designing a car. The Ur-SAAB was never in series production but the (at least in Sweden) very popular production cars took a lot of inspiration from it. We had one of these when I was a kid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_96 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_96 This is an earlier model with even more similarities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_92 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_92

markvdb 5y ago

Two various tidbits: - The inventor apparently managed to rescue several jewish people [0] when designing and prototyping for the Wehrmacht in Riga, Latvia. - This immediately made me think of the little known Volkswagen 1-litre car [1]. Something like that with an electric drivetrain would be close to my ideal car... [0] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Schl%C3%B6r_von_Westhofen-Dirmstein https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Schl%C3%B6r_von_Westhofen... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car

capitainenemo 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors#Production_plans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors#Production_plans Aptera seems to have resurrected... similar form.
- sovreign 5y ago
  Hope the Aptera safety testing comes back better than these older cars. Aptera and similar aerodynamic, (hopefully) inexpensive cars are really a nice middle ground between hefty Teslas and EV motorcycles.
  - bagels 5y ago
    Modern engineering and modern materials. Shouldn't be hard to do better in a crash than something designed before seat belts and crumple zones were implemented in cars.
    - capitainenemo 5y ago
      One warning is they deliberately chose 3 wheels to qualify as motorcycle and thus lower requirements (probably in interests of weight and to allow more innovative technologies - I remember design #1 had issues with wanting to use cameras instead of mirrors for more streamlining, but bikes had to have mirrors too, at least at the time). But, yeah, overall the design seems good and certainly far better than a typical 3 wheel motorbike.

rkagerer 5y ago

Those aesthetics! Looks like the type of vehicle Apple would design.

pvaldes 5y ago
Looks much like a black keeled slug. And change tires on route would be difficult also.

wfme 5y ago

This looks vaguely similar to the Volkswagen XL1 [0] - similar internal layout but with a much longer nose. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car

gerdesj 5y ago

"In 1942, engineers took a 130-horsepower Russian aircraft motor and bolted it to the back of the car for some test runs." "Test runs" is likely a euphemism for "got drunk and nearly killed themselves playing silly buggers". That thing is a steampunk precursor of the insanity that was the ME 163 Komet - just add wings and a leather flying hat with goggles!

nelox 5y ago
Jay Leno would love it! https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/jay-lenos-airplane-engine-collection-180977799/ https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/jay-lenos-airplane-...
imadethis 5y ago
The first flight of the Komet was in 1941, so it seems the insanity was concurrent. At least the train never melted anyone.
- gerdesj 5y ago
  I was playing fast and loose with dates and ... facts! I made a model of the ME163, whilst living in West Germany back in the 1980s. Not to mention the rest of them: Spitfires, Lancs, Dorniers, Focke Wulfs, Heinckles (111) Arado (234) Blenheims, Bristols, Mossies and more. The ME163 was an absolutely insane thing. It took off on a weird cradle and was powered by an incredibly nasty fuel. One of its pilots was dissolved by the stuff (see the WP page for details)
  - dotancohen 5y ago
    No Mustang?!? I'm appalled! Seriously, I miss my model planes so bad that my children know about them, decades after they we "disposed" of against my will. The hours of glue and sanding and paint. If you have any pics I'd love to see them.
    - gerdesj 5y ago
      My sincere apologies for getting a little introspective (I'm British)! I did make at least one Mustang and Lightnings - beautiful aircraft all, and rather a lot of {B(n): n ∈ (US bomber designations)}. My Enola Gay was pretty decent. I made it with undercart down and with unusual foresight, I used plasticine and a ball bearing to weight the nose behind the cockpit so it sat correctly (bloody tricycle undercarriage - honestly, aero designers have no idea what trials they put modellers through 8) The ball bearing in question was given to me by a friend in West Germany, whose dad was a ociffer in the Royal Tank Regiment. It was a ball bearing from a Chieftain tank (probably mark I - this was 1976ish). I still have one of the really big BBs from one of those beasts somewhere - it's about 2.5" diameter. This one was about 0.5" so it fitted inside the fuselage. From memory, I made two Musties. One was nearly all silver with some black upper surfaces and another was the original UK build. I didn't realise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang that it was oriniated from here. What a cracking gift from our mates over the seas. That aircraft was an absolute belter. Not quite as pretty as a Spitfire (depending on your point of view, but that oval wing shape on the Spit is pretty iconic) but could give an FW 190 a right good kicking with a decent run up. The Mustie had a brilliant cockpit design from day one that started with the canopy - huge visibility. Later Spits and other fighters copied that, I think. Later on the Lightning (US) and the Mosquitto (UK) showed what happens if you make the fighter a bit bigger and deploy seriously manly weaponry on a platform that has much longer legs. Our Mossies were counted as two kills by the Axis, if they managed to shoot one down.

