400hp/500tq on e85 and gets 110mpg????

[mac71ss]

UMMMMMM any thoughts on this? This frys my mind like bacon!
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/100-MPG-Muscle-Car_169809.htm

[CRead01]

sounds to good to be true but I would love it if it was true.

[rogue]

If it were true the guy would end up dead within a week. Hes full of it.

Like these guys that were working on a bacteria that produces ethanol:

http://cryptogon.com/?p=2861

lets not forget his 0-60 claim of 3 seconds :rolleyes:

http://www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=213291

[WS6]

I'm calling BS for now.

[6fastback7]

They announced this contest at the NewYork Autoshow this year...Jayleno was even talking about this on his website before. Its a contest for teams to develop 100mpg or better cars for a grand prize of 10million dollars. If you look on his gas cap you see the decal that this car is a contestant in the same contest.

its the Progressive Automotive X prize

[David Sloan]

I have always been one of those guys that you got to show me before i be leave it.
But that would be sick if it is.

[Samckitt]

I'm calling BS for now.

X2.

[Paul_J]

As long as he is still using an internal combustion V8 the physics just don't add up. I would love for it to be true.

Anyone remember that Fiero that Smokey built in the 80's that super heated the intake charge and made some crazy HP and great mileage but the heat killed it?

[amx2334]

0-60 in 3sec. with 400hp? no.
10 years he's been tweaking it? Where was he when gas hit $3gal. and he was getting maybe 75mpg?
Back in the 70's the mechanic in my neighborhood and his nephew made some sort of vapor thing and were in the local paper.Looked like an old toolbox under the hood.They sold the thing to chrysler and that was the end of it.
I think someone just snookered CNN and got his 15min. of fame.

[[email protected]]

if i understood the contest correctly for e85 fuel only needs 66mpg. either way the massive gain im MPG out of nowhere does sound odd thats for sure.

[XLexusTech]

Hope its true ... I agree he shoud stap on some body armor if it is cause that kind of thing would sure get him some interesting visits from some Blackwater type Oil co. folks ...

[silver69camaro]

Gawd this thread smells like bullsh&*.

That car will probably need some 25HP to run on the freeway (if not more), which is about 0.31kwh. E85 has a energy capacity of 30kwh, which means 97mpg is obtainable when the engine is running at 100% efficiency. Impossible. Modern motors today are around 30%.

If he's broken the laws of thermodynamics and physics, he deserves a gold star.

[Paul_J]

Amen Matt!

[mac71ss]

I think its crap 2. Its why i posted it. What gets me about the whole thing is he said ford was working on the technology and all the engineers involved retired. :screwy:

[Young Gun]

he aught to walk in to some big car company and tell them he can save their entire line of SUV's...he would make a killing

[Young Gun]

oh and about 3 seconds means anywhere from 3.0 seconds to 3.99... seconds pretty nice different between the two

[TonyHuntimer]

It sounded like he pulled the "3 seconds" answer out of the air. I don't care if it takes 4 seconds, if he's getting close to that MPG claim.

If his setup brings big numbers like that, a big oil company will buy it and squash it with claims that it didn't work. Sounds like Smokey Yunick all over again.

He better be watching over his shoulder if it is true.

Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

[TonyL]

actually an 40% percent efficient engine has been produced.
behold. (http://gas2.org/2008/06/26/low-cost-gas-engine-innovation-doubles-fuel-economy/)

In a Yaris, this engine would get over 80 mpg and would have more power and torque than most sports cars. pretty amazing stuff there.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

[Fuelie Fan]

No, they haven't. They've done nothing to alter the fundamentals of the 4 stroke cycle, so from a thermodynamic perspective claims of 80% efficiency are inane. The carnot efficiency Despite the push of many on this site recently to pretend that concepts like "carnot efficiency" and "entropy" and "scientific laws" are 19th century crap, I for one am going to stick by them for now.

Update: I just looked on their website, and even THEY claim only 40%. Where did you get 80% from????

[TonyL]

not sure. probably another thread. my mistake.

[MonzaRacer]

Bs, Bs,bs!!!!

[David Pozzi]

Here is their web page: http://www.hp2g.com/videos.html

View the last video at the bottom, it explains a lot.
David

[BMF Machine]

Gawd this thread smells like bullsh&*.

That car will probably need some 25HP to run on the freeway (if not more), which is about 0.31kwh. E85 has a energy capacity of 30kwh, which means 97mpg is obtainable when the engine is running at 100% efficiency. Impossible. Modern motors today are around 30%.

If he's broken the laws of thermodynamics and physics, he deserves a gold star.


My Bro is a ME, graduated Rose Hulman In 93. You guys with intelligence make me sick................................lol:barf: Goes for you Tony? 40 percent, ya had to top him didn't ya,lolol

[Jim Nilsen]

[quote=TonyHuntimerRaceHome]It sounded like he pulled the "3 seconds" answer out of the air. I don't care if it takes 4 seconds, if he's getting close to that MPG claim.

If his setup brings big numbers like that, a big oil company will buy it and squash it with claims that it didn't work. Sounds like Smokey Yunick all over again.





When it comes to energy and technology, it seems like the there is a silent force like the one that took down Forest Tucker when he got squashed. Doesn't matter what energy people are figuring out how to get more out of it, the means to mass produce it just don't let it happen ? We are all on our own if we are going to make it seems unless you want wind power and then they restrict you from having it!!!!. If you want to have energy efficiency you have to figure out how you need to do it and pull it all together for yourself.

The thing that bothers me about it all is that it is dividing everyone up. We have to find what works and instead of patenting it we need to just do it and do thousands of them before anyone catches on no matter what it is about. Then there will be a grassroots movement that can't be stopped as easy. WD-40 never got a patent and they are still in business. This whole patent situation is very perplexing. It seems that there are patents given out by our government and other governments that would have to lead you to believe that all kinds of energy devices work since they don't just hand out patents and people have been coming up with solution after solution.

