I agree that good place for an air intake might well be the stagnation point, and one of them is often around the base of the screen, hence the vents for air conditioning often being found there.
But that is about flowing air, and compared to atmospheric pressure (14.7 psi) which is what forces air into an NA engine, these local pressures around a vehicle are, as I said, insignificant at say 60 mph (about 0.25%) and let's say until 120mph (about 1%) also pretty insignificant.
It is pressure we want and higher density. Velocity, unless very high, is overrated as the figures above show - this is common and well known theory - and a common and well known fallacy...
..until it's enough to make a difference when slowed down and converted to pressure, which requires a diffuser, you are better off if the ground is hot (sunny summer weather) going for density through the odd few degrees difference between surface and a couple of metres up (out of the super-adiabatic layer stuck the the ground).
See the Formula 1 style overhead intakes, scoring on velocity AND density through colder and cleaner airflow. At 180mph maybe 2~3 % might be had, + being 1 metre above the ground and in clean and slightly cooler air is definitely better than lower down, particularly as detonation from high intake air temperatures would be the limiting factor of such beasts

Cars in close proximity throw out enormous amounts of heat, and the tell-tale sounds of pinking as a 3-lane summer traffic-jam eases and drivers move off again without waiting for a gap big enough to pull away at sufficient revs, or even dawdle away in 2nd gear, are all too often heard. Most of these cars have pickup low down around the wheel arches (fenders). Oh! for a 4 metre shnorkel intake or a free supply of cool air :wink: