For automakers on the cusp of the 1990s, interest in aerodynamic efficiency was high. This yielded popular cars—the 1988 Honda CRX, the 1989 Ford Thunderbird, the 1990 Mazda RX-7—with drag coefficients (Cd) around 0.32. This aerodynamic sculpting also yielded, to my eye, good-looking and well-proportioned cars. In the 1990s, the rise of the SUV seemed to deprioritize aerodynamics, as we climbed into ever-more blocky-looking trucks. For example, the bestselling SUV of the '90s was the Ford Explorer, with a Cd of 0.43. In the 2000s, the crossover began to emerge. Initially, these had the same lousy aerodynamics as SUVs. Honda's 2002 CR-V, for instance, had a Cd of 0.45. But throughout the 2000s and into the 2010s, U.S. fuel standards—driven in no small part by California's stringent requirements and outsized influence—drove automakers to seek efficiency gains, again through aerodynamic refinement. I'll use Honda as an example again. Their CR-V went from 0.45 to just 0.33, with their 2023 CR-V. The weird thing is, the 2023 CR-V doesn't look very aerodynamic. Consider that the 1988 CR-X we looked at above has a Cd of 0.32. Look at the two cars side-by side: Would you guess they both have nearly the same co-efficient of drag? So how is this possible? The short answer is that the world's automotive designers and engineers have figured out how to achieve multiple tiny gains across the entire vehicle. Subtle radii across the surface transitions, carefully-shaped A-pillars and mirror housings, more precise panel gaps, subtly-sculpted wheel arches, smooth underbody panels. What this means is, today we have aerodynamic vehicles that don't look particularly aerodynamic. One standout segment, however, is EVs. EV buyers have range concerns that gas-powered-car buyers don't, and thus EV makers have to resort to more extreme aerodynamic styling. Take the Tesla Model Y. It has a Cd of just 0.22, and it looks it. Volkswagen has gone even further, with their newly-unveile

← Back to Designed News