clouddrover 5y ago

A present day German car with a drag coefficient of 0.200: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/2022-mercedes-benz-eqs-ev-most-aerodynamic-car/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/2022-mercedes-benz-eqs-ev... A present day American three-wheeler with a drag coefficient of 0.13: https://www.aptera.us/ https://www.aptera.us/

aidenn0 5y ago
I had forgotten that Aptera was showing signs of life again. Unlike a decade ago, I'm not currently in a position where I can buy a two-seater so I haven't followed them as closely.

_ea1k 5y ago

This reminds me a lot of what Aptera is doing. It really pushes efficiency to the extreme limits of what might be practical.

_carbyau_ 5y ago

My first thought is "based on a wing? That'd give it uplift..." I love the curved glass on these cars though. I recently fell in love with the Alfa Stradale 33, one aspect being the curved glass. But then I have other ideas/desires with cars, not all of them compatible with either sensibilities/reality/each-other.

worik 5y ago
Upside down wing?
- _carbyau_ 5y ago
  Ideally yes. But looking at the images I am not sure they did that. Unless there is some Aston Martin Valkyrie level of hiding underside aero...

amelius 5y ago

I've seen bicycles with a hull shaped like this. E.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIsa0L5UNgs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIsa0L5UNgs

tppiotrowski 5y ago

“consumed 8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers – 20 and 40 percent less fuel than the reference vehicle.” How efficient are modern vehicle designs in terms of drag? Are we 90% efficient or do we sacrifice a lot of mpg’s for attractive body styling?

bagels 5y ago
Nowhere near 90% efficient. Door handles, side mirrors, vents, grilles, exposed wheels, several inches of ground clearance.
- tppiotrowski 5y ago
  Nice that EVs don’t need grilles. Hopefully the Tesla door handles catch on as well.
  - Plasmoid2000ad 5y ago
    Interesting to me that even what initially looks to someone largely ignorant to aerodynamics like me as a very low effort design, like the Nissan Leaf, actually has some fancy aero design hiding in plain sight. The handles are distinctly non-Tesla style, very pronounced, but they've tackled the wing mirrors actively by shaping the air with the headlights. https://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=6836 https://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=6836 I expect as we see more small EVs (Small by non-US car sizes) built on native EV platforms, we'll start to see more adventurous designs for aerodynamic reasons as you can't hide a large battery in a small cheap car.
- mnw21cam 5y ago
  How are you measuring efficiency? Because as I see it, when travelling along a level surface, 100% of the engine power is going towards overcoming drag, so the efficiency should therefore be 0%. What is that 90% a proportion of?
  - bagels 5y ago
    The question was not really well defined. But just looking at drag force, there are a lot of things that can be done to reduce it by more than 10%, they're just unpalatable, impractical, or simply haven't been implemented. Also a lot of energy is lost to heat, even in electric cars if you're looking at the whole car and not just the aerodynamics.

dghughes 5y ago

I watched a video about EVs and it mentioned aerodynamics. It compared a new EV to a Tesla the EV discussed had a drag coefficient of 0.2 the Tesla was 0.2008. That tiny difference meant the non-Tesla had 50km more range all things equal (except the drag coefficient).

