Read what I write. Easy for intelligent people.
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
Troll incentive more like...
You can see it now... a cadmium/lead/lithium disposal tax to deal with the nasties in the batteries.
Well its going the battery way whether hybrid or fuel cell. By the time they are norm, the cities will be very clean compared to today (90% less emissions), something which goes over your head, and newer technology will be in place: prob fuel cells.
Get used to it.
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
What is going over your head is that all that is being done is that the pollution source is being moved up the line. Do you seriously believe that electric, hybrid or fuel cell cars can first be made, used and finally scraped without causing pollution ?
Hmmm, a man who obviously has no grasp of the relationship between torque and power.
It is a parallel hybrid, with the with the concession that when the IC engine is driving the wheels, it is also turning the generator. For it to be a serial hybrid, the IC engine would have to be exclusively for driving the generator(s), with final drive always being provided by the electric motor(s).
As I said, the thing's actually a Miller Cycle, though why Toyota insist on calling it an Atkinson I don't know. Look up Ralph Miller, 1947, delayed closure of inlet valve.
dIMM, though you're obviously incapable of expressing any form of shame, you're the one who should be ashamed. Especially as I managed to describe the operation of the power splitter (and you've already demonstrated a failure to understand the relationship between torque and power), deduced (correctly) that inspite of Toyota's marketing blurb, the engine is actually a Miller Cycle rather than Atkinson (and suspect you didn't have a clue about the details of the Atkinson and Miller cycles). I also understand the distinction between parallel and serial hybrid drivetrains.
You however, settled for spurting marketing blurb and - I suspect - only looked up the details of the Atkinson cycle once I'd expressed doubts about Toyota's engine being an Atkinson. And the phrase "A sort of half way Otto/Atkinson." is an absolute classic.
So, in a word, no, I don't feel in the slightest bit ashamed, as I've already demonstrated an understanding of many of the concepts used. If I were to be ashamed of anything, it would be of wasting my time trying to educate a gormless cretin such as yourself. But if other people on this group have been informed, then it wasn't a total waste.
I f**king know how a Stirling engine works. Do you, really? Care to distinguish between alpha and beta configurations? Without googling first? It's a closed-cycle external combustion engine, of course it uses a source of external heat, but that doesn't have to be a burner you know. Any exothermic reaction will do, including (for illustrative purposes only) radioactive decay, simulateous oxidation and reduction (e.g. a spectacular example of which is the thermite process). I've built several Stirlings over the years. Even had a go at an Atkinson, which was a bastard to build. Started it as an academic exercise, as the friction losses from the complex mechanical linkages offset the efficiency gains the cycle could offer, which is why Miller's approach is so much better.
The word you are looking for is "until" not "unless". I consider hybrids to be an intermediate step, not the end point. There're still too many steps between initial fuel and final drive.
Cheers Clive
A damn sight more than you my dear fellow.
Once again.....
"It is serial/parrallel hybrid". Got it?
That situation can occur.
I know all about the Miler cycle. It requires a compressor and a low compression inside the chamber. This does not have a compressor. Toyota say "Atkinson", not me.
See dIMM ablout that.
Torque splitter me dear chap. 2/10 for that.
You only have half a clue. Sad but true.
It is NOT a MIller cycle.
You should do. Normal peopel would inthat situation. Shame on you...oh you have no concept of shame.
That is reassuring as you display a lack of comprehension in most technical matters.
I'm brill at everything.
So, does just about everyone else. BUT!!! it is here and fuel economical and 90% less emissions. Until something better comes along this is the way. A pity you don't understand it. Better just accept what I tell you, it will be easier that way.
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
Read this. This alleviate your shame..
You've shown that's no true already. But keep digging if you so desire. Come on then, what is the difference between torque and power? If you're so clever, why not show it instead of recycling marketing blurb.
Well, explain it for the rest of us then. Describe, concisely and accurately, how the entire drivetrain functions such that the electric motor is driving the road wheels, and the IC engine is only turning the generator.