It is going to take the unity of every level people to change things but the bottom is a terrible place to start from especially when it's 6ft under and the ones with all of the money and the brains won't unite and at least try to help even if they don't understand or believe it can work.

Try it You might like it!

[jerome]

110 miles at an average of 45mph takes 2.75 hours. Civic uses roughly 1.15 liter per hour at idle in drive as seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KPF4NPrz2Q&feature=related

2.75 hr @ 1.15 l/hr = 3.16 L = .83 gallons

This guy is claiming that a 400hp mustang running at 45mph (no acceleration, just maintaining speed) will only use 20% more fuel than a newer civic at idle?

Automakers would make a killing on a car that efficient. Do you really think that oil companies are just going out and killing ideas that work? The reason you don't see any of these ideas is that they are not possible with current technology, or they break the laws of physics. Look to automakers and engineers for solutions. Not the average idiot who thinks their grandfather is smarter than Detroit, Japan, Germany, and every other scientist out there. Internal combustion is a game of optimizing engine efficiency and reducing chassis friction. It is not a matter of breaking through.


Jerome

[TonyL]

Jerome. In 1989, I owned a mazda B2000 that brand new, got over 30 mpg. Since science and technology have advanced SO much in the last 20 or so years, why are the engines less fuel efficient now? Shouldn't they be better? The fact is, that automakers are determining what is possible. Do you honestly believe they are incapable of turning out more economical and thrifty engines? They can, but they wont. The powers that be like it that way. Everyone gets richer this way.

a long time ago LA had the most advanced and efficient mass transit rail system in the world. GM, Firestone and an oil company got together and brought it down, and jammed the bus system down LA's throat.

This is no different. They control what we can buy. they make the engines in every car just efficiant enough to make it look like they are trying. The cars get slipperier and slipperier and yet, they get the same mileage.

[jerome]

Tony, you make a good point. I agree that automakers haven't had fuel economy at the top of their list. They want to produce features that sell the most. The American public, for the last 10 years, with the exception of the past 12 months or so, has wanted more power, more luxury, and more capacity. The American carmaker has delivered on this, without putting gas mileage in the gutter. [You try making a 300+hp 5000+lb vehicle that puts down 15mpg, not as easy as it looks]

Now, with gas prices on the rise, consumers demand more fuel efficient vehicles. I think that yet again, in order to sell more cars, carmakers will meet the demands of the market (within the realm of physical possibility).

BTW, automakers are not stepping backwards in engine technology, they are just making them bigger and more powerful. I have no doubt that mazda truck put down some good mpg numbers, but it had nowhere near the capacity and power of the newer trucks getting worse MPG. It probably had very few options, 2wd, and a 4cyl. It is incomparable to a 2500hd with full options getting half the MPG. The reason is that the 2500hd is double as heavy. It's a tradeoff that the general public wanted.

Economics dictates innovation. Without a demand, there is no supply. We have a demand now, I believe a supply is coming.

[TonyL]

Now the real question is, who's the puppet master dictating what the public demands? Is it the consumer? or is an outside influence generating demand where their was none?

It isn't hard, really. Tell the consumer cars aren't safe, that larger, pickup based tanks will keep soccer moms and the snowflakes safer, Tack on an insane price point to make it a status symbol and the next thing you know, everyone wants one, regardless of fuel economy. Boom. How else can you explain the H2 being popular? Now, that the market is saturated with cheap to build SUVs, that well has dried up.
Time to generate a new panic in the eyes of the American public. Create a demand for sleek new gas sipping cars...

[jerome]

From the manufacturer's viewpoint it makes sense. Change what is demanded every few years, and you always have a fresh product every few years. New car sales are what they profit on, and people will change cars more often when the new models offer something different.

Families have always wanted more space, they would buy large sedans before manufacturers dreamed of low-cost production minivans. But minivans were a bit emasculating and everybody wants more power and better offroad capacity, so manufacturers dreamed up SUV's to replace minivans. I think the manufacturers have just been innovating to make better products to capture more market share. I don't think they've had the foresight to shift from land yachts to minivans to SUV's and large pickups, and now back to economy cars. That is just giving them too much credit.

For them to advertise a new vehicle concept to the public to increase sales: that is a hallmark of capitalism, and I don't see anywhere where the public was misguided. If we were told a lie, then that is wrong. I don't think SUV's do well in crash ratings compared to current large sedans. And price premium, status symbol, etc. that is capitalism at its best. I don't think that carmakers are some sort of evil. The public was presented with truthful information, and the public made an informed decision.

As for oil prices going up...I highly doubt that it was so that carmakers could make money on the next trend. They are followers. If they weren't they'd be selling new cars like hotcakes. Oil prices are up because of a combination of increased demand worldwide (most notably from developing countries), losses in oil drilling equipment (hurricanes rita & katrina), instability in the middle east, and countless other contributing factors (some inexplicable -- puppetmaster theory).

Compared to a socialist/communist extreme example, we would all be driving 30mpg old VW bugs. I'll take American capitalism anyday.

Summary: Carmakers just innovate, follow, and advertise trends. To call them the puppetmaster is giving them too much credit. There may be a puppetmaster, but it sure isn't the carmaker. GM is down 56% YTD and looking at possible bankruptcy if its slide continues. Ford is down 20% YTD. They need to find fuel efficiency and sell it like crazy to keep afloat.

[TonyL]

never said it was the carmakers. More like an amalgam of companies that stand to profit by jerking us around.

[Tony_SS]

Somewhere along the line I think were giving the consumer too much credit and not giving enough to corporations and their marketing.

It's so much easier and more profitable on a corporate level to repackage, market and resell the same thing. And 90% of what we buy is based on some level marketing. A car is box on wheels. People can be bought and sold on anything. 8mpg - who cares - its a Hummer! Markets are created. It's up to the manufacturer to create that market to sell their product. GM choose to do that with the Hummer (which wasn't too hard a task in our culture) and huge profit potential on a monster SUV made that choice easy. Big oil wouldn't have anything against it either. Was it a backroom scheme? Who knows, but it makes for good speculation.

