Today’s automakers are faced with a tough dilemma. Just as the world’s governments are looking to implement stricter emissions and fuel economy standards, consumer tastes have shifted away from passenger cars to bigger, heavier and less efficient crossovers and SUVs.
This rather challenging circumstance has forced some brands to get creative as they try to squeeze more mileage out of their crossovers and SUVs. One way General Motors is tackling the issue is with subtle aero winglets that can be seen affixed to the rear fenders of some of its latest crossover and SUV models.
These little aero pieces, located toward the backs of the rear fenders, help to manage the turbulent airflow exiting the wheel wells. By streamlining this airflow, the vehicle’s overall drag is reduced, squeezing that little extra bit of efficiency out of vehicles like the Cadillac XT4.
In addition to the XT4, these aero winglets are also featured on the new 2021 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2021 Buick Encore GX, 2020 Chevrolet Blazer, 2020 GMC Acadia, 2021 Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban, 2021 GMC Yukon and 2021 Cadillac Escalade. These vehicles represent the latest of GM’s crossover/SUV offerings, so it’s likely that future crossover models from the automaker will have similar rear fender winglets.
The engineers that helped to develop these aero winglets will likely find themselves quite busy in the coming years as GM shifts its focus to battery electric vehicles. Success in the electric vehicle space is largely dependent on a company’s range-per-charge figures and aerodynamic tweaks like this can be an easy way to pump range figures up.
The importance of aerodynamics with regard to EVs is exemplified by the slippery design of the recently released Tesla Model Y electric crossover. With a low 0.23 drag coefficient, the Model Y is one of the most aerodynamically optimized vehicles on sale today, outclassing many gasoline-powered passenger cars despite being relatively tall and upright.
Other ways automakers work to optimize efficiency is by implementing active grille shutters and using smaller wing mirrors. Some automakers are going even further, ditching side view mirrors altogether in favor of slim rear-facing cameras.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more engineering and tech news, aerodynamics news and ongoing General Motors news coverage.
This report was written in collaboration with our sister site, Cadillac Society.
Comments
Automakers can easily make aerodynamic vehicles, the question remains can you make them look interesting. Tesla designs are rather boring and look very similar.
I think the Tesla’s look ok, but you do have to wonder what they are planning for the future. At some point, they are going to need to update their design language.
If the Cybertruck is any indication of their future designs though, that probably won’t translate well to a future Model S.
dont forget the prius! biggest thing holding back gas engines is the grill, and the need to vent off heat. It doesn’t help that to avoid lawsuits, something that Tesla doesn’t have a problem with with the jury bias towards them, they need to make sure every car doesn’t overheat while climbing davis dam in the middle of the summer with a radiator that just drove through a bunch of weeds and is only half full and is unable to function. I have an older cavalier with an almost micro radiator and it does just fine in hot southern summers as long as I keep it moving. That shouldn’t be a problem in the next five-ten years as engines become more efficient and halve their cooling requirements.
See? Mileage, efficiency can come down to some cheap plastic bits with good thinking. Detroit can do great things when you push it. We do not need to ease up on emissions or mileage standards.
On the other hand, I can sort of a see a repeat of the late 70s / early 80s where the vehicles are mostly enormous, but have no power in order to meet regulations.
Ed it has tKen a lot more than that.
If you have not noticed it has taken a large redesign of our engines with expensive added features like Turbocharging, direct injection fuel injection. Displacement on Demand, variable valve timing, 10 speed transmissions, auto stop systems, more expensive lighter materials and now even a 3 cylinder engine.
The add on plastic bits are just desperate final details they are reaching for to meet ever increasing numbers.
These things have driven the prices of cars up to where many can no longer afford a new car.
Even my new CUV has a disconnect for the rear drive shaft that is only good for a small percentage of a gallon. Why did they do it? The engineer said they are so desp they will seek any advantage even one that small that adds cost.
We really need a balanced approach to the future that improves the numbers but also considers the consumers ability to still buy an affordable car that they need.
German automakers have been doing this aero bit for quite awhile now, and not just on their SUVs but their coupes/sedans
GM has had tricks for many years.
The rear bumper corner of a. Lot is a sharp squared off corner. It cuts drag and added range.
The wheel well pants on GM trucks in front of the rear tire deflects air from the tires that create major drag. Etc.
If you look at most GM vehicles from above the cabs are tapered front to rear. This is why if you roll down a rear window with the others up you get that throbbing sound.
It is like air being blown over a open bottle.
Every car I’ve had in the past 20 years had that issue with the back windows being rolled down. The worst was a 2007 Jeep Patriot.
I don’t think it was particularly tapered.
This was one of the first aero tricks they used and it started back in in the 80’s.
It has only gotten worse with even more aero the vehicles get.
On some the laminar flow of air caused it. There was more than one way to move the air on the sides.
i recall reading that tesla was claiming their aerodynamic wheel covers increase efficiency by as much as 10%. i’d bet in real world conditions, it made very little difference.
Kind of like a stop-start system. You pull up to a stop sign, the engine shuts off for 2 seconds and you improve your mileage by 0.001 mpg. Supposedly.
start stop only increases efficiency in mega cities where you sit at a light for almost 2 minutes, yet you only live 5 miles down the road. There you might see some savings where your engine idles for 10 minutes and drives for 3. Does nothing for me here in the Midwest.
Nate, if you want to get better MPG in the city, then just move to Chicago…..LOL
Too bad this didn’t translate over to the window sticker on these 3 cylinder wonders. How can something this small and light be 2-4 MPG worse on the highway than the larger more substantial 2020 CRV with a larger more powerful 1.5 4 cylinder turbo engine?
The epa measuring system has become something unto itself I am not sure it is representative anymore. Some brands probably all brands game to test in some way or other. Best see what people get on hte average ther are websites that have that info.
Its actually simple they are looking to increase city mpg more than highway. For highway you actually need a bigger engine because of wind resistance. Turbos do great in high altitude and normal city driving. If your on the highway and get any wind resistance turbo’s suck more gas than a naturally aspirated engine because the turbo is being used more to keep the speed up. In the city the turbo spool up for initial off the line feel and doesn’t work very much in stop and go driving. I went on trip to Oklahoma in my 2011 Cruze, once I hit the flat lands and the constant wind my mileage dropped a lot 5-7 mpg. If it was a not a turbo it probably wouldn’t have dropped as much.
Much of what they are doing today are for what they calloff cycle credits. Things like auto stop and displacement on demand can not be measured consistently so the EPA awards off cycle credits that the automakers use to meet their numbers. They have xpcredits for a number of systems today and that is why we are getting the Rube Goldberg tricks.
Does aerodynamics or a concern especially with full size SUVs like the 2020 Cadillac Escalade ESV where the top tier model sells for over $90K; aerodynamics are critical if GM made CUV capable of high performance and given that there is no GM SUV or CUV with a 650 hp LT4 supercharged 6.2L V8, aerodynamics is a mute point.
I think you mean “moot point”.
As for the rest, that was a lot of words.
Some lawyer is just itching to sue them for lacerating a pedestrian with those wings.