Did you know?

[GyroChuck]

Got this from my brother today. I don't know how much or if any of this is true. Any of you guys have any facts.

Did you know?
That as of 2005 --
1. 76 years ago the President of General Motors predicted
80-mpg by 1939;
2. 69 years ago Ford Motor Co. tested a 170-mpg Pogue carburetor;
3. 32 years ago Shell Oil Co demonstrated a 376-mpg automobile;
4. 28 years ago a 100-mpg Ford V-8 was demonstrated;
5. 22 years ago Peugeot advertised a 72-mpg @ 56-mph Diesel.
6. 3 years ago an English newspaper article announced
a 104-mpg Toyota Diesel and 94-mpg VW/Audi Diesels.
7. Commercial fuel cell vehicles have been available in Europe for
years.
8. Many U.S. Patents exist for devices that separate the elements of
water for use as fuel, one patent #1,380,183 was granted 84 years ago.

A CD is available detailing documentation for four of the above
statements. If you wonder why this technology is not available to you see:
byronw.www1host.com.

 

[Cobra Doc]

I remember the VW Rabbit diesel that got incredible gas mileage. It seems like it was in the 55-65 mpg range for US use. It actually got it's best mileage at 96mph, but I don't recall what the mileage was. The only 300+ mpg I remember was a university engineering project. It was a run-and-coast machine. I think the top speed was only 20 mph.

 

[PW_Plack]

Numbers 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8, I believe, are likely true. The others, I believe, are probably urban myths or conspiracy theories which have grown with aging.

In the case of 1 or 6, anyone can predict or announce anything, whether true or not, so they don't mean much.

 

[Jazzenjohn]

1. A prediction, just a guess by someone who is more likely to be a businessman than an engineer
2. Ford and other auto companier often test "revolutionary" new devices which often turn out to be fake, overhyped, or unuseable.
3. Not true, despite the wealth of conspiracy theory sites which say it is so.
4. Probably true but what are the tradeoffs? All car companies make test vehicles. Here is a link to a site for a 157 mpg car.

https://www.canosoarus.com/03CalifCommuter/CalCom01.htm

You can see what is required to get mileage like that. Cramped, 1 person, superlight construction that wouldn't pass crash standards, without all the pollution control junk that is required by law, no A/C, alternator, or other energy robbing options, Minimum acceptable speed limit, extreemly slow acceleration, etc. etc.
5. So what? Lots of cars get great, steady state, highway gas mileage.
6. Found a link to the article but it was dead. Went to the site where it was supposedly from https://www.timesonline.co.uk and searched but didn't come up with anything. This is likely the same as the 100 mpg Ford and the Peugeot . Someone seeing a rating of say 100 mpg AT 45MPH and thinking it means the car would get 100 mpg all the time. Disregarding whether it could ever be a legal vehicle on the road and all the other tradeoffs that were made to get it to that performance level. The highest milage vehicles do what Cody said, run and coast at 20 mph to reduce air resistance while riding on 150 psi bicycle tires over super smooth tracks in still air on cold days without any amenities, pollution controls, safety devices of any kind with riders that weigh 120 lbs. in something that is far more like a motorized streamlined recumbent bicycle than an Automobile.

 

[PW_Plack]

There was an engine in the early 80s called the Moody Diesel which, installed in a Mercury Capri, got over 70 MPG on the highway. (The Capri was, at the time, Mercury's variant of the Mustang.) It offered better acceleration than the same car equipped with Ford's 2.3L four-cylinder gasoline engine.

The guys who developed it drove it to Washington DC to testify before Congress, and made headlines. Withe the car loaded for a road trip, it still got about 60 MPG.

Afterward, Ford announced they were buying the rights to the engine, and it disappeared forever. Conspiracy buffs spread the word that it was killed off because it would have damaged the oil companies, but it turned out Ford engineers couldn't find a practical way to damp the engine's severe vibration to the point where it was marketable.

As badly as the domestic carmakers are getting their butts kicked by Toyota and Honda, if they had a practical 100 MPG family car on the shelf, you'd see it in showrooms pretty quick. There are probably technologies that could produce such a car, but would be more expensive than consumers would buy.

