harddrivin1le

I couldn't find frontal area (or Cd * A) for Gen 3 TLs.

Here's that information for a 2004 Accord Hybrid, which has the same drag coefficient (.29) as the TL. I think anyone would agree that an '04 Accord and a Gen 3 TL are essentially identical in terms of frontal area:

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...rid-page4.html

Drag area, Cd (0.29) x frontal area (25.3 sq ft, est): 7.3 sq ft

The '92 'Vette's Drag Area is 6.27 sq ft per the link I posted above.

(7.3 - 6.27)/6.27) X 100 = 16%

The TL's drag area is therefore 16% greater than the Corvette's, meaning that the Corevtte is the more "aerodynamic" of the two.

harddrivin1le

More information:

http://www.hondanews.com/categories/735/releases/3746

Acura TL width: 75.4"
Acura TL track: 62.1"
Height: 56.7"

Accord Hybrid (from information above)

Width: 71.5"
Track: 61.1"
Height: 57.1"

Run the numbers and you'll see that the TL's frontal area is nearly 5% greater than the Accord Hybrid's. Both share the same .29 Cd, thus the TL's drag area is also nearly 5% greater.

Hence, a '92 (or similar model year) Corvette is more "aero" than a Hybrid Accord, which in turn is more Aero than an Acura TL.

TylerT

iTrader: (1)

Are you married to a Corvette? You're defending it like somebody called your significant other fat, ugly, and bitchy .. or all of the above.

Lets leave it at, you're right everybody is wrong :\.

U4ICTHEORY

wow... did i start this?

you guys are nuts... fucking comedy... is anyone else in here cracking up?
haters are everywhere, and in the words of Kat Williams... they're just doing their jobs... no ones insulting anyone, no one bashing anyone... people just want their point across and the last word in... plain and simple... i just took a guy who lost for some unknown reason... in all honesty... maybe he was just trying to get some pasta too.... who knows?... who cares?... the guys on the corvette side are correct... the guys on the TL-S side are correct.... enough said... so... lets all give eachother the friendly hand shake and pat on the back... some ome light up the charcoal, pop a beer open... kick back and talk stories of their cars...

-thanks for those compliments, a kill is a kill... but taken with a grain of salt...
(and that's coming from the driver of the TL-S)

-thanks for the comparisons, though it isn't right to compare the two... it's still nice seeing the numbers...

-no hard feelings to/from anyone i hope... take that shit outside... doesn't belong here...

-see you guys out on the streets... i'm usually in the bay area and/or stockton... rolling a CBP 07 TL-S 6 speed w/ an A-Spec kit, tinted windows... smoke coming out of the sun roof with my finger in the air yelling out "For the greater good!"

TylerT

iTrader: (1)

It's all good fun ... I just like poking fun at people .

jdb8805

And at the end of the day, the guy with the vette still has a vette.
You'd have to own one to understand what that means.

U4ICTHEORY

are you kidding me?... your 19 years old and driving a TL?

where the hell do you work at? i couldn't afford this car until i this year!

U4ICTHEORY

At the end of the day... i can fit 4 other people comfortably in my car plus grocieries... you'd have to have a 4 door and grocieries to understand what that means...

J/K

harddrivin1le

I deal in objective facts - regardless of what vehicle I happen to own at the moment.

I have never owned a Corvette, although I have owned THREE Honda Accords and one '07 Acura TL Type S.

An LT1 Corvette is ~ 17% "more aerodynamic" than an Acura TL, is ~ 8% lighter, makes ~ 5% more peak horsepower and has a fatter power curve due to its huge advantage in torque.

The LT1 Corvette is therefore the faster car.

But an LT1 Corvette is now THREE generations old. How fast is a three generation old Acura sedan (e.g. Vigor)? Answer: Not very.