bagels 5y ago
Drag force is proportional to the drag coefficient. Power is proportional to force. That tiny fractional difference doesn't seem like it could account for a 50km range difference all else equal.
- whazor 5y ago
  Typo from poster, Tesla model S should be 0.208. Also there should be the double effect, once you improve efficiency with a small step then you get to reduce the battery size which gives less weight and more range. I am looking forward to hyper efficient electric cars, currently most EVs are enormous. With efficient in-wheel motors, good aerodynamics, and very low weight will result in a much smaller battery and therefore a cheaper car. Solar cars like Lightyear One use these principles in order to become viable.
  - dotancohen 5y ago
    > Also there should be the double effect, once you improve efficiency with a small > step then you get to reduce the battery size which gives less weight and more range. Also known at the tyranny of the rocket equation. Which brings the discussion about the Tesla vehicle full circle, as that company is closely associated with (and actually shares a material engineering lab with) an extraordinarily innovative rocket company.
  - bagels 5y ago
    Even at the 0.208 vs 0.2 cd all else equal, a 50km difference implies a range of 1,300km, which the Tesla does not have.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

olivermarks 5y ago

I always thought the Schlörwagen would make a great BEV

TylerE 5y ago

The Tatras,starting with the 87, were a more practical take... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_87

perl4ever 5y ago

Based on the headline, I thought of this from 1939, before the Porsche cars that most people recognize: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_64 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_64 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/VW_Typ_60_K_10_-_Porsche_Typ_64_%28Berlin-Rom-Wagen%29%2C_Bj.1939.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/VW_Typ_6...

dotancohen 5y ago

The Germans have had many super aerodynamic, but otherwise impractical cars over the years. Of recent note is the VW XL1, a recent production car with two people sitting diagonally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car

nmehner 5y ago
The same guy also did the aerodynamics for the Milan velomobile (https://www.velomobileworld.com/product/milan-sl/ https://www.velomobileworld.com/product/milan-sl/ ) with a CW value of 0.1. This one is actually quite practical and fun to cycle. Also it starts sailing in strong cross winds.
- bjourne 5y ago
  It's a shame no one has been able to figure out how to cheaply mass produce carbon fiber frames yet. Otherwise the Milan - with our with electric assisst - would be a great vehicle for almost everyone. €10,000 is a little steep.
ithkuil 5y ago
I was puzzled at what sitting diagonally means. Turns out the passenger seat is pushed a little bit back
- k8sToGo 5y ago
  You are also sitting diagonally in the Citroën Ami (or Opel Rocks-E) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_Ami_(electric) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_Ami_(electric)
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

OneTimePetes 5y ago

Imagine for a moment using the ground effect to reduce transport load- and re-engage with the ground on need for breaking and steering.

rapnie 5y ago

I saw a documentary the other day ("Tegenlicht" [0]) about full-solar cars and the quest of Lightyear One [1] to maximize aerodynamics while still being a comfortable family car. Early models still come with hefty price tag, but I really liked the design. [0] (Dutch) https://www.vpro.nl/programmas/tegenlicht/kijk/afleveringen/2021-2022/Rijden-op-zon.html# https://www.vpro.nl/programmas/tegenlicht/kijk/afleveringen/... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightyear_One https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightyear_One

otsdr 5y ago

Also somewhat related, the Persu Streamliner (1923): http://www.dwrenched.com/2014/03/dwrenched-special.html http://www.dwrenched.com/2014/03/dwrenched-special.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurel_Persu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurel_Persu

2dvisio 5y ago

Apparently quite similar to what Alfa tried much earlier on https://www.museoalfaromeo.com/it-it/collezione/Pages/A-L-F-A--4060-HP-Aerodinamica.aspx https://www.museoalfaromeo.com/it-it/collezione/Pages/A-L-F-...

bookofjoe 5y ago

Buckminster Fuller's 1933 Dymaxion car: https://www.washedashore.com/projects/dymax/pictures.html https://www.washedashore.com/projects/dymax/pictures.html

pepoluan 5y ago

Reminds me a bit of Citroen DS, which was also revolutionary aerodynamic. Yet practical. And VERY popular. Here's a video about the DS's aerodynamics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD1_WQQAwzw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD1_WQQAwzw