 

[Wilson]

Years ago I read in one of my hot rod magazines about a new intake system someone was testing on a 4 cylinder Pontiac Fiero. It was a large article with photos and dynamometer results. If my aging memory is correct, they were getting over 80 mpg and producing upwards of 300 horses. It was done by heating the fuel to a temperature that permitted the fuel to atomize more completely and then mixing it in the incoming air with turbo type blades. The blades were like a turbo charger, but did not generate any boost. The results they were getting with the Fiero were impressive.

The developers claimed they would market it themselves or sell it to a car company for production. They had already gotten the patents in place before the article. Several months later the magazine had a short statement saying the rights to this carburetor had been sold and the developer was not permitted to say anything more.

No, I do not know that an ‘oil company’ bought out this group. But someone did.

Wilson

 

[Jazzenjohn]

Actually that sounds like the carburator that Smokey Yanuck was working on. It became outmoded by fuel injection as I recall.

 

[Ga6riel]

I gather these figures are for US (6pint) gallons
My feeling is that 140mp(US)g is barely feasable
however in these things it is possible to display higher mileage given lower speeds and a steady rate. Given a fairly lightweight car with minimal engine accessories, tall gearing, and efficient transmission this is well within grasp. As I recall it, efficiencies in the high 20% range are common for quality cars, this is an abismal figure.

There have been experiments with diesel/electric (similar to many frieght trains) variants that have efficiencies of around 65% and more. These vehicles are propelled by engines of around 10 to 15HP, and supplemented in acceleration by a battery capacity and electric transmission. The resulting performance is able to withstand 60mph all day, and accelerates in just like the cars we are all used to.

Unfortunately there are few choices in engines of this HP range, giving an SFC (specific fuel consumtion) of around .5 pounds per HP (ie, .5 lbs fuel for each HP). Commonly more efficient engines have an SFC of around half this, I think I can recall figures of .236 lbs per HP being bandied about for efficient diesels. These engines are crafted to be not much heavier than optimum, and considerably lighter than the average fair.

My feeling is, it is unlikely that the likes of Ford or GM will rise to this challenge. Where for instance, GM has a huge capital investment in cast infrastucture that is near useless in an electricly motivated world. Requiring more simple cookie cutter technology.

For the future, the bulk of the auto industry will hence move to China anyway, and there will be much upset and failure for local and known to us manufacturers. When fuel pricing becomes ever tighter, and within a government regime other than what exists; that recognises the existence of the global warming calamity, environmental fatigue and the associated threats ~ change will ensue, and as usual, it will be a tad late.

 

[Cobra Doc]

Last night I was thinking about how we put power on the road and the differences between gasoline motors and electric motors and hydraulic motors. I know that there is no such thing as a gasoline motor, they are actually engines. That's where I finally caught on. Engines produce energy, motors use energy. It was Arlen Ness' new turbine bike that got me thinking about it. I sent him an e-mail about needing either an electric or hydralic drive. By the time the turbine is geared down to useable speeds, the torque prduced is around 750 pound/feet and he is burning clutches. Imagine that. Sometimes even the experts over-look the obvious.
So, back to my original thinking, in an electric vehicle the batteries are the true engine. Meaning also that in an internale combustion powered vehicle the transmission is the true motor, a "gear motor". Where am I going with this, you may ask? Well, to be perfectly honest, I just don't know yet. A motorcycle with a radial-rotary engine sounds like an interesting concept: direct drive, no power robbing motors. Except that with as little as a 4' diameter tire at 750 rpm idle speed you would be cruising along at something like 34 mph. Math isn't exactly my strong point, so forgive me if I'm off a bit. It could work at Bonneville and should be very stable. I wouldn't want to try it on the road, turning could be problematic. Putting a cluth on this rig would also prove to be an interesting engineering exercise. Add in a planetary transmission, and we end-up with a gear motor in the middle robbing us of power. I sprained my brain enough for one day.

 

[Heron]

Around mid 80's there was an engine called ELKO (elsbett konstruktion), it was tested with any kind of fuel, including vegetable oil.
This guy took a frying pan out of a pastrie stand, poured it in to the tank and got 22 km per liter (22 X3.8/1.6).
The Brazilian company that bought the rights went bankrupt in a few months and the project disapeared.
There is a forum where this guy is claiming that he has an invention and the government refuses to let him go ahead with his project, he is in limbo down in Brazil. Another conspiracy theory?
All major americam manufacturers are in Brazil, using alchool for decades now and the new Four Flex cars are coming out of the factory with 2 fuel capability gas and liquid (gas, alchool or diesel) and a chip made by Bosch can convert the vehicle to 4-flex (any liquid plus gas)
There is the bio-diesel, already here by the hands of Willie Nelson (yes) and there is a special kind of natural gas just for cars, stations beginning to multiply.
Airplanes are running on alchool too . . .
A friend of mine says that if the government allows for more pumping there will be no shortage, but then the prices goes down and the profit too, who wants that?
I hope no one from the Gyro Comunity runs for president, gyros will be so expensive . . . .
Heron

 

[Ga6riel]

forget clutch, gearbox differential drive etc
all these things can be done with electronics and motor controllers

Doc, when you hit on the differences between motors you were right on track and it comes down to this. A gasoline engine you are familiar with, u need rpm to make enough torque to overcome resisance. In a simple fashion, torque is acceleration, HP is speed. The way we do it now, we need bundles of HP to get acceleration we can live with, and that is because both HP and torque curves are 'somewhat' proportional ~ more rpm = more torque & HP.

Ok so lets leave all that aside a sec, an electric motor produces power quite differently. Torque is the inverse of power, that is to say, from start up you get max torque (acceleration), and it decreases from there. At max rpm you get max HP, just where you need it.

So in the application of a vehicle, the electric motor 'transmits' power. Its a transmission as well as a motor. Soft starters that actually multiply torque, and chopper controllers make gearboxes redundent. You dont need a clutch, just turn set it to OFF. Wiley electric vehicle makers put brushless 3 phase motors in the wheels. Since the induction principle is 100% efficient, the only losses are at the bearings. At 2% per bearing we get about 92% transmission efficiency. While there are other losses, we are way ahead of an 'efficient' compact such as a BMW sedan at around 28% efficiency.

Whats missing, well yes you need battery power. Now you could live with just batteries alone but, this has proven to be uneconomic and has range issues. So just like in a train or a submarine, lets add a gen set. In this application the engine will operate at constant speed, and can be tailored for maximum fuel efficiency. We only need enough current to move us at VMax and some float charge. This keeps the battery bank small for just an additional acceleration surge 'dash' speed that matches the demands of driving in our cities.

 

[scottessex]

Kind of like a locomotive.
The first true hybrid.
https://travel.howstuffworks.com/diesel-locomotive.htm

 

[Cobra Doc]

the first trucks I drove in the mine were the 170 ton deisel/elctric trucks. They were, ...interesting, to drive. I prefered the 190 ton Cats with their automatic transmissions. They were more complex to operate but simpler to drive.
So, we've decided batteries make lousy engines. Hybrids are heavy and complex. Fuel cell is plausible, but still complex. Turbo-shaft, like electric, is essentially a torque drive. (Throttling a turbine changes the power out-put but doesn't make much difference in engine speed.)
One thing that has intrigued me since I was six years old, but I don't have the ability to experiment with, is the solar engine. Somebody has one in their avatar: the light bulb with the spinny thing inside. the owner of the Dairy Queen we used to go to had one in the window for years. On most southern Arizona days that little engine was hitting some very high rpms. It would turn fast enough to make the globe vibrate on the shelf. If the paddle bars were tipped with magnets and a copper wire wrapped around the globe, could it produce electricty? How much resistance is there in dragging an electron around? (The elctric haul trucks used electric brakes, so I have a rough idea.)I wouldn't mind driving a "slot car" if I didn't have to pay for gas.
I also got to work with one DARPA test of a little airplane that was powered by microwaves and radio waves.

 

[Adam H]

I also got to work with one DARPA test of a little airplane that was powered by microwaves and radio waves.

