GnatGoSplat Posted March 5, 2005 Report Share Posted March 5, 2005 I found this in my box of old car brochures and stuff I'd been collecting since 1983 or so. I used to have this taped up on the wall at my parents' house back when I was 12 to about 16. I remember awhile back someone didn't believe me that the Cutlass had a 0.297 drag coefficient. Well here's the proof! Anyway, I thought it was pretty cool, it dates back to early 1988. http://gnatgosplat.homestead.com/files/1988CutlassSupremePromoOutsideFront.jpg http://gnatgosplat.homestead.com/files/1988CutlassSupremePromoOutsideBack.jpg http://gnatgosplat.homestead.com/files/1988CutlassSupremePromoInside.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THe_DeTAiL3R Posted March 5, 2005 Report Share Posted March 5, 2005 I was expecting to see a red and yellow car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Posted March 5, 2005 Report Share Posted March 5, 2005 The paint scheme of the CS in the second pic? I'm lovin it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerdealy Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 lol cool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prospeeder Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 McDonalds gave away a Cutlass? lol thats halarious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terryk2003 Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 thats kinda neat that you have that...from 1988....and DAYUM "one of the most aerodynamic cars to date" ...thats great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutlsp Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 this would explain why when i draft with big rigs in my car i get like 45mpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prospeeder Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 yea, untill the TGP came along, then that was more areodynamic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP1138 Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 yea, untill the TGP came along, then that was more areodynamic Right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted March 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 I thought the TGP had a 0.31 drag coefficient, same as the C5 Z06 Corvette? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prospeeder Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 .299, better than a corvett C5 206 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutlsp Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 how does the drag coefficient work? i thought the lower the number was the more aerodinamic a car would be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 drag coefficientA dimensionless measure of the aerodynamic sleekness of an object. A sleek car has a drag coefficient, or "Cd," of about 0.30; a square, flat plate's is 1.98. Also signified by Cx. I could never figure that out, the Cutlass has a more vertical face than the Prix or Lumina, yet that was their main advertising point, the low drag coefficient. Does the different rear window treatment really make that big of a difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted March 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 how does the drag coefficient work? i thought the lower the number was the more aerodinamic a car would be? You are correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian P Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 yea, untill the TGP came along, then that was more areodynamic the Cutlass had a 0.297 drag coefficient .299 Duhhhyyyyyyyyy!!! Not that there's much of a difference. It just makes you wrong... LOLOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted March 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 I could never figure that out, the Cutlass has a more vertical face than the Prix or Lumina, yet that was their main advertising point, the low drag coefficient. Does the different rear window treatment really make that big of a difference? It could be the vertical part of the face is so small as to be rather insignificant. It's probably less than 4" in height. Aside from the face, the Cutlass body panels are more rounded and curvier. All that probably makes up for the more vertical face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutlsp Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 yea, untill the TGP came along, then that was more areodynamic the Cutlass had a 0.297 drag coefficient .299 Duhhhyyyyyyyyy!!! Not that there's much of a difference. It just makes you wrong... LOLOL :withstupid: the cutlass is more aerodynamic so get a life prospeeder tgps are not the end all be all w-bodies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prospeeder Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 yea, untill the TGP came along, then that was more areodynamic the Cutlass had a 0.297 drag coefficient .299 Duhhhyyyyyyyyy!!! Not that there's much of a difference. It just makes you wrong... LOLOL dang, i was wrong, that constitutes for a burn on me, or a cut, or being owned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian P Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 yea, untill the TGP came along, then that was more areodynamic the Cutlass had a 0.297 drag coefficient .299 Duhhhyyyyyyyyy!!! Not that there's much of a difference. It just makes you wrong... LOLOL dang, i was wrong, that constitutes for a burn on me, or a cut, or being owned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitzel Posted March 6, 2005 Report Share Posted March 6, 2005 Yup the rear window can make a huge difference in the overall aerodynamics of the vehicle. The less abrupt the transitions in airflow, the more likely the airflow will remain laminar, as opposed to turbulent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regal_GS_1989 Posted March 8, 2005 Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 Hey Gnat, you don't happen to have any Regal Ads in that box of your's, do you?? I would love to find an ad for the 89 Regal GS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted March 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 No, but I do have a Regal ad someone posted a long time ago. It's on my PC at home, I'll see if I can find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regal_GS_1989 Posted March 8, 2005 Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 Thanks A lot Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prospeeder Posted March 9, 2005 Report Share Posted March 9, 2005 i have a 1992 Chevy Lumina Euro Ad, and a bunch of other old ads, for like buick, chevy, ford, pontiac, dodge, and like reveiws, and detroit reports on all that back in the early 90's, i havent taken pics of them yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted March 9, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2005 Hey Gnat, you don't happen to have any Regal Ads in that box of your's, do you?? I would love to find an ad for the 89 Regal GS. Here's a Regal ad for ya! http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y15/GnatGoSplat/Buick-Regal-Ad.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.