I am basing my question off this [image](https://study.com/cimages/multimages/16/dragcoefficients8851096396303799158.png)
Edit: Okay, okay, I should have said “teardrop” instead of “raindrop.” Talking about the *actual* shape of raindrops doesn’t really help given the visuals I provided.
In: 558
Specific to the teardrop (and the extent of aerodynamics I know) with respect to cars, you’re not looking at just moving through the air with minimum drag — that’s not the optimization problem here, nor is it the optimization for planes and trains. Consumer cars need traction at all angles, and in many/most designs (and sadly for engineers and environmentalists) they need wheels with enough ground clearance to go over potholes and bumps, and worst of all they want protruding side mirrors (instead of more recent camera-only options). This gives rise to [unique aerodynamics optimizations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_aerodynamics) — the flat bottom being sealed so that air is redirected strategically to minimize drag in certain parts, maximize pressure in others, etc.. I’d say the abrupt, sharp cutoff to the back is the most counterintuitive part of car design imo, but that is apparently what produces the least drag for the overall shape.
Anywho, this is why I keep my cows spherical.
Latest Answers