But given the opportunity to squash competition, a corporation will do it. Has it been done? Probably. Was it in the best interest for the consumer? Doesn't matter really.

So where's the motivation to improve or change things? It'll cost millions to retool the machine to manufacture and market a new product. Are their more efficient means of transportation out there? If so, are they feasible to bring it to the market? Is there a choice anymore? Like Tony said, the well is dry, the market is tapped out - time for the next step.

I believe that efficiency of transportation could be worlds better, but efficiency is the enemy of corporations and capitalism. Not that capitalism is bad, but the corporations could show more conscience to the consumer. However, consumption is the ultimate goal, no matter what the cost.

Corporations create and drive the market. But that doesn't stop consumers from thinking that they do.

[Jim Nilsen]

Gawd this thread smells like bullsh&*.

That car will probably need some 25HP to run on the freeway (if not more), which is about 0.31kwh. E85 has a energy capacity of 30kwh, which means 97mpg is obtainable when the engine is running at 100% efficiency. Impossible. Modern motors today are around 30%.

If he's broken the laws of thermodynamics and physics, he deserves a gold star.


Now that is the kind of math that obviously leaves 200% more improvement over a standard engine to be gained. So by getting twice as much out of a 30mpg car to 60mpg still only puts it at 60% with 40% more to go. Changing to a fuel or enhancing the fuel so that it would burn more completely would seem resonable enough to get gains before the mechanical losses would start to come in. This is not changing any of the laws of physics or the math, it is just increasing the efficiency level of the fuel to get the gains. So the addition of HHO gas to get a more complete burn and increasing the power of the gasoline could very easily fit into the formula with 40% losses still working against you. Water injection has been proven to change and enhance the power of an engine for years,whether you want to consider it a fuel or not it has an impact on what you can do for timing and combustion of an engine by altering the fuel properties. it would seem illogical not to think that HHO would not be the next step in making an engine more effecient at the fuel level.

It sure sounds to me like there is room in the factors for improvement!


In 1985 my girlfriend had a Datsun 210 that would get 38 to 42 mpg hwy and 30 to 32 mpg city. There are definately some serious dillusions that we have made any gains in the last 25yrs.

[Jim Nilsen]

Now the real question is, who's the puppet master dictating what the public demands? Is it the consumer? or is an outside influence generating demand where their was none?

It isn't hard, really. Tell the consumer cars aren't safe, that larger, pickup based tanks will keep soccer moms and the snowflakes safer, Tack on an insane price point to make it a status symbol and the next thing you know, everyone wants one, regardless of fuel economy. Boom. How else can you explain the H2 being popular? Now, that the market is saturated with cheap to build SUVs, that well has dried up.
Time to generate a new panic in the eyes of the American public. Create a demand for sleek new gas sipping cars...


The puppet masters are the central banks and the new panic fueled by war and 4 trillion in new money and more to be printed soon to cover the seizere of mortgage losses so they not only get to make up the money loss by printing more of it ,they get the land for free just for being nice enough to print more. They don't care if you walk just so long as you have debt and fear and can get the people to panic!

The car manufactures were all suckered into this ,just look at the projections for new CAFE standards?

By changing everything we can to use less or self produce the energy we need we can create an economy that doesn't have to make a run on itself to feel safer,you can be less dependent which makes you more free from energy providers which will hurt them more than you ever know !

The real war should be on inefficiency and all of the money should go to building the new United States !!!!!

[silver69camaro]

Changing to a fuel or enhancing the fuel so that it would burn more completely

...is no longer E85. E85, or any fuel for that matter, only holds so much energy. If you can turn 100% of that potential energy into mechanical motion, something's wrong. That just doesn't happen...especially in a Mustang.

I could be wrong, but it didn't sound like that Mustang was running on HHO/E85 fuel.

[barraza]

There is so much stupidity in this thread it makes my head hurt. Way too much conspiracy theory here.

THERE IS NO MAGIC

THERE ARE NO PUPPET MASTERS

THE LAWS OF THERMODYNAMCS ARE LAWS, NOT SUGGESTIONS

Fuel mileage is about moving mass over distance using energy. You can change the inputs around, like weight, aerodynamics, or speeds, but there is no free lunch. Gas burns at chemically determinable best mixtures, there is no magic way to change this relationship. Once you have good mixture control, the rest is efficiency, and all the easy and cheap improvements were done long ago. It's just fantasy to think there are great improvements being hidden, any engineer I've ever known would cut off his nuts to be the hero that saved the automotive world. Not to mention that any race team would be an instant winner if they took advantage of the "hidden" secrets. The gains we have experienced over the last 20 odd years are from mixture and ignition control, but we havent seen huge increases because cars have all gotten heavier. Not just SUV's and trucks, but ALL cars, even tiny cars like mini's or miatas are pushing 2500 lbs. Twenty five years ago small cars were 25% lighter.

Back in the eighties, I had a fiesta that surprised a lot of "hot" cars. It weighed slightly under 1900 lbs and had about 140 hp. It didn't get great mileage with carbs, but with a modern engine it would be much better. Of course at 1900 lbs, it would never be more than a tin can, just like the cars mentioned above. People quit buying lightweight strippers because they didn't like them, especially when factored against cheap gas. Not because there was a conspiracy by the manufactures.

Some of you need to turn off the movies and news shows (hollywood writers and news journalists - theres an educated bunch) and study a physics or thermo book.

[TonyHuntimer]

Way too much conspiracy theory here.
THERE ARE NO PUPPET MASTERS

HA! Hypothetically...If the big 3 automakers sold an reasonably priced (close to the cost of a H2) SUV that got 100MPG. All of the sudden the public buys tons of these cars (like happened with the Prius). Let's say there are 30,000 SUV's that get about 14MPG that are replaced with 30,000 SUV's that got 100MPG...and say those SUV's were driven the average of 10,000 miles per year.

