Hello,
To represent the complete vehicle in a flow, if you know the SCx of the vehicle it is enough to separate the flow in 2: the part entering the grille (calculated in my file) and the part passing around the bodywork, the loss of which is calculated with the SCx (this SCx not taking into account the grille, obviously ...)
But anyway as I indicated, the values obtained are not real at all (pressure drop coefs = ??? Air speed under the hood = ???)
The goal is simply to show that in any case, we lose more energy to the air flow (therefore, in absolute reference, to the vehicle) than we recover with the wind turbine.
Afterwards, the total Cx, we don't know it and it doesn't change anything. If you have a large wind turbine that produces a lot in a car with a very low Cx you may increase the SCx by 25%; if the wind turbine is small and not very powerful, and the car is a mirror cabinet, it will increase it perhaps by 1%; but whatever happens you will gain nothing
Okidok, indeed its will also depend on the load ...
If not for your car / motorcycle comparison, certainly a motorcycle has a terrible Cx but it also has a riquiqui master-couple, which makes it generally more aerodynamic than a car!
If there is something that I am sure is that with a weight / torque and equivalent weight / power ratio, a car drives faster than a motorcycle.
I would even go so far as to say that a motorbike whose power-to-weight ratio is higher than that of a car will not roll especially faster than the latter.
I'm only talking about top speed, not acceleration capacity.
that is a certainty !!!
For example:
http://www.motoplanete.com/mv-agusta/F4 ... hnique.php
185kg dry for 190hp.
or a power weight ratio of 1kg / hp
a top speed of 312km / h real.
or about 337km / h counter.
a bugati veyron has a power-to-weight ratio of 2kg / hp, more than the MV and runs at 400km / h.
I who believed that its explained precisely by aerodynalism, I am pumped!?!?!?!? §