Most people don't seem to understand that at the reynolds numbers and speeds of passenger vehicles and their generally unoptimiszed profile that more drag reduction is to be had by "teardropping" the aft end, that is filling in the area in the back that is generating a rotor. I look at many sports cars, particularly the expensive wedge shaped ones with squared off backs and told the young engineer collegues that bought them that they would go better in reverse. It is news that is generally met with disbelief. Minimum drag enclosed area at these reynold numbers is a teardrop shape with a fine-ness (axis) ratio of 3 to 1, bluff end into the airstream.
Sailplane pilots are kind of the volt-nuts of the skies, looking for any optimization that will get them an improved lift-to-drag. It is a curse, because you see how everyone else is doing it wrong. That goes as far as reprofiling the wings of their gliders, and using inflight leading edge bug scrapers that are deployed whenever they feel they picked up a heavy load. (the bugs trip the laminar flow into turbulent flow and you endeavour to delay that to as far back on the airfoil as you can)