Vellum Venom Vignette: Flattened Fenders and Air Curtains

Sajeev Mehta
by Sajeev Mehta

Mike writes:

Sajeev,

I have noticed something on newer cars, and it’s been bothering me for awhile now. Perhaps you, with your deity-like omniscience (and access to inside information) will be able to provide some clarity.

As you can see from the picture below, a new Toyota has this vertical flat area around the wheels. And it’s not just this particular model of car — nearly every modern car I see on the road today has a similar design feature, though they vary in the width of the flat area around the wheel arch. Contrast this the Clinton-era Toyo at the bottom, where the body lines follow a graceful curve all the way to the fender opening.

To my eye, the wheel arch flatness looks terrible. Are every automaker’s designers on the same drugs, or is this done for an actual reason — i.e, aerodynamics, or possibly to make the wheels appear larger (another trend which befuddles me)?

Looking forward to your reply, thank you!

Sajeev answers:

Access to inside information in the car design biz? Deity-like omniscience? Hardly. I contacted two experts in aerodynamics and neither responded. Even worse, one is a longtime family friend.

Aesthetically speaking: I agree. The flattened fender arches add an unnecessarily complex or flow-killing stylistic element to a vehicle’s bodyside.

Realistically speaking: The hard transition provides an aero benefit I cannot independently verify. I reckon it reduces drag and/or turbulence around the wheels, especially when adding air curtains. The two might combine to “clean up” (technical term) airflow around the front wheels. Which implies your ride gets quieter and more fuel efficient — not just for fancy BMWs, but also for the Ford F-150 and Mustang.

Which begs the question, how much does this really help? Bullet-nosed faces of the 1990s are history and we still have pedestrian-friendly fronts with extensive amounts of frontal area. Perhaps that’s why air curtains are necessary: every little bit helps.

If you’re a Car Design Wonk, please chime in below or drop me an email.

[Image: BMW, the OP, Ford]

Send your queries to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com. Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry…but be realistic, and use your make/model specific forums instead of TTAC for more timely advice.

Sajeev Mehta
Sajeev Mehta

More by Sajeev Mehta

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 39 comments
  • V-Strom rider V-Strom rider on May 28, 2017

    My M235i has them - my least favourite part of an otherwise beautiful car.

  • Lightspeed Lightspeed on May 30, 2017

    Truly hate those flat arches, one reason I love my 2000 Lexus GS, it has box-flares! real, live box-flares! Todays cars are nearly indistinguishable from one another and the interiors even more so. The designers today strike me as being more interested in anime and comic books than in cars, hence cars and trucks becoming so cartoonish. I drove a Lexus NX loaner a few weeks ago and was embarrassed to seen in the thing, and not even because of the grille, but because of the giant flat wheel arches.

  • Honda1 Unions were needed back in the early days, not needed know. There are plenty of rules and regulations and government agencies that keep companies in line. It's just a money grad and nothing more. Fain is a punk!
  • 1995 SC If the necessary number of employees vote to unionize then yes, they should be unionized. That's how it works.
  • Sobhuza Trooper That Dave Thomas fella sounds like the kind of twit who is oh-so-quick to tell us how easy and fun the bus is for any and all of your personal transportation needs. The time to get to and from the bus stop is never a concern. The time waiting for the bus is never a concern. The time waiting for a connection (if there is one) is never a concern. The weather is never a concern. Whatever you might be carrying or intend to purchase is never a concern. Nope, Boo Cars! Yeah Buses! Buses rule!Needless to say, these twits don't actual take the damn bus.
  • MaintenanceCosts Nobody here seems to acknowledge that there are multiple use cases for cars.Some people spend all their time driving all over the country and need every mile and minute of time savings. ICE cars are better for them right now.Some people only drive locally and fly when they travel. For them, there's probably a range number that works, and they don't really need more. For the uses for which we use our EV, that would be around 150 miles. The other thing about a low range requirement is it can make 120V charging viable. If you don't drive more than an average of about 40 miles/day, you can probably get enough electrons through a wall outlet. We spent over two years charging our Bolt only through 120V, while our house was getting rebuilt, and never had an issue.Those are extremes. There are all sorts of use cases in between, which probably represent the majority of drivers. For some users, what's needed is more range. But I think for most users, what's needed is better charging. Retrofit apartment garages like Tim's with 240V outlets at every spot. Install more L3 chargers in supermarket parking lots and alongside gas stations. Make chargers that work like Tesla Superchargers as ubiquitous as gas stations, and EV charging will not be an issue for most users.
  • MaintenanceCosts I don't have an opinion on whether any one plant unionizing is the right answer, but the employees sure need to have the right to organize. Unions or the credible threat of unionization are the only thing, history has proven, that can keep employers honest. Without it, we've seen over and over, the employers have complete power over the workers and feel free to exploit the workers however they see fit. (And don't tell me "oh, the workers can just leave" - in an oligopolistic industry, working conditions quickly converge, and there's not another employer right around the corner.)
Next