Xpditor

I am not disagreeing with your point about drag being the product of Cd and area. But, we are splitting hairs. Cd is a relative term to describe how an object slips through the wind relative to a flat frontal plane. That is my definition of aerodynamic. Your's is apparently different. I readily concede that smaller objects have less objective drag than larger ones with the same Cd. IOW, I am saying that the TL is more aerodynamic, but because it has more frontal area, it has more drag. Since we both agree on the net result, no sense beating a dead horse.

Now, to my other assertion. I am saying that testers get 5.6 secs 0-60 for the TL and about 4.6 for the C6 'Vette. Those are both very quick times and only about a second apart.

One can compare anything to anything else. I never said the TL was faster or as fast as a 'Vette. I said that it is flattering to be having a serious discussion about their relative performance when, back in the day, it would be a non-nonsensical discussion to have to begin with.

And the variables are endless. Put an obese driver and passenger in an auto 'Vette with a full tank of gas..... and a skinny driver running on fumes in the TL with good reflexes, driving skills, and a 6MT.....

This is just an extreme of the variables on the street. My brother-in-law has a C5 auto 'Vette and I have caught him off guard several times. The TL has earned his respect.

U4ICTHEORY

i think big words are impressive...
just as impressive as passing a vette...

if know one knows your racing them... you always win!

harddrivin1le

Drag Area = Cd * frontal area.

The Corvette is more aerodynamic than the TL because it has the lower drag area product.

Here is a quick calculator which uses drag coefficient and frontal area to calculate the horsepower required to overcome aero drag at any speed.

http://www.gtechprosupport.com/support/AeroDragCalc.htm

harddrivin1le

Also, 0 - 60 times are largely traction limited in higher powered performance cars.

The better measure of acceleration is trap speed through the 1/4 mile.

A base model '08 C6 traps at about 116 MPH, while a TL-S 6 speed traps at about 100 MPH.

That equates to roughly 10 car lengths in just the first 1,320 feet.

The 'Vette's advantage will only increase with speed.

DIRTYJOHN

i believe him

harddrivin1le

A new C6 'Vette (base model) is hitting ~ 145 MPH right around the time a TL-S 6 speed is hitting 100 MPH:

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...-corvette.html
(click on "spec sheet")

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=4460

The Acura is but a spec in the Corvette's mirror by that time...Not even close.

TylerT

iTrader: (1)

I just turned 19. Basically, I had a huge down payment from my previous car ($10,000) and I got this car for $21,000. A $10,500 loan @ 6.9% is $211 a month which is very affordable. I work at Wallace Lumber 2 days a week, 16 hours a week. My income is very limited and I can barely pay my car payment and gasoline. My car is going to stay stock for awhile unless I get another job ... I don't feel like being a full time student and working full time . As long as I'm going to school, I don't have to pay rent ..

harddrivin1le

Your car is going to end up costing you hundreds of thousands of dollars over your lifetime.

How?

Because you could be driving a ~ $6,000 Civic and investing the full difference into an SP500 stock index fund, a total bond market index fund, etc.

TylerT

iTrader: (1)

I understand the consequences for my car payment / paying for this thing myself. I can give 2 shits about investing at the moment, I'm having too much fun.

It doesn't sound conservative at all. Since I come from a generation of instant gratification, investing isn't how people do things when you're 19.

harddrivin1le

That's why most people never obtain any wealth, though.

Putting money away at the youngest possible age it crucial so that you can benefit from the maximum number of years of compounding.

Read "The Millionaire Next Door." Contrary to popular belief, most millionaires in this country drive inexpensive cars. (Camrys and Buicks are among the most popular).

I'm 43 and this TL Type S is, by far, the most expensive car I have ever owned. Yet, it's total value represents a very small percentage of my net worth.

I wouldn't be able to make that statement if I were driving that level of car at age 19.

TylerT

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, I know a millionaire from work. He eats canned food, drives a 1987 Ford ranger, and lives in a trailer. He's currently building a multi-million dollar estate in the SoCal area.

Hats off to people who save their money.

harddrivin1le

There is such a thing as "a healthy compromise."

An example of that in your case might be a nice, used Civic Si for around $17K.

