1st Generation Specific (1979-1985) 1979-1985 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections

What's the drag coefficient of a stock 1st Gen?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 1, 2003 | 05:32 PM
  #1  
Project84's Avatar
Thread Starter
Open up! Search Warrant!
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,838
Likes: 3
From: Kicking down doors in a neighborhood near you
Question What's the drag coefficient of a stock 1st Gen?

I know the 2nd Gen is 0.31 and 0.29 for the sports package. What about the 1st Gen? Any wind tunnel info available on that? I did do a search and all I found was that the 1980 car was 0.38. Where others years and models different?

Thanks guys
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2003 | 05:36 PM
  #2  
Rx7carl's Avatar
Airflow is my life
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,736
Likes: 2
From: Orlando, Fl
I bet the later cars had a lower CD than the SA's due to the more contoured front bumper/air dam.
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2003 | 05:40 PM
  #3  
82transam's Avatar
Never Follow
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,389
Likes: 120
From: North Jersey
According to "Cars: A celebration" by Quinten Wilson a FB has a .36 drag coef. In reading through that book I've found numerous inaccuraces so I'm not sure how reliable that number is. Sounds about right though.
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2003 | 05:40 PM
  #4  
racermike's Avatar
aheadau
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
From: St. Louis, Mo.
I seem to recall 34. But not sure,
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2003 | 08:30 PM
  #5  
rotor vs. piston's Avatar
Function > Form
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 10,890
Likes: 3
From: Catonsville MD (baltimore suburb)
I think the color history of the Rx-7, it says .32 for the FB and a higher number for the SA, I just can't remember what. And too, in this book I've found misinformation.
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2003 | 09:58 PM
  #6  
racermike's Avatar
aheadau
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
From: St. Louis, Mo.
36, 34, 32, do I hear 30? 30 going once, twice,,,,,
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2003 | 10:46 PM
  #7  
82transam's Avatar
Never Follow
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,389
Likes: 120
From: North Jersey
30
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 12:47 AM
  #8  
fatboy7's Avatar
Got Boost?
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 1
From: Watertown, MA
I've also heard most of those, but using a simulation that I built using the equation for drag, I found that 0.32-0.34 gives a pretty close estimate for the posted topspeed. (using 1.895 m^2 for frontal area)
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 12:49 AM
  #9  
fatboy7's Avatar
Got Boost?
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 1
From: Watertown, MA
Actually the drag forces on a 1st gen and 2nd gen are really close, the 1st gen has a higher coeffecient of drag, but less frontal area.... this tends to balance things up a bit.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 12:51 AM
  #10  
racermike's Avatar
aheadau
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
From: St. Louis, Mo.
I was thinking the 1st gen was 34 and the second was 33,,,,,but surely someone has the factory (or sales) numbers!
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 12:52 AM
  #11  
error402's Avatar
#!/sup_mod/üb3rg33k
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
From: Kansas City
This is what I found in "RX-7 Mazada's Rotary Engine Sportscar" by Brian Long

Prototype -
"A final prototype being tested in the wind tunnel. The Cd was a highly creditable 0.36, or 0.35 if a rear spoiler was fitted."

SA -
"The clean lines and steep windscreen angle promoted a Cd figure of 0.362 - better then that of the Datsun 280ZX of the same vintage, and about the same as that quoted for a Porsche 924; the optinal rear spoiler not only dramatically reduced lift at the back end, but further enhanced the coefficient of drag, lowering it to 0.352."

FB '81 -
"The highly-specified UK cars came with a moulded rear spoiler (which dropped the Cd down even further, to a quoted 0.32)."
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 01:05 AM
  #12  
Manntis's Avatar
add to cart
Tenured Member: 20 Years
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,181
Likes: 0
From: Saskatoon, SK & Montreal, PQ
"In JARI's wind tunnel the P642 [Mazda's designation for the car we call the SA- Manntis] attained a drag coefficient of 0.36.

P815 [Mazda's FB designation] appeared in August 1980with extensive styling changes. A new urethane covered front bumper/airdam helped lower the drag coefficient to .34, equivalent to a gain of 5 horsepower, and reduced the front-end lift coefficient from 0.18 to 0.12"

Source: J. Yamaguchi
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 03:15 PM
  #13  
purple82's Avatar
Absolute Power is Awesome
Tenured Member: 20 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,973
Likes: 5
From: Issaquah, WA
Originally posted by fatboy7
I've also heard most of those, but using a simulation that I built using the equation for drag, I found that 0.32-0.34 gives a pretty close estimate for the posted topspeed. (using 1.895 m^2 for frontal area)
What values are you using for power? Tire drag? Driveline drag?
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 03:41 PM
  #14  
fatboy7's Avatar
Got Boost?
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 1
From: Watertown, MA
What values are you using for power? Tire drag? Driveline drag?
I've been using a 15-17% drivetrain loss, if I'm trying to guessitmate the power curve. Of course there is enough dyno-charts lying around, I've just been using some of stock ones to make the torque curve that includes drivetrain losses...

Last edited by fatboy7; Jan 2, 2003 at 03:43 PM.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 08:08 PM
  #15  
Project84's Avatar
Thread Starter
Open up! Search Warrant!
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,838
Likes: 3
From: Kicking down doors in a neighborhood near you
So its pretty comparable to the 2nd Gen. The 2nd gen's CD is 0.31 (0.29 on with the sports package.)
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 08:13 PM
  #16  
error402's Avatar
#!/sup_mod/üb3rg33k
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
From: Kansas City
Originally posted by Project84
So its pretty comparable to the 2nd Gen. The 2nd gen's CD is 0.31 (0.29 on with the sports package.)
Yep.

-Error402
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 08:31 PM
  #17  
Zulu's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
From: somewhere
I show a .31
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 09:19 PM
  #18  
rx7gslse's Avatar
EX Pres of DFW Drunks
Tenured Member: 25 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,132
Likes: 1
From: DFW, TX/Mexico
"Rx7 Sportscar History" John Matras...

SA22C .36 equal compared to the 924S
headlights raised it to .38

81+ front dropped it to .34, and adding the spoiler further dropped it to .32
- note, lift coeficent dropped to .12 compared to .18 for the 1980 model


2nd gen,
base model, .31
w/ aero package (spoiler, front air damn, and rocker panel deflectors) reduced it to .29

88 vert, .33 top up, .38 top down

no mention of change for the S5 cars.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2003 | 09:29 PM
  #19  
Project84's Avatar
Thread Starter
Open up! Search Warrant!
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,838
Likes: 3
From: Kicking down doors in a neighborhood near you
Originally posted by Zulu
I show a .31
I show you this

Its on page 9. .29 with sports package.

Thanks for all your info on the first gens guys.

Last edited by Project84; Jan 2, 2003 at 09:31 PM.
Reply
Old Mar 29, 2012 | 05:57 PM
  #20  
damusto's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
From: Poland
Guys and what about rear end lift ?
Reply
Old Mar 29, 2012 | 07:23 PM
  #21  
DivinDriver's Avatar
1st-Class Engine Janitor
Tenured Member 10 Years
iTrader: (15)
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,376
Likes: 28
From: Chino Hills, CA
42?
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
distr0
Megasquirt Forum
48
Mar 18, 2022 06:17 PM
Nuvolari
NE RX-7 Forum
1
Aug 24, 2015 09:44 AM
craaaazzy
Comments and Suggestions Archive
3
Aug 21, 2015 02:00 PM
Frisky Arab
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
13
Aug 18, 2015 05:30 PM
Marty RE
New Member RX-7 Technical
0
Aug 13, 2015 11:19 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:50 PM.