What's with the gaping maw that all cars must have now.

[mademan]

I quite enjoy the front end of my beast

[Greg Myers]

Easy way out. Call me biased and silly. Ignore the actual facts entirely. Sorry dude, I go by real knowledge and experience in BOTH fields.

Aerodynamics is aerodynamics, and thermal management is thermal management...whether in aviation or surface vehicles. Differing operating regimes, same basic theories apply in all cases.

One other tenant, " Form follows function." .

[Greg Myers]

I heard GM wanted to give the '55 a more "euro" look, and loosely based the '55 grille into the ones used by Ferrari. For '56 they clearly departed from that

[Harry P.]

One other tenant, " Form follows function." .

Not always.

Here, form follows function:

But here, form has absolutely nothing to do with function, it's form for form's sake. In other words, "styling," whether or not you like it. There's no reason the headlights need to have this wacky shape, it's purely a styling thing:

[Lovefordgalaxie]

Not always.

100% agree.

On a plane, form follows function alright.

On a car, form follows whatever the manufacturer thinks will make it sell more. If the tendency is having a big hole on the front and headlights that go to the windshield, it is the way it will look, for no other reason than making it to sell more.

[Zarana-X]

[Southern Fried]

Must be some "youngsters" on here. LOL!

THIS! Is a "gaping maw"...

[Southern Fried]

While this, is a very "tasteful" maw...although the "Bling" in the middle of it would look more at home around a Rappers neck...

[Ace-Garageguy]

Not always.

Here, form follows function:

But here, form has absolutely nothing to do with function, it's form for form's sake. In other words, "styling," whether or not you like it. There's no reason the headlights need to have this wacky shape, it's purely a styling thing:

100% agree.

On a plane, form follows function alright.

On a car, form follows whatever the manufacturer thinks will make it sell more. If the tendency is having a big hole on the front and headlights that go to the windshield, it is the way it will look, for no other reason than making it to sell more.

This is really a trip.

We're back to my original premise (it was apparently too subtle or too complicated for some to understand, so the means I used to illustrate the premise was attacked, using erroneous information I might add, rather than the logic of the premise itself) that the huge "gaping maws" on mass-production cars have no functional purpose...especially in the name of aerodynamics or cooling...as had been postulated by the author of post #39, who I quote immediately below, and to whom I was responding:

"I kind if thought it had to do with cooling. Cars today have a lot more power that cars or 10 or 20 years ago, that extra power creates heat. Due to aerodynamic improvements there is less air sneaking in outside of the grill opening.

Have a nice day.

[Tom Geiger]

I dunno, all those big gaping front ends on new cars... to me they just scream P-L-A-S-T-I-C !!!

[Joe Handley]

"I kind if thought it had to do with cooling. Cars today have a lot more power that cars or 10 or 20 years ago, that extra power creates heat. Due to aerodynamic improvements there is less air sneaking in outside of the grill opening.

Have a nice day.

I think there are a lot more cars getting air in from below the front bumper for at least cooling, and combustion for some,

[Ace-Garageguy]

I think there are a lot more cars getting air in from below the front bumper for at least cooling, and combustion for some,

Yup, and have been doing so for years and years and years and years...

Edited May 27, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Brudda]

I for one do not like the gaping maw on cars. Lexus is the worst. Well maybe not the worst but close. I love my c6 corvette. Small frontal area.

[Scott Colmer]

I'm so happy.

Hosted on Fotki

[Greg Myers]

[Aaronw]

Lotsa power from liquid-cooled engines doesn't require stupid looking vents, troughs, flaps, scoops and ducts all over the place...especially not in the name of aerodynamics.

You do realize neither of these aircraft utilized an option available to cars. The P51 mounted the radiator in a pod below the fuselage, and the Spitfire had wing mounted radiators. So unless you are suggesting a large pod above the car or adding wings...

P40 and Typhoon would be more appropriate for a car comparison.

[Ace-Garageguy]

The simple point, for the point-getting-challenged, was that it's simply NOT NECESSARY to have huge grilles to get enough airflow through a production-car radiator to cool its engine. It's nothing but styling...period...not based on aerodynamic or thermodynamic necessity.

Look at the relative sizes of the cooling-air intakes on the cars Greg put up in post #90, and think about it.

Where an intercooler is present, a larger air-intake is required, obviously.

But by all means, everyone think and believe whatever you want, and compare anything you want, and refuse to see my point.

Edited May 31, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[jbwelda]

I think the point is, airplanes are not sold by their looks, at least not primarily, as are cars. in planes, form follows function, in cars, in many ways, function follows form.

jb

[Crazy Ed]

Reality is complex. Of course, in the Google future, cars won't have grills or drivers..

And sometimes they won't get there. I enjoy those Delivery Drivers and Friends that have told me they don't need directions because they have GPS. When you hear the term "Not Available In All Areas" we live in one of 'em. It's not that the GPS Signals are not reaching the Earth here, it's that the Maps on the Computers are showing roads that ain't there. Plus with that Ground clearance, well I hope you brought along food and water

[PeeBee]

At least the Mazda's are smiling. That old Buick has a frown. A lot of cars had frowns immediate post-war. You'd think they'd all be smiling during that era.

My take on the Audi's and Lexi is that they've been trying to appeal to dog-people, particularly the owners of boxers, Great Danes and bulldogs. Or, perhaps the fans of chocolate ice cream who like to lick the bowl.

I never tire of looking at the P-51. What a beautiful machine that was.

Whatever committee designed the heavy-handed new Camaro was obviously made up of kids who grew up on Transformers. Heck, they even co-branded the new Camaro in one of the Transformer movies, didn't they? Anyway, that car's styling doesn't hold a candle to the '69 car it's trying to mock. Same goes for the new Challenger, in my opinion.

PB.

[oldscool]

Here's the image I had in mind when I made the original post:

[Ace-Garageguy]

Prominent grille openings as styling devices are nothing particularly new, anyway. '53 Fiat 8V coupe by Ghia...

'53 Chrysler showcar, also by Ghia...

[om617]

It`s not just for styling,actually has a lot to do with downforce and cooling.

Computational fluid dynamics, reduced-scale rolling wind-tunnel testing, full-scale clay models and full-size prototypes were tested in several wind tunnels, including General Motors’ wind tunnel in Warren, Mich., resulting in five primary contributors to the Z/28’s aero supremacy:

http://blog.shawgmc.com/2013/11/2014-chevrolet-camaro-z28-designed-for.html

[Greg Myers]

Why the BIG opening and then most of it is blocked off ?

Edited June 4, 2015 by Greg Myers

[chunkypeanutbutter]

The illusion of power.