But like you said, it's your money so do what you want, although you will look back on this when you're 40 and say, "What was I thinking?!"

TylerT

iTrader: (1)

I still owe $10,000 on this car, getting a car for $4000 cheaper with much less luxury wouldn't make sense to me.

I'm sure I'll give up this car in the next year or so when things get real tough. That or I find a 2nd job.

harddrivin1le

I guess I don't understand how losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in investment returns over a lifetime by choosing to drive a $38,000 car at age 19 makes sense to you...

The differences between a TL and a Civic Si at age 19 are insignificant relative to the differences in investment returns they'll produce over the long run.

If it were me I'd put the Acura up for sale tonight, buy a used Civic (e.g. 4 year old LX) and invest the difference in the market. I'd also invest the difference in payments and insurance on a monthly basis..

TLdriver022

Nice Kills!!! Corvettes are for hillbillies.

harddrivin1le

Which "kills" are you referring to?

The OP claims to have more or less stayed with a "1995 'Vette," yet he was unable to confirm the model year when I asked him.

It was likely a '91 (or earlier) car fitted with an L98. Or perhaps it was a very poorly driven/out of tune LT1...

Any modern (e.g. '97 or later) Corvette will eat a TL alive...345 HP and 3,400 pounds represents the worst case scenario there. A 3,550 pound car producing with more aerodynamic drag and 258 - 286 HP just isn't going to be able to compete with that. Anyone who's driven several examples (like I have) knows that.

Soseductivesf

O.K but he DIDN'T race a modern vette so why do you keep comparin it to his T.L?

groovyone789

Give TylerT a break, he doesn't need a lecture from you. and who guarantees that those investments would have been profitable unless they were sitting in a bank (but then there's inflation anyways)? Taking a page from my economics class, this is cost vs. benefits. Clearly, to him, there was much more benefit in working hard and having a nice car than investing 4k. Maybe you would have thought differently, or maybe you are just jealous. Also, why police everyone's comments? It's childish and wrong.

As far as the vette vs. the TL-S. Like U4ICTHEORY said, there are so many explanations or possibilities. We are not looking to compare a 90's vette versus and 90's acura. We are comparing one random person's C4 and the 07 TL-S. He ran into that car on the highway, not a 2007 Vette. And he was driving his TL-S, not some mid 90's acura. Like Xpditor said, there are many explanations for the result. And I'm not even calling it a win because we don't know what happened. He could have had bald, tractionless tires. He might need a new transmission. We know that there was probably engine wear in a car that old. But who cares? Who cares about the aerodynamics? There is no need to make excuses, it happened. I'm sure if we took our TL-S back to 1992 the result would be different. But we can't do that now, can we?

You're basically arguing with everyone who is posting on this thread. Yet you're arguing against stuff that the people never said. And creating your own comparisons that do not even belong in this thread. Maybe you should start your own thread about how a 92 Vette is faster than a 07 TL-S. If you were really so smart about all this stuff(including investing and money management), you would quit wasting your time and invest it in something other than bashing people!

Xpditor

As I said before, you are beating a dead horse.

A brick has less drag than a Tomahawk missile. By your logic, a brick, then, is more aerodynamic?

If your answer is "Yes", then we will just have to agree to disagree.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

man I'd never argue with the moderator like that .... this thread is really awesome...haha...

mishar

Probably wouldn’t be that grumpy either. Sorry, I couldn’t help it.

harddrivin1le

I have a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering, which included 2 semester of fluid dynamics.

The accepted definition of "more aerodynamic" is the object with the least amount of drag.

The equation for drag is:

1/2 density * Velocity^2 * Drag Coefficient X Frontal Area


Drag coefficient by itself does not define drag. Rather, it is one component in the full equation.

So yes, a brick is "more aerodynamic" than a tomahawk missile because it would require less power to maintain (and achieve) any given speed through any given fluid. (Air is a fluid in engineering.)

