Did the Ugly Duckling grow into a beautiful swan?

Hi All,

Maybe its that angled beltline that is screwing up the high speed drag on the Gen III ? Still trying to figure that out. Are they throwing wind vertically and creating the extra drag? Need go get Myth Busters to add on a styrofoam piece that makes that beltline back in line with the flow of the air, and see if helps!

I put in grill dams to keep the air hitting the closed off grill from going into the engine compartment. Subjectively, I think they are a drag improvement, its not much. Tuff to gauge with all the wind around here.

The winds this week were very heavy. The Gen III did alright, but it seemed to have lift in the front end that the Gen II did not. Remember, I had the BT Tech plate on the Gen II. When a side gust hit that car, it hunkered down and rolled a little (even front and back). The Gen III seemed to be lifting in the wind side front. Again, I am thinking the Gen III aero is not superior to the Gen II (or at least my Gen II with the mods I did).

I seem to remember that Toyota published the Coeficients of Lift front and back on the Gen II, but I have yet to see that on the Gen III...

 

Hi All,

Another car that has been Prius'ized is the Buick Lucerne. It has the Prius rear shape now...

 

You would be wrong.

G2 Cd = 0.26
G3 Cd = 0.25

 

We're all splitting hairs, bc I think we all agree the Prius is pretty terrific. Personally I give the edge to the new Prius, of course (it's what I bought). Terrific Edmunds video:

 

I agree. I believe that the G3 is a better car for many reasons but styling is not one of them.

 

Yeah but a dropped Gen II looks so much slicker than a dropped Gen III because the Gen III is so much bulkier and its lines are overreaching.

 

The 3rd Gen looks more filled out and a bit larger from every angle. I prefer the more 'fastback' look in the rear slope of the new Prius. And one thing is for sure, moving the roof peak back allowed them to better proportion the front/rear seating room.

I can see where the 3rd Gen's taillights irritate some people. Kinda reminds me of an old, big boat of a car from the 60's with the boomerang shaped tailpieces.

I mostly like how the 3rd Gen is desgined to make a wider range of people more comfortable driving it.

Oh man, I wouldn't want to drive around in a dropped Prius. Scrrrrape.

 

Oh God here we go again. You mean like 6 foot tall people? LOL.

 

Exactly. The 1960 Chrysler called and wants its tail-lights back:

 

I ignored the Prius for 10 years cause I hate its look. The Gen II looks like an ocean-bottom-dwelling flounder fish to me. Then the Gen III came and I took a look and I was in love. Ok, I'm a tech so I love anything high-tech. The Gen III simply looks high-tech. This "love" is universal love, it has nothing to do with sex.

The Prius is SEXY? How on earth can you guys relate a car, basically a machine to be "sexy"? I can never understand why the French assigns male or female gender to dead objects. The sex starved dogs will hump anything, dead or alive. We humans should know better, think with your big walnut up there, not with those tiny acons down there.

Ok, if you insist, I do think that the Gen III is WAY sexier than her predecessor.

 

The Prius is SEXY? How on earth can you guys relate a car, basically a machine to be "sexy"? I can never understand why the French assigns male or female gender to dead objects. The sex starved dogs will hump anything, dead or alive.

I think you've just like....wow...I hope no one posts pics in response to this...

 

I remember when Chevrolet was touting a CD rating of 0.25 on its revolutionary new design in 1980.

 

Hi MVD123,

Aero is more than Cd. I think the CdA is worse on the Gen III, but mayber its my car's alignment, or newness. or the mods I had on my Gen II. My Gen III is just not as good as my Gen II was in high speed (> 45 mph) coast downs.

Also, there is lift. The Gen II had very good Cd, along with very good Cl s . Which is a difficult combination to get right. Toyota has not provided Cl s for the Gen III. My Gen III drive in the heavy cross winds the other day seems to indicate the front Cl is significantly more possitive than the Gen II.

 

Besides looking silly, I am wondering if Toyota has the production precision (or any car company) to keep the seal between the headlight and the body over the long term of production and usage with such a shape?

A simple curve is much easier to get a perfect match, sufficient for the O-ring material compliance range to not be exceeded.

 

I do not remember that. This ( http://oldcarscanada.blogspot.com/2010/09/1980-chevrolet-citation.html ) website seems to indcate that the Cd of the Citation was .417. How GM could get such a poor Cd with a sloping hatchback is beyond me.

Actually, I know. It was just being feciacious. There is a no-mans land of slope of the rear hatch for Cd. This is why the Prius hatch is at such a shallow angle. The Citation is within the poor Cd range.

 

How right you are. Aero is all encompassing including scores of little
details that individually wouldn't seem to be important but taken
together make the car more "sllippery."
I would think that the Gen III details are derivative of the Gen II's and
therefore better.
However,sometimes in the end, styling considerations may win out
over pure aero.

But, who knows for sure.
Identifying the contribution of separate details takes a wind tunnnel.

donee,

For the record, what aero specific changes/mods did you make to your
Gen II?

The Prius has such very good aero in its OEM configuration. I've been
watching for things that have a valid aero-improvement possibilities.
Other than maybe grill blocking and lowering the car, there don't seem
to be many... despite the many unverified/unvalidated claims.

But then again, maybe I'm missing something.

 

Hi MVD123,

This link gives CdA's based on a very simple formula for Area - Vehicle Coefficient of Drag List - EcoModder . THe problem with this and the Prius is the Gen III tires are 10 mm wider, and the area formula would not account for that. So even though they show the CdA of the Gen II and III nearly identical (5.83 versus 5.84) there is a problem with thier numbers that would push the Gen III CdA much larger.