Lake St. Clair Fishing Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,047 Posts
QUOTE(Mini @ Jun 16 2009, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>very interesting. not much info given on either site, but it sure looks promising!

Not much at all. Not sure if I'm buying into this one quite yet!!

I did find a quote where he said he was getting the mileage from having tighter tolerances in the engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,943 Posts
YMMV


Sounds great. Hope it's true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,638 Posts
There is certainly room for improvement in the basic design of the internal combustion engine, but a 4-fold improvement in efficiency is just not believable. If he's got something that good, he'd better patent it. And if he had something that good, and patented it, he could sell the rights for billions of dollars.

Doesn't add up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,047 Posts
QUOTE(sleeper @ Jun 16 2009, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>There is certainly room for improvement in the basic design of the internal combustion engine, but a 4-fold improvement in efficiency is just not believable. If he's got something that good, he'd better patent it. And if he had something that good, and patented it, he could sell the rights for billions of dollars.

Doesn't add up.

It doesnt. It seems every few years there is someone with an idea for an engine that gets 100mpg and it never seems to go anywhere.

Has to be a reason why.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
QUOTE(Pornodave @ Jun 16 2009, 03:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Has to be a reason why.

there is a reason, but if i told you then this thread would have to be moved to the political forum to meet its untimely death......

lets just says it rhymes with "its tooshes salt".............
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts


ASSUMING that by hand assembling engine to aerospace tolerances would actually increase efficiency fourfold, how expensive are these engines going to be? Horsepower and torque specs are similar to race engines costing $15,000.

Assuming you drop a 400 HP engine into a light car like a fox-body Mustang, it would take a very light foot to realize a mileage boost.

However, with the way the auto industry competes for fuel mileage bragging rights these days, if a 100 mpg gasoline engine were economically feasible do you think any automakers would be fooling around with electric cars or hybrids?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,943 Posts
QUOTE(gregg g @ Jun 16 2009, 10:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


ASSUMING that by hand assembling engine to aerospace tolerances would actually increase efficiency fourfold, how expensive are these engines going to be? Horsepower and torque specs are similar to race engines costing $15,000.

Assuming you drop a 400 HP engine into a light car like a fox-body Mustang, it would take a very light foot to realize a mileage boost.

However, with the way the auto industry competes for fuel mileage bragging rights these days, if a 100 mpg gasoline engine were economically feasible do you think any automakers would be fooling around with electric cars or hybrids?
But I wanna believe in Santa Claus!

The whole problem is "Big Sleigh" is keepin' them off the market.


(great graphic, btw!
)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
QUOTE(gregg g @ Jun 16 2009, 09:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


ASSUMING that by hand assembling engine to aerospace tolerances would actually increase efficiency fourfold, how expensive are these engines going to be? Horsepower and torque specs are similar to race engines costing $15,000.

Assuming you drop a 400 HP engine into a light car like a fox-body Mustang, it would take a very light foot to realize a mileage boost.

However, with the way the auto industry competes for fuel mileage bragging rights these days, if a 100 mpg gasoline engine were economically feasible do you think any automakers would be fooling around with electric cars or hybrids?

Dont know if anyone remebers that combustible manifold many years ago when the oil company bought the patent an destroyed it cause it could get almost a 100 mpg?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,047 Posts
QUOTE(shipnut38 @ Jun 16 2009, 10:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>QUOTE(gregg g @ Jun 16 2009, 09:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


ASSUMING that by hand assembling engine to aerospace tolerances would actually increase efficiency fourfold, how expensive are these engines going to be? Horsepower and torque specs are similar to race engines costing $15,000.

Assuming you drop a 400 HP engine into a light car like a fox-body Mustang, it would take a very light foot to realize a mileage boost.

However, with the way the auto industry competes for fuel mileage bragging rights these days, if a 100 mpg gasoline engine were economically feasible do you think any automakers would be fooling around with electric cars or hybrids?

Dont know if anyone remebers that combustible manifold many years ago when the oil company bought the patent an destroyed it cause it could get almost a 100 mpg?


If it was years ago the patent would be expired and open for use by anyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
The entire problem with the internal combustion engine is that combustion is an inefficient transfer of energy, too much is wasted as heat.

If a cold chemical reaction could be used to produce power, that would achieve a far greater efficiency.

Yes, that means fuel cells.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,638 Posts
Look a little further into fuel cells and you'll realize that those are a long way from feasible on a mass scale. It'll be a few years before we see those, at least. Although I have ridden in a fuel cell powered chevy equinox. Drove nice. Sounded weird, all the cooling fans and whatnot for all the electrical stuff. Very complicated, but seemed near-transparent to the user. Probably a $150,000 car though. I guess they built a handful as a test fleet, sorta like that honda or toyota fuel cell car that the media actually hypes.

Gregg is right though, the efficiency gains for an internal combustion engine aren't going to come from better tolerances and such. The efficiency of the combustion, the actual conversion of the fuel to energy, needs to be increased, and less of the energy needs to be lost to things like heat in the exhaust. There is room for improvement there with head design and such, but the kind of improvements cited in the article just aren't likely. We've seen major improvements over the years, though. Compare the efficiency of a 4.6L or 5.4L ford motor with the old 5.0 and 351. Compare the efficiency of an LS1 to an LT1. Major improvements, but nowhere near what's cited in the article. And that's with the resources of some of the largest companies in the world driving the developement with teams of hundreds of engineers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Unfortunately, fuel cells are one of the 'ten years away' technologies- it's been ten years away for 40 years.

http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/gm-electrovan.htm

To increase the thermal efficiency of an internal combustion engine you must increase cylinder pressure, the down side in a gasoline fueled engine is pre-ignition, or spark knock.
However, there is an efficient, high combustion pressure engine in existence that exhibits this concept quite well, the diesel engine. Combustion chamber pressure is so high that once an initial heat source fires off the process combustion continues on pressure alone.

Too bad that in this country many still view diesel engines as noisy smoky and slow, suitable only for trucks.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top