Hypothetically...
Current SUV 10,000 mile gas consumption= 714 Gallons X 30,000 SUV's = 21,420,000 Gallons of gas sold per year at current average gas price (premium $4.50) = $96,390,000 per year

100MPG SUV 10,000 mile gas consuption= 100 gallons X 30,000 SUV's = 3,000,000 Gallons of gas sold per year at current average gas price (premium $4.50) = $13,500,000 per year

That would be an annual loss of sales for oil companies of $82,890,000 per year for only 30,000 vehicles.

Conspiracy theories aside...I'd say that you wouldn't need to have a business degree to know that some fat cats in the oil industry wouldn't think an SUV that got 100MPG would be bad for business.

But you're probably right. The rich oil giants don't have their hands in the pockets of any auto makers or government officials.

my $.02
Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

[amx2334]

Here is their web page: http://www.hp2g.com/videos.html

View the last video at the bottom, it explains a lot.
David

I watched this and what I see is that he gets government money to fund it.I've dealt with these nonprofit types in the hvac business and lets just say they have money to burn.Not the brightest bulbs either.
One of the guys in the first video is an ex-lawyer.
The main guy mentioned that E85 has 1/3 less energy.

[TonyL]

well it *is* an x prize contender. So his secret technology will have to be shown sooner or later. We'll all see what his angle is soon enough.

Speaking of X prize contenders there is this one that's flying below the radar.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2008/07/poulsenhybrid-1.jpg


While most of the Automotive X-Prize entrants are vehicles built from the ground up for maximum gas mileage, Poulsen Hybrid's entry takes a considerably different tact, with it consisting simply of a kit that can be attached to any old car. That kit consists of two hybrid electric motors with rare earth permanent magnets that (as you can see above) are mounted on the outside of the vehicle, which are tied to a 72V 120Ah Deep Cycle Lead Acid battery pack on the inside. According to Poulsen, once installed, the system effectively turns a front-wheel drive car into an all-wheel drive car, and results in a driving "effect" that is " equivalent to freewheeling down a 3% grade," with the accelerator needing to be depressed less or not at all to keep the car moving. Also unlike most other X-Prize competitors, Poulsen intends to make its kit available to the general public in the not to distant future, and for the relatively bargain price of $3,300, no less (add an extra $600 to that if you don't think you're up to installing it yourself).

[TonyHuntimer]

well it *is* an x prize contender. So his secret technology will have to be shown sooner or later. We'll all see what his angle is soon enough.



Very True. I watched the video and it gives you a better picture. I can't wait to see what this guy is doing. I'd love to get 80MPG out of my big block. :)

Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

[Tony_SS]

Conspiracy theories aside...I'd say that you wouldn't need to have a business degree to know that some fat cats in the oil industry wouldn't think an SUV that got 100MPG would be bad for business.

But you're probably right. The rich oil giants don't have their hands in the pockets of any auto makers or government officials.

Thats exactly right Tony. I guess to some folks their corporations/government are completely innocent and the world is still flat.

[Jim Nilsen]

It always seems that the conversation at this level always heads toward politics. It isn't because we are here to discuss politics, it just happens that is a relative part of the equation.

There are 3 types of science in this world, physical/biological,political and religious science. it is naive for anyone to think that political and religious science are more powerful but they are . I am soooo glad the religious peo[le mostly don't care what we do with cars , but the political people are a whole other segment. I don't give money to SEMA and write letters to politicians to save this hobby for nothing. :secret:

So if you want to think I will let go of conspiracy facts,not theory you will have to dig up a lot of dead people who paid the price over the years for being scientifically inncorrect.

[Jim Nilsen]

Very True. I watched the video and it gives you a better picture. I can't wait to see what this guy is doing. I'd love to get 80MPG out of my big block. :)

Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

I hope that the publicity and media along with an open minded group of scientist that understand the common language and sense most of us use when we really see something work bring us an answer.

The real truth is that it is always the unexpected experiment that prevails. Unfortunately many of them have never had the backing of enough people to start a movement. Remember that it takes a nation to want to change to actually change. Pockets Hell, they got a gun to their heads.

[bigvegan]

There must be some potent people behind this conspiracy if GM and Chrysler would face bankruptcy / restructuring rather than put these high mpg products on the market.

Conspiracy or no, don't buy a product based on their own hype until you've seen some valid 3rd party evaluations, or you're participating in the ongoing global conspiracy to keep short-sighted people poor.

In the meantime, buy a bicycle and hop it up, and use that as the weekend fun ride. The parts are a lot cheaper, they're easier to work on, there's no gas to buy, you get in shape, and there's a whole casual riding scene for those of us that aren't into spandex and racing (sort of like the cruise night scene for those hot rodders that aren't into nomex).

[ZVT]

I am keeping an open mind on this due to the many inventions that we take for granted that came from the guy working in his home/garage.Not saying that corporations hold back ideas but they buy ideas from the little guy.Isnt that part of the american dream???

Ford,Edison,Tesla,Bell these men became big but at one time they had there naysayers and people calling BS on there ideas.:geek:

[Fuelie Fan]

That is the kind of math spouted by somebody who's never been in a powertrain development program. Firstly, You are misunderstanding the different efficiencies quoted in engine performance. Engines are converting well over ~95+% of fuel's chemical energy into thermal energy. The problem is, most of that energy cannot be harnessed. 30% ends up in the cooling system and 35% goes into the exhaust, with remaining the going into the crankshaft. Everybody looks at that and says, "WOW lets just grab that additional energy" but it is not that easy. Materials and lubrication properties force the designer to keep the components at certain temps, and that drives the cooling system heat rejection requirements. Can those numbers be decreased? Sure. Just as soon as the consumer is ready to accept a $100,000 engine, or carry around 5000 lbs of 5% efficient IRPV cells to convert that energy to electricity (whose mass, by the way, will end up eating all your fuel economy gains anyway, not to mention their cost).

