18 replies to this topic

[giner88]

i kno minis are not the most aerodynamic of cars but i was talking to my friend at work 2day who seems to think the clubman minis are worse than the roundnose minis when it comes to aerodynamics. i find this daft as the clubman shape came out 10 years after the first roundnose mini. woulden there have been some sort of advancement in aerodynamics by then? or was this a time when stuff like this was not even thought of? does anyone have any info on this subject?

[minimanclive]

The clubman is less aerodynamic. But aerodynamics didn't come into the design. The longer front makes it easier to service. Better access to the distributor, and saves time by not needing to have the grille removed. Also by having more metal up front it probably makes it marginally safer in a crash.

[72clubman]

I was always told it was worse, and how could it not be? The mini in general was never an aerodynamic masterpiece!
You might find this interesting
http://www.niksula.h...diy/1/drag.html

[Ethel]

It wouldn't be hard to find a clubby & roundnose identical in every other aspect and do a head to head speed test - I expect that's where the figures in the link come from - the improbably low figures are likely down rolling resistance not being taken fully into account, or pessimistic hp figures.

My understanding is that the clubby was purely cosmetic, with a raised bumper line (see the Canadian Minis) and more impact structure as an aside.
I don't consider Minis to be such an aerodynamic disaster, the external seams don't help, but it's still a very short box that accommodates four passengers - hard to do a lot better in 10 feet. Remember frontal area also matters as much as drag coefficients, there isn't much to match a Mini on size.

[mini-luke]

In terms of drag coefficient, frontal area has a big impact, which a Mini wins hands down vs just about anything 4 wheeled.

[Ivor Badger]

It wouldn't be hard to find a clubby & roundnose identical in every other aspect and do a head to head speed test - I expect that's where the figures in the link come from - the improbably low figures are likely down rolling resistance not being taken fully into account, or pessimistic hp figures.

My understanding is that the clubby was purely cosmetic, with a raised bumper line (see the Canadian Minis) and more impact structure as an aside.
I don't consider Minis to be such an aerodynamic disaster, the external seams don't help, but it's still a very short box that accommodates four passengers - hard to do a lot better in 10 feet. Remember frontal area also matters as much as drag coefficients, there isn't much to match a Mini on size.

done the comparison by fitting a clubman GF flip front in place of a round nose. The round nose went back on after one day.

[giner88]

i guess my mate at work was right then. the more i think about it the more it make perfect sense you don't see half as many track day cars with clubby fronts. but then again there prob aint as many clubbys about. Does this mean the old 1275 GT would of been faster if it were in a roundnose? or would it not fit ?? its weird how they discontinued the clubby front end after a couple decades. was this directly because of the aerodynamics? or was it looks? i quite like the clubby look

[giner88]

o thanx for the stats 72clubman

[Mini-Mad-Craig]

In my eyes no Mini ever was and ever will be aerodynamic.

If you wanted a Mini based car which was aerodynamic you'd chose the Mini Marcos or similar derivative... they did very well at Le mans and are still widely used in circuit and endurance racing today

[yousmeg]

Does this mean the old 1275 GT would of been faster if it were in a roundnose?

I cant quite remember the details but i think ive heard somewhere that they made a 1275gt with cooper s engine and running gear so might be worth finding out more about it

[Ethel]

The Clubby was pensioned off because it was the "luxury" model replaced by the Metro, the Mini was only intended to continue as a a bargain basement run around.

[Wil_h]

The clubman front I'm sure has a higher cd than the frogeye, but there are a number of reasons for this. I found some large gains in top speed and stability by making the front as flat as possible and minimising the holes, sounds odd I know.

[BGB]

No brainer. SLAB. Vs ROUND

5 year olds kmow that flat edges are less aerodynamic.

[The Matt]

Can't see the drag coefficient being that different to be honest. Both are rubbish in terms of aerodynamics anyway!

[The Matt]

Here's one for you, would the CD of a Mini limo be the same as a standard length one?

Nope, but probably bugger all difference in real terms, unless it was like 50ft long.