Ah, at last, a clear admission that all you do is recycle marketing blurb. Miller's 1947 proposal relied on an external compressor in the form of a supercharger, but to conform to the Miller (aka 5 stroke) cycle, the inlet valve remains open during the initial phase of the compression stroke. Careful design of the inlet geometry can allow the Miller cycle to be implemented without the need for forced induction. But then, you'd need to actualy understand what you're talking about, something you're plainly incapable of.
Well, given that it uses delayed closure of the inlet value, and doesn't complete all four strokes of the Otto Cycle in one revolution of the crank shaft, it sure as eggs are eggs isn't an Atkinson.
Ha. That's rich coming from you.
Plastic pipe and hacksaw springs to mind.
And there's the profound difference between yourself and damn near everyone else who posts to this group. Most of us are competant in some areas, and where we lack understanding, we ask questions. You, however, give the appearance of a total lack competance in damn near every area, yet are incapable of facing up to the reality of the situation, instead relying on marketing information lifted from brochures and websites, and resorting to your truly pathetic , et al when faced with irefutable response. You are, in short, a poor excuse for a knowlegable poster. You may well be a great road sweeper, public convenience cleaner, husband, boyfriend, rent boy, whatever, but your apparent deficiencies displayed on the group make me truly thankful that I am, God willing, unlikely ever to meet you in person. A fact for which I am truly grateful.
And once again, IMM completely fails to follow the thrust of the debate. But ignoring that, I never blindly accept anything without supporting information, and especially not from someone with your track record.
However, why don't you prove your point. Present this group with verifiable figures that prove that the Prius is both more economical and less polluting than the equivalent best-of-class diesel powered car over a typical set of driving conditions including motorways, rural and urban A roads and city centre driving, with a mix of both flat, undulating and hilly terrain. Don't forget to factor in the polutants and emmissions that are by-products of the entire production process, including battery manufacture, fabrication of the solid state electronics, etc.
Don't worry though, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for any meaningful response from you. In an unselfish act of generosity, just snip everything above one of the following, it'll make your life easier and simpler.
Cheers Clive
"It could turn the gasoline-electric hybrid into an all-electric car - for a mile or so on limited battery power."
So it can run exclusively on batteries for about a mile or so. Big effing deal. That would make the Prius a Petrol/Electric hybrid with a virtually useless electric-only mode.
Oh, and it gets better...
"Why would anyone want to do that?" wonders Sam Butto, a Toyota spokesman in Torrance, Calif., when told some Prius owners are creating their own plug-in Priuses. "One of the great features of the Prius is that you don't have to plug it in." It is also unlikely Toyota would make a plug-in Prius - though "nothing is impossible," he hedges. The problems are many, including a "much, much, much larger battery" needed to increase range, which would add hundreds of pounds, says David Hermance, a Toyota environmental engineer.
And then, further down....
Anyway, plug-in hybrids are not that green, Mr. Hermance argues. They run on electricity that's often created by coal-fired power plants. So, such a car would be only marginally better from an environmental and economic perspective than a regular hybrid and have limited appeal, he concludes. Case closed.
While Andrew Frank concedes that an electric car powered indirectly by coal isn't much better for the environment
So your point is what exactly? That you know how to use google?
Cheers
Clive
The point was to educate shameless people like yourself. A hybrid with greater battery power can get 90% less petrol used, and less pollution in cities where it matters. These points obviously went over your head. Many cars can be topped up overnight using energy that otherwise would be wasted. Don't you feel ashamed at not seeing that?
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
Geat understanding of hybrids, and drive one too.
I have already given links for that. Please read. If you have then you lack comprehension. Sad but true.
What crap. If you think it is a Miller cycle then show us where it is one.
See above.
I know... I am brill.
I gave supporting info.
I gave all that. The Prius is not designed for of road. Normal driving the
4x4 is coming soon,.
All given.
It is clear you didn't understand from your first post. ...and displayed no shame.
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
Right, point one, even Toyota agree that it isn't a standard 4 stroke engine. Point two, contrary to what Toyota call it, that engine does not complete all four strokes of the Otto Cycle in one revolution of the crankshaft, and does not use the complicated linkages necessary, therefore it is not, by definition, an Atkinson Cycle. Point three, Toyota claim that the engine uses variable valve timing to delay closure of the inlet value until after the start of the compression cycle, which is very similar to the Miller cycle.