There is no conspiracy, at least on the design side. Power out the cooling system or exhaust is power that could go to the crankshaft. Power sells. Power wins races. If F1 cars with unlimited budgets still have cooling systems and exhaust systems dissipating roughly the same percentage of fuel energy, that should tell you something. As for the theories about corporations creating and driving markets, who knows. Maybe so, maybe not. But, in conversations relating to engine performance, it's irrelevant.


Now that is the kind of math that obviously leaves 200% more improvement over a standard engine to be gained. So by getting twice as much out of a 30mpg car to 60mpg still only puts it at 60% with 40% more to go. Changing to a fuel or enhancing the fuel so that it would burn more completely would seem resonable enough to get gains before the mechanical losses would start to come in. This is not changing any of the laws of physics or the math, it is just increasing the efficiency level of the fuel to get the gains. So the addition of HHO gas to get a more complete burn and increasing the power of the gasoline could very easily fit into the formula with 40% losses still working against you. Water injection has been proven to change and enhance the power of an engine for years,whether you want to consider it a fuel or not it has an impact on what you can do for timing and combustion of an engine by altering the fuel properties. it would seem illogical not to think that HHO would not be the next step in making an engine more effecient at the fuel level.

It sure sounds to me like there is room in the factors for improvement!


In 1985 my girlfriend had a Datsun 210 that would get 38 to 42 mpg hwy and 30 to 32 mpg city. There are definately some serious dillusions that we have made any gains in the last 25yrs.

[Fuelie Fan]

I think the high mileage plug-in hybrid push is all a conspiracy from the utilities to make us more electricity dependent. Think about it:

30 kW-hr per car per day * $0.10/kW-hr * 30,000 plug-in hybrids*365 days =32.9 million.

-end sarcasm

Are the utilities licking their chops? Most likely. Is it a masterminded scheme? Please.


HA! Hypothetically...If the big 3 automakers sold an reasonably priced (close to the cost of a H2) SUV that got 100MPG. All of the sudden the public buys tons of these cars (like happened with the Prius). Let's say there are 30,000 SUV's that get about 14MPG that are replaced with 30,000 SUV's that got 100MPG...and say those SUV's were driven the average of 10,000 miles per year.

Hypothetically...
Current SUV 10,000 mile gas consumption= 714 Gallons X 30,000 SUV's = 21,420,000 Gallons of gas sold per year at current average gas price (premium $4.50) = $96,390,000 per year

100MPG SUV 10,000 mile gas consuption= 100 gallons X 30,000 SUV's = 3,000,000 Gallons of gas sold per year at current average gas price (premium $4.50) = $13,500,000 per year

That would be an annual loss of sales for oil companies of $82,890,000 per year for only 30,000 vehicles.

Conspiracy theories aside...I'd say that you wouldn't need to have a business degree to know that some fat cats in the oil industry wouldn't think an SUV that got 100MPG would be bad for business.

But you're probably right. The rich oil giants don't have their hands in the pockets of any auto makers or government officials.

my $.02
Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

[TonyHuntimer]

I think the high mileage plug-in hybrid push is all a conspiracy from the utilities to make us more electricity dependent. Think about it:

30 kW-hr per car per day * $0.10/kW-hr * 30,000 plug-in hybrids*365 days =32.9 million.

You bring up an extremely good point. A good amount of people don't think much about the energy they are buying to plug their cars in. THey are too focussed on the money not flying out of their pockets at the gas station. :)

Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

[WS6]

You bring up an extremely good point. A good amount of people don't think much about the energy they are buying to plug their cars in. THey are too focussed on the money not flying out of their pockets at the gas station. :)

Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

CARB is the same way when they still upheld their demand for more electric cars ont he road during California's brown out summer. They couldn't even supply electricity on a normal day to the entire state, yet they demanded more vehicles be built that suck up electricity.

It is funny how people won't look at the overall picture and simply focus on one aspect.

I believe this mustang is making their claim based on the equivalent part of the deal. I think that's BS. Either the vehicles goes 110 miles on one gallon of whatever or it doesn't, period. Because if they could do it with gas, why didn't they? I thought this was supposed to be "real world" usable technology that will make a difference?

[bigvegan]

In terms of electricity, it shouldn't be a big deal, as the cars would generally be plugged in at night when there's not nearly as much demand for power, so it's not as though there would be a significant need for additional power generation.

Plus, if you do the math for the cost of electricity vs. the cost of gasoline for an individual car owner, it comes out pretty heavily in electricity's favor.

I can't wait until they come out with batteries that are powerful enough, light enough, and hold enough charge to make retrofitting old cars worthwhile. A 4-wheeled, road-trip worthy counterpart to Killacycle would be pretty sweet.

[Jim Nilsen]

In terms of electricity, it shouldn't be a big deal, as the cars would generally be plugged in at night when there's not nearly as much demand for power, so it's not as though there would be a significant need for additional power generation.

Plus, if you do the math for the cost of electricity vs. the cost of gasoline for an individual car owner, it comes out pretty heavily in electricity's favor.

I can't wait until they come out with batteries that are powerful enough, light enough, and hold enough charge to make retrofitting old cars worthwhile. A 4-wheeled, road-trip worthy counterpart to Killacycle would be pretty sweet.

Tesla motor company already has the battery situation under control and the right kind of charging system. You won't need the grid if you do it right and solar and wind will give you enough. Whether you can do wind is up to zoning and solar is a bit more money but you can produce more than enough to supply your own needs. By everyone producing their own it eliminates the stress on the grid altogether, but they don't want you to do it that way. They want wind farms so they can charge you twice, once to install it and then for the power it gives you making a total cost of power to you as high as you already pay. Make your own and it cost you to install and then some maintenance and some systems are almost maintenance free.

Electric is a way to go personally in the future for a local commuter and for the long haul there are more choices coming.

[barraza]

HA! Hypothetically...If the big 3 automakers sold an reasonably priced (close to the cost of a H2) SUV that got 100MPG. ............................................Blah, Blah,Blah,Blah, Blah,Blah, more hypothetical, Blah, Blah,Blah, unsubstantiated it's all evil oil kings fault,.... Blah .................

my $.02
Tony Huntimer
RaceHome.com

Lets see, Laws of Thermodynamics and the inability of humans to EVER KEEP SOMETHING IMPORTANT A SECRET vs hypothetical BS with NO FACTS WHATSOEVER. I'll take Laws of Thermodynamics.

You realize of course that the person who could reveal the hidden "secret" would be the most important person in history.

Yes, in hindsite, different decisions in what type of auto production mix we have now might have been better, but last time I checked the crystal ball hadn't been invented either. Looking backward to find conspiracy is a waste of time.

[TonyL]

Another interesting article on compressed air cars (http://gas2.org/2008/07/15/an-air-car-you-could-see-in-2009-zpms-106-mpg-compressed-air-hybrid/) Interesting stuff there.
I doubt it'll ever be safe enough for the US though.

[Jim Nilsen]

Having to go through all of this discussion and have so many views is really good. I keep looking for the good positve ideas and the set in stone old ways and try to find the common ground to form better options to what I have at the now moment.

I have realized one thing that can't be denied when it comes down to the bottom line about energy. We all have to do our best and many could do better overnight. With the cost of a mid range new car I can put a system in my house that would take care of all of my needs. It's not new science or anything you can say doesn't work, no voodoo or trickery, just what is available right now if you pick up the phone and spend the money. It really pisses me off when people keep debating with much more extreme opposition than we ever get to around here about it and just keep ourselves from ever getting it. It is hard for people who have the money to get a new car and get rid of 12mpg transportation for some reason? I don't know what the deal is but would someone give me the $$$$$ to show you how to do it !

The Tesla roadster looks so good next to the refueling plug and all of the power comes from the wind and the sun that is still just outside my door. Is that power FREE? I can't recall the last time I paid for either, do you? I have complained about it being too windy but never had the ability to stop it, the sun doesn't do what I say either. Are they like perpetual as the now moment? I will believe it is free until the day I die or the earth stops and were all dead. Am I dillusional for thinking like this? Does the sun break any thermodynamic rules? Does the wind blow the theory away ? Is the air we breath going to disappear before we do? The water dry up and leave us for good?

The future will tell us if what some believe to be true is. The way we are discussing this is similar to the way the economy is working at the now moment too. You have to keep believing that everything is ok and you can keep on going just like you are and not change any ideas you have about what is possible and things will work out.

I don't know about the rest of you but I am going to find what I need to do better and it means following the people that are successfull and not the disbelievers. Are any of us making alternative energy already?

I want to hear more about this contest that is going on and what everyone is thinking. Sure does have some thoughts running by here good or bad.

Oh, remember that there are 2 Golden Rules,
1 ,do unto others as you would want them to do unto you
2nd, he who has all of the gold rules.
3rd, when in doubt refer to rule number 2


:cheers:

[Jim Nilsen]

Another interesting article on compressed air cars (http://gas2.org/2008/07/15/an-air-car-you-could-see-in-2009-zpms-106-mpg-compressed-air-hybrid/) Interesting stuff there.
I doubt it'll ever be safe enough for the US though.


I really like the air propulsion for the reason that I could charge it up on the side of the road with an air pump enough to get to more air and at home I could charge it off of a battery powered air compressor connected to a solar panel. I like the sound of them because it still sounds like an engine. They seem to be fairly fast and would be just great for the 6 miles to work everyday.

The big drawback is if it doesn't make enough heat to be good in the winter?

You could even make it run on CO2 cartriges for emergencies to get even more pressure in a smaller container transfered to the big one. But the carbon police won't like that idea even though you could just be recycling it in reality.

It could also be made larger with a shorter trip radius and do work for a low cost.

Then there is the flexible solar panels that you could put on the roof and hood, a nice solar stripe package would be cool and when you are driving and at work the sun could run the compressor.

It is sensible to be able to fuel for almost free if you have the right means and a regular shop compressor is still cheaper than gas.

It is also lighter and less expensive to make and maintain compared to an electric vehicle. I could see one of these for the weekday travels and a Tesla roadster for the weekend after a week of tricklecharge!

There is so much out there and the market is ripe for new stuff.

They say traffic deaths have gone down since people are driving less but they expect a big change in bicycle and motorcycle/motor driven cycles accidents and deaths. Why is it the people who can't drive for crap are always the ones who have to have the big suv to feel safe? I will feel safer no matter what if they finally get a smaller vehicle they can handle.

Good topic to bring up Tony :twothumbs

[barraza]

The Tesla roadster looks so good next to the refueling plug and all of the power comes from the wind and the sun that is still just outside my door. Is that power FREE? I can't recall the last time I paid for either, do you? I have complained about it being too windy but never had the ability to stop it, the sun doesn't do what I say either. Are they like perpetual as the now moment? I will believe it is free until the day I die or the earth stops and were all dead. Am I dillusional for thinking like this? Does the sun break any thermodynamic rules? Does the wind blow the theory away ? Is the air we breath going to disappear before we do? The water dry up and leave us for good?


Wind and sunshine are free, harnessing them for power output are not. Sorry if I come across as negative, I just hate to see the same snake oil salesmen trying to peddle ideas that were tried and discarded years ago. I see battery car people trying to sell the same ideas that were proven unworkable 20 years ago when I did battery research. Yes, there are always new ways to look at problems, but most of the ideas I have seen are putting lipstick on a pig and calling it pretty to try and scam goverment research money.

The bottom line is that nothing is free. The fact will always be that no form of energy is converted from one form to another with zero losses. Transmission losses are the key, but must include EVERYTHING, from raw material to going down the road. This is where most of the "NEW" ideas breakdown.

Some technologies have potential in some situations, but none are as suitable across the board as fossil fuels. We got to this point from 100 years of automotive evolution, not because we were forced here. Gradual improvement is always being worked on, but there are no silver bullets.

