Originally Posted by PC Valkyrie

Remember one thing: drag coefficients basically tell us how "slippery" a car slices through the air when moving. For sports cars and race cars, what is very important is "downforce", which aids in cornering speeds. But the only to generate downforce is to create differences in air pressure between different surfaces of the car (like a wing or spoiler), which means you have to harness the air to do the work.

In other words, a car with very high downforce inevitably results in a higher drag coefficient. That's why cars like the Gallardo, Zonda, etc, have fairly high drag coefficients.

A good example of this is the retractable wing on the Veyron. In normal handlng mode, the wing is tilted up to generate good amounts of downforce to allow for stable and high speed cornering. However, this tilted up wing creates a lot of drag. To achieve the car's top speed, the wing has to retract to minimize the drag, but then you obviously lose the downforce on the rear wheels.

Originally Posted by 7.3 AMG

Remember dude, this doesn't completley determine how good the vehicles aerodynamics are

The Gallardo actually does quite well in the overall aerodynamic test as does the Murcielago. It sounds
like you have interest in the following, so tomorrow i'll start work on the actual downforce/lift or neutral
figures these vehicles develop.

For example: I'll also include the overall aerodynamic rating they were given

Ford GT @ 200 km/h: develops 44kg of downforce but develops 2kg of lift at the rear

V8 Vantage @ 200 km/h: develops 48kg of lift at the front and also develops 13kg of lift at the rear end