The 'E' Type Forum

I am not sure if this has been posted before but I came across this video from Grays Garage

Here is his description:

In this newest episode, I talk about the aerodynamics of one of my favourite cars, the E-type Jaguar. Experiments were performed using a 1/18 scale vehicle model to determine the behaviour of the flow around the open-top and hard-top models.

I remember wasting half an hour of my life on this rubbish . Notice that there is no apparent airflow underneath the car , this being one of the aspects that is of particular importance on an E because of the well known front end lift phenomenon . Note also that there is no modelling of the underbonnet flows which are of importance in relation to the drag created . To add an extra element of unreality, there is no demonstration of the flows in planform i.e. from the top, which are of considerable importance in analysing the creation of turbulence by spanwise flow , and the resulting creation of drag

The E-Type is not as aerodynamically clean as its shape suggests. While the basic shape is reasonably efficient, items such as drip rails, bumpers and overriders, and that big hole in the front all conspire to increase the drag coefficient. I believe that FHC 9600HP was not able to reach the magic 150 MPH until they removed the front overriders. I also once read that someone with access to a wind tunnel tested a model of a FHC and found that the CD was actually lower when the model was tested in reverse. Putting all of this into perspective, the E-Type is still more aerodynamic that any of its contemporaries.

The coefficient of drag of an E-Type FHC is 5.2, the OTS 5.4. Jaguar figures.

Heuer wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 10, 2018 3:45 pm

The coefficient of drag of an E-Type FHC is 5.2, the OTS 5.4. Jaguar figures.

CD is a quotient based on a flat round plate of the same frontal area - which was defined as 1.0. The E had a CD nearer 0.44 or 0.45 which isn’t all that good when a modern car is closer to 0.25.

Overall drag is another matter altogether.

Now there's a dichotomy of views. Internet forums are never dull places (actually, I can think of one that is).

Regards