[amx2334]

I can't seem to get the attraction of this compressed air thing. Nevermind the fact that there are significant losses when converting electric energy to compressed air but it also means you are riding around with 3200 ft3 at 4500psi? So your sitting at the stop light and you get rearended. You survive the initial jolt but your tank splits open and subsequently launches you and your car into the statosphere or shoots you out into traffic where you are run over by a truck.
The article states that you would fill up your air tank (3200 ft3 @4500psi ) for $2? I want an air compressor that can do that.What would be the cost to put a compressor at every filling station capable of doing this? is this self serve? This ain't your little battery powered pump for inflating pool toys here.
Instead of converting electric to comp. air why not just use electric? The infrastructure is already in place.
Of course once you go electric there are other factors involved. How does the gov. tax you?Remember that 18.9 cents /gal? they'll want their money somehow.
the coal industry is already taking heat from environmental types and they supply alot of power plants. wind farms take alot of $$$ just to recoup initial investment.Just wait for the environmentalists to go after them. It'll be something like "the wind farms slow down the wind thereby changing the climate and causing global warming or "The seeds from the plants aren't blowing around and spreading thereby depriving the red breasted titmouse fly swallow their natural habitat".
The only thing thats free is advise. Of course you get what you pay for.

[amx2334]

In the meantime, buy a bicycle and hop it up, and use that as the weekend fun ride. The parts are a lot cheaper, they're easier to work on, there's no gas to buy, you get in shape, and there's a whole casual riding scene for those of us that aren't into spandex and racing (sort of like the cruise night scene for those hot rodders that aren't into nomex).

Good luck with this. We live in a country that uses segways because walking is too much work.

[Jim Nilsen]

Wind and sunshine are free, harnessing them for power output are not. Sorry if I come across as negative, I just hate to see the same snake oil salesmen trying to peddle ideas that were tried and discarded years ago. I see battery car people trying to sell the same ideas that were proven unworkable 20 years ago when I did battery research. Yes, there are always new ways to look at problems, but most of the ideas I have seen are putting lipstick on a pig and calling it pretty to try and scam goverment research money.

The bottom line is that nothing is free. The fact will always be that no form of energy is converted from one form to another with zero losses. Transmission losses are the key, but must include EVERYTHING, from raw material to going down the road. This is where most of the "NEW" ideas breakdown.

Some technologies have potential in some situations, but none are as suitable across the board as fossil fuels. We got to this point from 100 years of automotive evolution, not because we were forced here. Gradual improvement is always being worked on, but there are no silver bullets.

Alternative energy is a lot like a 401k. You put your money in and you get more out of it than you originally put in. Why? You really didn't do any work for it and you say you don't get something for nothing. So you got it because it was an investment right. You get all of this extra freelike money for no work on your part it's the money that is perpetual. Alternative energy is the same way, if you invest in it you can now get more back in the long run than you put in. To me 3kw of solar and wind look like they might be more useful than a bankrupt 401k in the future or just make the 401k go a lot further. You are not being negative to me. You are being negative to yourself. I am the one working toward reducing and you are denying yourself of something that is good for everyone. The best investment is in yourself. I am choosing to take the step. It is a costly one but so was the car I drive and the home I have and none of them will ever give me anything back but memories of how much it cost to feed them $$$$ and if I am lucky ,ENJOYMENT !


The air car has the ability to reduce the amount of wire and weight over an electric. The components are so cheap toy carlike that it is just that, but it can get you back and forth to work as safe as riding a bike in my town. Flying over like a top is as dangerous as being under a truck.

We have to give up fossil fuel. There are ways to power things without it now and it is getting very competetive in price.

[jerome]

i doubt that alternatives are getting close in price, but even if so...we are far far away from getting away from fossil fuels in terms of infrastructure.

401k example: By putting you money in a 401k you are taking certain market risks, and you have an opportunity cost of money (what utility you could be getting with the money that is invested). What you gain is tax shelter and possible market gains.

I agree that returns from alternative energy sources such as solar or wind may have a positive net present value, when factoring in initial cost, maintenance, and return in the long run. However, wind and solar power investments have risk of negative returns just like 401k's. Wind/solar equipment depreciates over its useful lifespan. Maintenance and upgrades can extend the life/value of it, but in the end, it is still a depreciating asset whereas a 401k should be an appreciating asset (in the long run). My point is that nothing is free, and solar/wind energy is NOT just one initial cost.

Investing in alternative energy personally does not yet make economic sense. You are not paying outrageous electric bills. Gas is "high", but it is not crippling. The high initial cost and risk of these alternatives does not make sense economically. If it did, then it would be adopted by everybody. Only those that get some other utility out of it are adopting it now. I am speaking of environmentalists, people that get satisfaction from "cheating the man", etc. Again, this is talking personally. As far as a large wind/solar project for profit, there may be a way to come out positive.

I agree that we need to move away from fossil fuels. Where we disagree, Jim, is whether the technology and infrastructure is there to make it economically feasible.

Also, flying off a bicycle is nowhere as dangerous as being under a truck.

[Overkill]

Speaking of X prize contenders there is this one that's flying below the radar.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2008/07/poulsenhybrid-1.jpg

Something like this would put an end to the wheel industry. No more Torque Thrust or Cragar wheel debates or needing to mortgage your house to afford top of the line wheels. I'm ready for that.

[amx2334]

I like the concept but I wonder how you change a flat?

[barraza]

Alternative energy is a lot like a 401k. You put your money in and you get more out of it than you originally put in. Why? You really didn't do any work for it and you say you don't get something for nothing. So you got it because it was an investment right. You get all of this extra freelike money for no work on your part it's the money that is perpetual. Alternative energy is the same way, if you invest in it you can now get more back in the long run than you put in. ........


We have to give up fossil fuel. There are ways to power things without it now and it is getting very competetive in price.
Sorry, but the money analogy doesnt hold water. Investment returns are the costs that are paid by others to you for letting them use your money, and taking the risk of losing it. In no way is it "free" money.

