Coefficient of drag??

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

columnshift

Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2014
Posts
34
Reaction score
0
Location
Minnesota
First Name
Mark
Truck Year
1977
Truck Model
1500 heavy half (retired)
Engine Size
350
Probably a wierd question for something so bricklike BUT i'm wondering if anyone has ever heard a figure, ever, or even an idea of what it might be. :)

I read somewhere that the square body was actually one of the first intentionally aerodynamic pickup designs, possibly assisted by computers of the time, and was further enhanced in at least 1981. (I don't know about later than that/if any other changes) What the actual aerodynamic figure is I would love to know in particular to compare with the GMT400 88-98 series. (if anyone knows that to compare to)


I thought it was interesting that the big rig inspired but semi swoopy dodge ram's of even the later 2000's were a horrific 0.55 or something which were as bad as 1950's passenger vehicles with vertical windshields. Whereas in many cases cars of the later 80's for instance were often quite close to 0.30 in some cases being better than vehicles that replaced them years later. (when the demand for 'style' was deemed more important... from what i've seen 2000's chevy pickups are worse than 1990's pickups for instance)
 

flyboy1100

Full Access Member
Joined
May 23, 2014
Posts
1,024
Reaction score
9
Location
UsA
First Name
me
Truck Year
1986
Truck Model
k1500
Engine Size
305, 700r4??, 3.42 gears
I would guess .7 or so. Coefficient of a rectangle is .8

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
 

chengny

Full Access Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Posts
4,086
Reaction score
1,010
Location
NH
First Name
Jerry
Truck Year
1986
Truck Model
K3500
Engine Size
350/5.7
The Cd of a standard pick-up truck has been stuck at about .62 for years now. I think they gave up trying to improve on that number.

Any attempt to lower the Cd of a pickup is now mostly concentrated on the use of add-on devices (i.e. air dams, tonneau covers, cab fairing panels, etc).

BTW - It has been shown - through wind tunnel analysis - that the use of a "cargo net" doesn't reduce drag co-efficient. It will actually increase it.

Above a certain speed (with the tailgate installed), a high pressure "bubble" forms within the bed. It extends to just above the bedsides and tapers down towards the top of the tailgate in the back. That bubble drastically reduces the turbulence within the bed and also somewhat reduces the eddy effect behind the truck.

With the tailgate removed and a net installed (or just with no tailgate at all), this high pressure bubble cannot form. At highway speeds, the turbulence inside the bed and the eddy effect behind the truck are increased. The result is a greater Cd - than if the tailgate was left in place.
 

columnshift

Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2014
Posts
34
Reaction score
0
Location
Minnesota
First Name
Mark
Truck Year
1977
Truck Model
1500 heavy half (retired)
Engine Size
350
The Cd of a standard pick-up truck has been stuck at about .62 for years now. I think they gave up trying to improve on that number.

Any attempt to lower the Cd of a pickup is now mostly concentrated on the use of add-on devices (i.e. air dams, tonneau covers, cab fairing panels, etc).

Well the Ford Lightning F150's apparently had a 0.38 which is better than alot of the early 1980's cars.

Mods can be taken notably further
You must be registered for see images
but i'm still curious what i'd be starting with vs a later pickup. The newer ones always get better highway mileage but some of that is less frontal area.

Still hoping for an eventual source if anyone ever finds one somewhere...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
42,322
Posts
913,643
Members
33,821
Latest member
78ALB
Top