The Tomahawk has a much more favorable drag coefficient, but its larger frontal area more than offsets that.

harddrivin1le

I'm not comparing it to his TL. He is.

He doesn't know what model year it was. At first he said it was a "1995," but didn't actually know once I asked him how he formed that conclusion.

Either way, it was likely a C4 (1984 - 1996). It would have been rated at no more than 250 HP if it was a 1991 or earlier model year.

An LT1 Corvette ('92 - '96) is a significantly faster car than any stock (or lightly modified) TL per the information I posted above.

"Modern" to me means C5 or later (1997 - present). That means 345 HP to 505 HP, depending on year and model. ALL of them would blow the doors off a TL assuming both drivers were actually trying and kept their feet to the boards for an appreciable period of time.

Go drive one if you don't believe me. I've driven many. It's a whole different league performance-wise.

TLdriver022

I would hope a modern corvette could beat a TL. It has nearly 80 more horsepower. But the fact is corvettes are for rednecks!! It would much rather be driving my TL than a hillbillie corvette.

rimz

i really didn't think you would breakdown Xpditor's comment about the brick and missile, but damnit you did....

harddrivin1le

A brick could very well be "more aerodynamic" than a missile.

Another good, straight forward explanation:

http://insideracingtechnology.com/tech102drag.htm

"Aerodynamic Drag

There is a basic equation for the force it takes to push something through air:

Aerodynamic drag = 1/2 D x A x Vsquared

In this equation, D is the density of the air, A is the frontal area of the moving shape, and V is its velocity relative to the air.

For real body shapes, air at standard conditions, V in mph, and drag in pounds of force, this equation becomes:

Drag = 1/391 x Cd x A x Vsquared

This equation shows that to calculate drag you need to know three things: Cd, the drag coefficient; A, the frontal area of whatever you’re driving through the air; and the speed of air past it. This equation shows an important point—aerodynamic forces are proportional to the square of the speed. That means you quadruple the drag or lift when you double the speed.

The drag coefficient, Cd, is important because, in concert with frontal area, it determines the power cost of pushing a shape through air at a certain speed."

EL19

iTrader: (4)

^^^offcially named google king...this guy can look up anything and post a link to it!

aw1

holy crap...this shit is funny...you guys work for nasa or something? CD of this and that...

the fact is, the original OP beat or stayed with (good kill by the way if you call it that) the Vette (91,92,93,95, 2125, whatever)...

harddrivin1le

The OP doesn't know if the 'Vette driver was even trying nor does he know what model year the car was.

MANY people don't push their cars anywhere close to the limit because they worry about "breaking something," getting arrested or both.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

haha exactly, the OP doesn't know anything about the driver of the Vette, and the vette itself, therefore he has stated for many many many, and I mean MANY times that all just happened was that he pulled in front of a vette. He never said the driver in the vette was trying or not. He didn't insist on anything at all in fact. He didn't say he raced "modern" vette, neither did he claim that he'd beat one. Again, all he said was he pulled in front of a older vette. Perhaps the driver in the vette was just playing with him? Who knows. We all know vettes are faster, just like he all know the TL has 4 doors while the vette has 2.

But then, being a mechanical engineering student myself, I know how stubborn mechanical engineers can be.

harddrivin1le

Read my earlier posts and I specifically stated that his encounter proved absolutely nothing (since the variables you mentioned and more were all unknown).

https://acurazine.com/forums/showpos...4&postcount=10

The number of doors a vehicle has isn't overly relevant in determining its performance. A new BMW M5 is a 4 doors sedan and will eat a '92 - '96 LT1 Corvette for lunch - without really trying.

An Acura TL-S 6 speed is a 4 door sedan, yet it will blow the doors off a 4 cylinder Accord coupe (2 door) without really trying.

(Drive wheel) power to weight ratio is the single most important factor in determining acceleration potential. The wind (aero drag) begins to become truly relevant around 100 MPH and becomes more and more significant (to the 2nd order) as speeds rise.

For 1/4 mile stuff, power to weight is king.