Trollhattan Saab has changed!
The site you're viewing now is the original Trollhattan Saab weblog, though it's now an archive only and no new material is posted here. As of February 2009, all new material is posted at our new site - Saabs United.
Please join us at Saabs United and get your daily Saab fix from Saab sources all around the world.
Car design, part I
I have a big bad yearning for a Porsche at the moment. This one, actually.
I definitely don’t have a yearning for the Panamera. If only Porsche could stop people from seeing it from the rear.
The Panamera is proving the rule, just like the Mini SUV did, that you can’t just apply a style to any body shape or size and expect it to work.
——
Car design, part 2
At what point should a car designer forego low wind resistence due to a need to maintain a design language?
I was reading an article this morning where one of GM’s designers was responding to criticism of the production version of the Chevrolet Volt. He said they had to make it like they did in order to minimise drag, and therefore heighten efficiency. The end result is a Chevy Volt that looks less like the production car and more like its Toyota competition (and for the record, I like the production version more than the concept, which looked like a toy).
Minimising air resistence, of course, is a science rather than an art. You have an object and you need to move the air past it as fluidly as possible. Given that that’s the case, there’s a grave potential that we could all end up driving something that looks exactly the same as designers lay their drawings at the aerodynamic altar.
The art is combining the science and the aesthetic requirements that satisfy the brand’s objectives. At some point a designer will have to say “we’ll accept a X% penalty in drag in order to make our cars look like a real [Saab] should”. Insert your preferred brand.
The designer that says that – he’s one of the guys I’d like working on Saabs. Aerodynamics are important, but so is DNA.
This is just one of the things that go through my mind.
——
Ignore any inaccuracies and tall stories.
Here’s a nice background piece on the Saab Musuem.
——
Aussie actor, Eric Bana (see either Chopper or Munich for his best work) has had an XB ford Falcon for 20-something years. He crashed it last year in the Targa Tasmania tarmac rally and has recently made a documentary of the rebuild.
Jalopnik have the preview. I think it will end up being a must-see for anyone who’s had a passion for a particular car.
——
iAfrica do some interesting testing of the Saab 9-3 convertible at altitude:
Common knowledge is that at the coast, turbo-assisted cars should be some 3.0 to 5.0 percent quicker than at Reef altitudes. But not so with the SAAB Aero — it proved 0.70 seconds quicker to 100km/h on the Reef — 7.4 seconds compared to the factory-claimed 8.1. Confusing to say the least.
Any of our other high-altitude Saab owners have something to chip in on this?
——
It makes no sense, but the GM/Chrysler merger story still lives.
GM are eyeing Chryslers cash and it seems they’re willing to borrow mega amounts to get access to additional cashflow. Why not just use the money you borrow for your own ops rather than having to negotiate the shuttering of multiple plants and dealerships as well?
All this is contingent, of course, on them being able to borrow money in the first place, which is a pretty difficult proposition these days.
——
Please note there’s a wall at the bottom of the right sidebar. Feel free to scribble on it, but keep it clean.
I will not hesitate to heed Mr Reagan’s advice should things get non-family-friendly.
This has been removed. Too much maintenance, and it’ll clog the recent comments section of the sidebar, too. Sorry.
-
10 responses so far ↓
1 eggsngrits
// Oct 21, 2008 at 11:01 am
They’ve said in a couple of news outlets today that the GM/Chrysler thing could get done by the end of the month. Typical merger talk — combined to reduce over head costs, eliminate duplicate capacity, etc. Why these two need each other to make this happen, I’ll never know.
2 Arnold
// Oct 21, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Regarding turbo power at high altitude, my understanding is that the power developed by the engine depends on how much charge is squashed into the combustion chambers. If the computer controlling the charge pressure is able to compensate for reduced ambient pressure, then I see no reason why a full charge can’t be achieved, as long as it is within the limits of the turbo.
Given that the power developed is the same as sea level, then the reduced drag at altitude (due to less dense air) should allow a higher top speed.
Top speed depends on power, and power required depends on drag times speed. Power required goes up the cube of the speed. To go from 100k to 200k requires eight times the power.
3 Brendan
// Oct 21, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Not sure about that Saab Museum article, I think it’s too inaccurate.
They say this
then include a photo of a Sonett III with a SAAB97 number plate
Too many mistakes for my liking.
4 swade
// Oct 21, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Yeah, I know. The “Toad” story completely missed the point, too, but it’s still good to see it get good coverage.
5 turbin
// Oct 21, 2008 at 2:28 pm
They skip the 99 as well, Brendan!
6 Me
// Oct 21, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Hi Swade,
you can’t be a Saab fan and have a yearning for the 2nd ugliest Porsche (without Panamera and Cayenne).
The Volt like the Toyota are High efficient cars, and beuty isn’t efficient. But with “normal” cars, aerodynamicist lay their needs at the designer altar, believe me.
7 swade
// Oct 21, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Oh Me, you wound me with that description. 2nd ugliest? Noooooooo. No way. I’d say it’s the most aesthetically pleasing of all the front-engined Porsches. Much better than the 928 or even the 968 that replaced it.
I’ll always be a Saabist and will always have a Saab in the driveway, but I’ve only got one life to live and a number of cars I want to own in the next 20 years. A 944 Turbo is one of them. Along with a 9-5 Aero and a Sonett and various others.
8 ctm
// Oct 21, 2008 at 7:39 pm
I read somewhere that the average speed of all cars during their life span while their engines are running is something like 50 km/h. But, air resistance is also something that only has a big impact on fuel consumption above 50 km/h.
9 Me
// Oct 22, 2008 at 12:22 am
Hi ctm,
maybe have the other resistancies liek road resistance a bigger impact on fuel consumption , but if you halve the CdxA you halve the Drag, at any velocity.
Eg: The EV-1 had an CdA of 3.95 ft², an 1995 Saab 900NG had an CdA of 7.1 ft²
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient
10 albert
// Oct 23, 2008 at 7:09 am
A Saabist is someone who does not care much about what someone else thinks, but goes his own way.
So when YOU like that Porsche – and it has always been and still is a great car – then go for it.
But don’t think good porsches come cheap.