We can discuss the wing on the A321 quite a while. There is no question, that Airbus could do a better wing for the longer range part of the A321 envelope.
But with a look at the competition, Airbus seems to able to compete. The competition is the 737. The 737 is slightly lighter than the A320 family birds and has a smaller diameter fuselage. The 737NG family seems to have lower fuel burn than the A320ceo family on short distances. The A320 makes headway on longer flights.
With a wider fuselage and about the same engines, the aerodynamic differences can only be the wings. So I post the theory that the older wing on the A320 is aerodynamically more effective than the younger wing on the 737NG. Both wings moved nearly unchanged to the next generation MAX and neo.
Now Airbus seems to be able to stretch this design slightly further to a still higher MTOW and 4,700 nm range.
I think we will see a new wing for the A321 and the A321 only, when it is clear that and when Boeing will launch the 797. Up to than there is no competitive reason to mess with a very successful design.
Your theory ignores that the 737MAX and A320neo use different engines and how weight and drag balance with engine efficiency
The 737 has a number of weight savings that help it
- Lighter Engines
- Smaller Cabin Service Doors
- Unpowered Cargo Doors
- Shorter Landinging Gear
- Gear doors are smaller and only cover the strut
- Narrower Fuselage
- No overwinter exit slides
Hundreds of pounds add up and helps explain why these airplanes perform differently. When we look at operations, Delta and Alaska prefer the 737-900ER over the A321 on transcons, and we have 4 737MAX operators flying Transatlantic compared to just 1 A321neo operators. My point is both 737MAX and A321neo are great airplanes and it depends on the operating environment and network of each individual airline
I believe your theory of the A320 being aerodynamically more effective is far too simplistic.
It is simple and the only explanation.
We agree that the 737 is lighter, that was one of my premises. So we do not need a list of why the 737 is lighter.
The 737 has a narrower fuselage, the next premises.
To show a fuel burn advantage Boeing has to go for a comparison for short distances, where the lower weight of the 737 makes an impact. Often discussed here on A.net, look it up.
Several discussions here on A.net, with direct comparisons, have shown, that the A320 family compares better as the distances get longer.
If you can give me a different rational explanation, how the heavier frame, with a wider fuselage, still compares well in fuel burn without having other aerodynamic advantages, be free to name it, if you do not believe it to be the wings.
Furthermore, I was comparing the A320ceo family with the 737NG family, to have a broad comparison.
You start talking about the MAX in your confused post. I call it confused, because you start talking desperately about other things instead to the point.