←back to thread

49 points geox | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
quailfarmer ◴[] No.43565321[source]
What's new here? College kids have been doing this since the 90s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Solar_Challenge
replies(2): >>43565529 #>>43566770 #
trhway ◴[] No.43565529[source]
Some look close to like a real car, that one EV + solar, 25miles/KWh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNSW_Sunswift#/media/File:Suns...

I'd venture a guess - Aptera went for 3 wheeler because certification as a motorcycle is much easier than as a 4-wheel car. Unfortunately 3 wheels - 3 vertical columns resisting the upcoming air - may be less aerodynamic than 4 wheels which are only 2 vertical columns resisting the upcoming air. Add to that that for the same stability you generally need the paired wheels in a 3 wheeler wider than the paired wheels in a 4 wheeler - that again worsens the 3-wheeler aerodynamics.

replies(2): >>43566726 #>>43567185 #
tromp ◴[] No.43567185[source]
Optimal aerodynamic efficiency on a 4 wheel car still requires a narrower rear, with a corresponding shorter rear axle to make the rear wheels roll in the slipstream of the front wheels. This can be seen on two of the most aerodynamic cars of all time, the GM EV1 and Mercedes EQXX.
replies(1): >>43567417 #
1. trhway ◴[] No.43567417[source]
>make the rear wheels roll in the slipstream of the front wheels.

thanks. That is in general what i meant by saying "4 wheels which are only 2 vertical columns resisting the upcoming air", i missed the shorter axle as being the most aerodynamic, and your description is just much better and more right detail level correct.