Calix Aero Loader reversed skibox test

Results from my range tests, banana box tests and other goodies here:

Get 30 day free trial on ABRP if you use the referral code TESLABJORN:

ScanMyTesla app for showing battery temperature, etc:

My Artlist playlist:

Donation links:

My live channel:

Teslabjørn Discord server:

Reduce food waste and get great deals on food:

[Ohnonomomono]

I find it amazing that we have had roofboxes for some half a century, before anyone actually started experimenting with a proper aerodynamic shape. Think of all the noise and fuel consumption people have had til deal with in those decades.

[jesperbech]

You missed the 3rd test - driving the same trip without any box.

[scottwills]

How many people will tell you “your roof box is on the wrong way round” 🤣😂

[edmundhayes]

530 litres?! What does that mean? I only know banana boxes

[MrTrisward]

The box in reverse looks a lot more like an aeroplane wing, where it would be designed to maintain laminar flow of air as far back as possible. The 'correct' direction would create more turbulent air at the trailing edge.

Very impressive result.

[jadziadax]

(Aerospace engineer here) I just always love how aerodynamics defy 'common sense'. When travelling at slow speeds (anything significantly lower than Mach 1), the rear is much more important than the front...

[xiziz]

I tested my calix 600l last fall on my Ioniq(empty ofc), ~12% lower at 110km/h and ~20% lower consumption at 120km/h with it flipped compared to traditional. Great that calix had gotten around to get one designed properly!

Thanks for the test and video Björn!

[efusco]

Bjorn, thanks for sharing this, it's interesting, but you really needed 1)A control with no box or rack, 2)With rack, but no box, 3)With the SAME box with the "normal" mounting, and 3)SAME box with "backward" mounting. That said, it is interesting.

[linusnygren]

I got probably one of the first Aero Loaders in Norway and have been very happy with it so far :) consumption in 2021 M3 LR with Aero Loader at 80-90km/h is about 170-180wh/km in approx 0C weather. Only complaints is that it wobbles a bit in the front and the construction is a bit flimsy overall

[berndvandecruys]

Awesome content Bjorn! You made me take the jump to Tesla with your tests!

[Show-me-how-now]

Thanks for the video Bjorn.

As an engineer, I've been putting my large Thule ski box backwards for years. I do get a lot of people telling me it's on backwards. :) But then I explain to them that having the bigger end at the front is similar to a raindrop, which is the most aerodynamically efficient shape for speeds lower than the speed of sound. It's also similar to an airplane wing.

[PoppingMagnus]

I watched so many aerodynamic videos from Formula 1 this makes perfect sense.
The main reason it's more effective is it creates less of a hole or low pressure zone behind the box as it slopes more together and redusing the low pressure zone.

[loooorence]

Bjorn! thank you for the constant uploads and content! you're my favorite youtuber, for sure. :) cheers

[cw]

Wow, thanks for testing and confirming. Aerodynamics aren’t intuitive at all! I remember you placed a ski box on a hitch mounted cargo carrier with minimal increase in consumption, I wonder if you can even increase efficiency with a well designed hitch mounted box. Calix should definitely explore that option.

[luisfernandes]

For people familiared with aircafts, this is the standard profile of the wings, caulings, fuselage... It's the logic step but I never thought about it! 😁

[lauritiainen]

I found from your previous tests similar 110kmh +2C test with M3LR...205Wh/km...with that box 228Wh/km is only 11% / 23Wh more....impressive for that big box. Compared to regular one 250Wh/km is 22%/45Wh more so this model dops the power consumption to half!

[bjorngb]

Looks weird because we are used to "the wrong" way

[einseitig]

These are great results.
The only observation is from the side profile:
The larger and hence (could be) heavier end of the box overhangs the steepest and most fragile part of the car where the wind screen and the panoramic roof meet.
The nine percent gain would mean it worthy of trying though not on a regular basis.

[Angry-Lynx]

imo it doesnt look weir at all, now its actually in shape of planes wing

[antoniocirino]

in aerodynamic efficiency, the tail is more important than the front in order to reduce the coefficient of drag, because in the tail are generated undesirable turbolences.
the section is equal in the two cases but different cx.