Popular Mechanics - USA (2018-07 & 2018-08)

A. Honda CR-V; B. Mazda CX-5; C. Ford Escape; D. Toyota RAV4; ANSWER KEY: JULY/AUGUST _ 201

E. Nissan Rogue; F. Hyundai Tucson; G. Lamborghini Huracán.

13

Maybe you’ve seen it: three lanes of mid-

size crossovers that could trade badges and

nobody would notice. Those shapes are dic-

tated by interior space, powertrain packaging,

federal regulations, and production feasibility.

But most of all, they’re designed for aerody-

namic eiciency. When we started asking

manufacturers around the country how

that works, we realized that it’s not

incredible that so many cars look

so similar. It’s incredible that

cars look diferent

at all.

T

H

E

F

UTUR

E O F A E R O

DY

NA

M

I

C

S

T

here is a

basic tension

between aerodynamic

engineers and car design-

ers. Each side will say that

their missions are in harmony, that good design should not

preclude good aerodynamics, and that aerodynamics should

not limit design. But that’s not really true. The wind doesn’t care

whether your grille is distinctive, or even whether you have one at

all. The wind wants your car to look like a raindrop, and anything else

is a compromise. Yes, every percentage of miles per gallon or range

per charge matters, but visual distinction sells cars. “I always ask,

‘Have we perfected the bottom of the car?’ ” says Andrew Smith,

please both designers, like Smith, and the laws of

physics, creating shapes that are visually

distinctive but aerodynamically

anonymous,

CAN YOU TELL THESE APART?

(ANSWER KEY BELOW)

BY EZRA DYER

A B

C D

E
F

G