A blanket statement that "we have to give up fossil fuel" is B.S. Name just 1 thing that can power a vehicle that is getting competitive in price without using tax dollars to be "competitive". I assume you did notice that a Tesla roadster costs $109,000 and doesn't even have a top.

Ever wondered why a tesla doesnt have a top? Besides the power sapping weight, if it had a top you would notice that it isn't a fully developed and quiet car like has become expected nowdays. It would also need an A/C system, that would sure reduce the distance you could travel. Another reason is that batteries are kind of like people in their temperature ranges, with a top people would want to use it in cold weather where the batteries dont perform best. It would also need a heater, oops more range down the tubes.

The bottom line is that a Tesla is a great toy if you need a convertible only, no A/C, no heat, $100,000 plus, in town only, status symbol to show others how "green" you are. Evidently, not too many people need that because last time I looked, they had only sold about 900.

[Jim Nilsen]

Here is an interesting Xprize project and some very interesting views to go with it. This guy explains it pretty good about how to use solar panels to replace gas. He also lives in the here and now with his technology. The cost is something that always comes down with mass production.

Here it is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVkIZQj-flc&feature=related


Tesla must have made an update only at Jay Leno's garage about their latest car coming with an air conditioner. I was surprised to here that but you know they do make electric air conditioners . Must cost a few miles off of the trip.

When asked why I would put money in a 401k at a presentation at work, I replied : HOPE. hope that it is big enough to live on when you retire, hope that it is still there and most of all hope that you will even live long enough to spend it. I know of 2 people I have worked with that never saw a dime of their retirement. 1 died right at work. If they had spent that money on alternative energy I know that their lives would have gotten something back from that money while they were still alive.

Spending 10k to 20k on an alternative energy system for your house will get you in the door to freedom and ready for upgrades if it wasn't enough. 60k will get you all of the power you need unless you have a mansion. People spend that kind of money on cars everyday and never get any return. We spend 1k around here on our cars to gain 20hp,20k to get 1,000 hp or just have it look different. I have seen wheels that could have bought me a whole system. The point is ,people who have the money are taught that they must give their money to someone else and it is safer than to invest in themselves and the now moment much less the future with something that they can touch and it gives them something back they need, the money is just a promisary note of paper if it is invested and they sure tell you how great they are for making money off of your money and giving you some of it.. I did hear the words risk and possible loss so I know it is obvious. The people who don't have the money to invest or save are getting killed right now by the cost of everything because the wasteful people keep the price up because they can afford to not change. The cost of alternative energy won't come down if we wait until it is less than the cost of fossil fuel and when you consider the the initial investment in any fossil fuel system plus fuel cost, there is a very close comparison and alternative energy usually wins these days for total lifetime cost. Think of it like buying energy in bulk at a fixed rate for so many yrs and if you have the money to do it why wouldn't you. I know poor people would jump at the choice of not having a utility bill to be a slave to, one month $40 and then $200 2 months later because of bad weather yet I hear that it is not crippling people. When it comes to the choice of whether you have to decide whether to eat or pay for fuel and utilities you get a clue that being wastefull is a choice and a lifestyle only for those who can afford it or want others to think they can. Kind of has an opposite comparison to wanting to be an environmentalist.

I am really thinking that at the end of the Xprize there will be some changes happen rather quickly and the automakers better pay quick attention or the aftermarket will slow the sales of new cars if retro fitting can get you better mpg than they offer with new choices. If you catch it in the video he mentions that the electric utilities are invloved on a small scale and I think they might be understanding that if they get in on electric cars they can take a market share away from the oil companies that we support even though some of the added usage will probably go to oil companies still.

[oestek]

Something like this would put an end to the wheel industry. No more Torque Thrust or Cragar wheel debates or needing to mortgage your house to afford top of the line wheels. I'm ready for that.

I'm not making any comment on the technology or the idea, but I noticed that installation instructions say you should use adhesive tape and pop rivets to stick the torque bar anchor to the bumper... not sure how long that would hang on...

From Poulsen Hybrid site:

How to install
Tools required:

Standard socket wrench set. Power drill. Pop Rivet driver. Metric Allen wrenches: 5mm, 8mm and 10mm (supplied).

With wheel on the ground unscrew lug nuts or bolts one at a time and replace with nuts or bolts supplied with the kit. Tighten well.
Install adapter plate onto lug bolts or nuts using hex socket flathead 10x1.5mm screws. Tighten using 8mm Allen wrench.
Install motor using central hex socket flathead 12 mm bolt. Before tightening turn motor until the locator pin on the back meshes into the corresponding hole in the adapter plate. Tighten bolt using 10mm Allen wrench.
Install torque arm using four 6mm socket head screws. Pull power and control cables tight to fit snugly where they enter the torque bar/conduit.
Mark position of torque bar anchor bracket on rear fender. Remove permanent mount double stick tape masking paper and press the bracket into place. Drill through fender in 6 positions using guide holes in bracket. Secure with pop rivets (supplied).
Install Torque bearing at lower end of bracket.
Drill entry hole for cable bundle in the sub fender and the side or bottom of trunk or spare compartment using 1" hole saw. Install grommet and guide the cable bundle through.
Install chrome hubcap and torque bar cover using stainless 6mm socket screws.
Repeat procedure other side.
Install motor controllers, on-board charger and batteries in trunk.
Connect following diagram in manual.

[jerome]

is this the prius idea, where the motor is a generator during braking and uses that generated electricity for power during acceleration?

if so, the idea is sound, but I don't see an aftermarket kit implemented for widespread use...carmakers could definitely add on an OEM system to their cars that isn't a chitty slap-on device, and is integrated into the vehicle.

[Tony_SS]

By the time everyone is done messing around with these widgets, gas will be back down to $2.59999 a gallon and everyone will be too upsidedown on their Prius car loans thanks to the F150 they traded in and wont be able to afford the new solar magnet wheeled bio fuel car that gets 26 mpg.