Quote:
Originally Posted by miatanut
Exactly.
When you throw away 1/3 of the car to make it lighter and also push less air around, even if it's not as ultra-optimized as the current rectangular cars, it's still using a lot less fuel to move that driver around.
|
Oh contraire; in my example I compared a 620kg 400bhp Deltawing with an 870kg 400bhp LMP. If they have the same engine producing the same power they will consume fuel at the same rate (400bhp requires about 75kg of petrol per hour if driven at full throttle). Now if one of those cars completes the race in a faster time it will actually be producing power (and hence consuming fuel) for a shorter time; it requires less fuel.
Now of course better aerodynamics and lower weight
should make the car faster, and hence use less fuel, as described above, but better aerodynamics and lower weight don't help if the car corners so slowly that it is out on the track (consuming fuel at 75kg per hour) for longer.
Now if that sounds counterintuitive imagine an extreme example... lets say we have a 4bhp lawnmower engine in a go-kart consuming 0.75 kg of fuel per hour, and then stick the same engine in a tractor, will it consume more fuel per hour? Of course not.. it will still consume 0.75kg per hour, it is just that the tractor will go slower because of the weight. if it is slower it will take longer to complete the course and therefore it will consume more fuel; the faster car consumes less fuel, even though they consume fuel at the same RATE.
"But more aerodynamic road cars have better mpg's than big heavy unaerodynamic lorries" I hear you say... well that because you drive your road car and your lorry at the same speed (usually determined by the speed limit) in this case, the car will have less drag and hence a better mpg for the same speed.
Race cars don't have a speed limit, they have a power limit.