That sounds a lot like Nikola Tesla's idea of transmitting electricity wirelessly. I read somewhere that his vision was for electric cars, airplanes, ships and anything else that needed power being able to capture it right out of the air.

 

[Cobra Doc]

When were (someplace way out west) the airplane needed microwaves due to the remote location. My radar unit was generally sufficient. When we were at (eastern seaboard) there was so much RF energy available the egg-heads needed to add a rheostat. It was like using a 12 volt battery in a 6 volt application.

 

[Ga6riel]

If you feel the need to glow in the dark then pursue then microwave energy by all means.

The 'so called' hybrids are indeed neither new or too heavy, GM has been building deisel/electric trains for over 50 yrs, successfully replacing all other forms of loco.

Fuel cells are way off for the present, we can do a diesel/electric car right now, today.

For a personal transport comparing with a car, subtract the weight of a differential rear end, the transmission, the flywheel and clutch. and divide your engine weight by 10. You have enough mass in hand to provide yourself with a usefull high power battery such as a lithium or nickel metal hydride (which are entirely recyclable). Theres no reason it should be more expensive in mass manufacture.

By the time the world gets around to this, it wont be a point of, you might try it and see if you like it. It will be pay $30+ a gallon or walk.

 

[PTKay]

Just watch out....

Already several fuel cell submarines are doing they duty in German Navy...

Once military gets taste for something, this will be produced,
and when porduced in greater numbers, the stuff becomes cheaper and
eventualy ends up in civil applications...
For me it's just a matter of time and declassifying the products.
(Look on Williams 44 turbines, first just in cruise missiles,
now, thanks to their declass, creating a whole new class of VLJ "Very Light Jets")

Do you know, why Rotax 912 and 914 were so sucessful and practically
outnumbered all other engines: because they were first sold in big numbers
for the US AF for Predators...
(Enough cash for development and tunning up the product.)

The same will happen with fuel cells, aero-diesel (new Predator runs Thielert diesel), etc.

Whole oil industry will be not able to stop this development, once fuel efficiency
becomes a strategic factor for the military...

And it is already now. It makes a difference, if a Predator can stay in the
air for 8 or for 24 hours, waiting and observing the battlefield, before it strikes.

 

[Ga6riel]

there are also submarine developments in stirling heat engines, alternate batteries which includes fuel cells, lithium cells, metal hydrides and advanced lead acid configurations. I hate to think what would happen to a fuel cell in a fire. Same goes for hydrogen fuels. There have already been a number of accidents with peroxide powered torpedoes, peroxide is used for very high speeds in the region of 70 knots, and in WW2 the germans attempted to use it for propulsion on the type 21 boats.

Submarine platforms like all military hardware have an acceptable ballpark for performance. At this time that is 1000 ft deep (u can calculate that from the skin thickness to crush depth) and 30+ knots. There is reluctance to make any major changes because no one has had combat experience with alternate designs.

Generally military requirements dont include economic performance, as they are somewhat opposed viewpoints, though I will grant you there are niche requirements not mainstream plans.

"Whole oil industry will be not able to stop this development, once fuel efficiency becomes a strategic factor for the military..."

PT, If you havnt noticed, it IS the strategic factor now in play

For the auto industry, some of the lag in getting programs off the ground is due to marketing circumstances, in that no one wants to be 'too' different, and no one wants to be first. I doubt you will see any major or meaningful plays from major manufacturers unless something really big happens....like if the arab states decide to turn off the tap for 6 months or so.

 

[Rehan K.Janjua]

My little Suzuki 4x4 with a Toyota 1.5 liter turbo gets 80 mpg.
I call it the Mighty mouse.

A gyro with a VW tdi 2.0 liter 160hp alloy would be nice.
Powerful, economical, reasonable price.

Rehan

 

[Cobra Doc]

We have an E-85 plant being built down in Maricopa. As much as everyone complains about the additives in Phoenix gasoline now, it's surprising how much everyone is looking forward to using alcohol fuel. It should at least make emissions testing a breeze.

There are a lot of ways to make power. The tough part is getting it on the road, or in the road, with the least amount of waste. If we all drove inductive pick-up cars, cars could be very light weight!