Rear Spoiler - functional or aesthetic?

[frinesi2]

Somebody needs to call Debra Hands, the Aerodynamic Supervisor for the Mach E, and see what she says.

https://www.ford.com/mach-e/2021/media-kit/

Sponsored

 

[EVer]

It's pretty amazing to see someone just make assertions which aren't backed by evidence or fact.

 

[Ken7]

It's pretty amazing to see someone just make assertions which aren't backed by evidence or fact.

If it's who I think it is, it's to be expected!

 

[Geronimo]

If it's who I think it is, it's to be expected!

Often wrong, but never in doubt !

 

[EVer]

Either show your work, or show or at least one technical reference to justify your passing off of uneducated opinion as fact.

 

[EVer]

That is neither your work nor a technical reference.

 

[eager2own]

That is neither your work nor a technical reference.

But it's still an uneducated opinion of fact.

 

[EVer]

Oh. I think I see what he's trying to pull of. He makes three distinct statements:
"It's not going have significant effect on efficiency range," [whatever that is]
"it will provide significant shade,"
"it will tend to suck the dirt up higher on to the window"

And he then posts a photo to justify the only statement which isn't in question, the one about shade, and even then it only demonstrates shade with a single position of the sun.

That would be like me saying, "titanium is stiffer than steel, the moon is spherical, and the atmosphere gets warmer with increasing altitude," and when asked to justify my statement, posting this:

Naturally, given the discussions in this thread, it is the first statement which needs to be justified.

 

[ChasingCoral]

That would be like me saying, "titanium is stiffer than steel, the moon is spherical, and the atmosphere gets warmer with increasing altitude," and when asked to justify my statement, posting this:

Clearly round and flat.

 

[frinesi2]

Oh. I think I see what he's trying to pull of. He makes three distinct statements:
"It's not going have significant effect on efficiency range," [whatever that is]
"it will provide significant shade,"
"it will tend to suck the dirt up higher on to the window"

And he then posts a photo to justify the only statement which isn't in question, the one about shade, and even then it only demonstrates shade with a single position of the sun.

That would be like me saying, "titanium is stiffer than steel, the moon is spherical, and the atmosphere gets warmer with increasing altitude," and when asked to justify my statement, posting this:

Naturally, given the discussions in this thread, it is the first statement which needs to be justified.

I was seconds away from correcting you on titanium vs steel stiffness until I remembered that the moon is an oblate spheroid.

 

[EVer]

I was seconds away from correcting you on titanium vs steel stiffness until I remembered that the moon is an oblate spheroid.

Slightly edited

Sponsored