Someone mentioned the Science Channel car program at 3pm EST today. I saw
the last 20 mins…interestingly enough, and quite surprising to
me at least (not being an engineer) was the statement that the '59 Bentley R
type Continental was more aerodynamically efficient that the E-type!
Les.
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Les Halls sent Sun 3 Sep 2006:
Les,
I read that its Cx was modest. Anyway this doesn’t prevent the
beast from reaching 256,367 Km/h (the 3.8)!
Ernesto '62 FHC–
The original message included these comments:
me at least (not being an engineer) was the statement that the '59 Bentley R
type Continental was more aerodynamically efficient that the E-type!
–
growling66
Cagliari, Italy
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Les Halls sent Sun 3 Sep 2006:
Les,
‘‘More aerodynamically efficient’’ probably means that the
coefficient of drag (Cx) was lower than the E Type’s, though it’s
hard to know how they figured that out since we listers have never
found a good documented source for the E Type’s Cx. That would
mean the shape was slipperier, but the total drag is dependent on
the frontal area. The Continental has a heck of a lot more – so I
would expect it to have lots more actual drag than the E Type.
Jerry–
Jerry Mouton '64 FHC
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Have no idea Jerry, only that the car weighs about 3+ tons and acheives
about 120mph with only 170 hp. They stated that a great contributor to this
capability was the more efficient aerodynamics…better than the E.
Les.
From: “mouton” jerry@moutons.org
Les,‘‘More aerodynamically efficient’’ probably means that the
coefficient of drag (Cx) was lower than the E Type’s, though it’s
hard to know how they figured that out since we listers have never
found a good documented source for the E Type’s Cx. That would
mean the shape was slipperier, but the total drag is dependent on
the frontal area. The Continental has a heck of a lot more – so I
would expect it to have lots more actual drag than the E Type.
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php