Now, your sole claim that it isn't a Miller Cycle is simply that there is no compressor. But, and try to understand this, a compressor is simply that,m a device which compresses. Now the compressor could be a supercharger, a turbocharger or, and I know you're going to struggle with this one, the inlet manifold itself. It is possible (and indeed has been done before), to design the inlet manifold geometry to produce a compression effect.
Now Miller used a supercharger, but as long as the compression effect exists, and the inlet valve is delayed until after the start of the compression stroke, then regardless of the how the compression effect is achieved, it (imho) follows the Miller cycle.
QED. And don't bother replying. You've already displayed your ignorance and duplicitousness above when failing to respond to a value challenge, and instead resort to your usual retort.
Just because you rely on google doesn't mean that everyone else does.
Bullshit.
Good grief IMM, even your reading skill are poor. It's the roads that cover flat, undulating and hilly terrain.
Right. Then it shouldn't take you very long to summarise them here. Assuming, of course that you actually understand the material you are quoting. I'll make it simpler for you. Let's take a decent production family-sized turbo diesel with comparable passenger capacity and on-road performance (acceleration, max speed) to the Prius, and with a similar price.
Now Toyota list the basic Prius at £17,500 for a 5 door hatchback with a
2.7m wheelbase and top speed of 105mph and 0-60mph in 10.9 seconds. We'll use the wheelbase, because Toyota can't be bothered to include the interior dimensions in their technical spec pdf, and I'm not going to go hunting for them. Now, take a new Ford Focus 1.6 Duratorq TDCi at £16,500 in Titanium spec (top of the range) for a 5 door hatchback with a 2.6m wheelbase, top speed 117mph and 0-60mph in 10.9 seconds.There you are, two cars of similar price, performance and capacity. Now show the TCO of each over 3 years, along with the *total* environmental impact for both, not only in terms of pertrol/diesel consumption, but cost of manufacture, cost of disposal, volume of greenhouse cases produced, toxic heavy metals used, etc. You can base the comparison on 12,000 miles per year, mixture of urban, extra-urban and motorway. I'll even cut you some slack, and let you breakdown the mileages as 4000/4000/4000 which is, to be honest, unrealistic, and I'll let you have 2000 miles inside the London congestion charge zone as well.
Now, sell me the Prius. Not in terms of you believing it to be better, but good solid hard facts. Come on, here is a golden opportunity for you to demonstrate your knowledge and analytical skills. No or cop-outs. Just a simple request for an alleged expert to do his stuff. Up to it?
Cheers Clive
The message from "Clive Summerfield" contains these words:
There is only one thing to follow that with:-
Hear! Hear!
I've left you original post in. Now, your original comprised a crude directive statement "Read this.", followed by a poorly constructed and abusive sentence "This alleviate your shame.." and finished with a link to an on-line article. In light of that, and that I, personally, have not challenged the environmental benefits/costs of the Prius, but merely challenged you on some "marketing speak" issue; given all that then I think asking you what your point was to be a perfectly valid question.
Oh, and quite all this talk of being ashamed. After all, I'm not the person hiding behind an online alias.
Cheers Clive
But Tony Bliar does not.
Lithium polymer mate. Streets ahead. Literally.
The only supply chain that I can see that is here now, works well enough to need only development, not research, and does reduce carbon emissions is:-
Nuclear power (plus other renewables) -> electricity -> national grid -> Lithium polymer powered battery cars.
The sums I have done suggest this is not only feasible, but actually well withing current grid power levels and overall technology. Overnight charge of ten hours on a 13A socket shold allow about 200-300 miles range the following day. Peak performance up there with a typical sports car if you want, or restrict to ford fiesta for longer range.
The main issues surround the safe use and cost of the batteries. Disposal is not too bad. No heavy metals, but some organic polymers.
The other supply chain that makes sense for transport that is not ground based or neat a grid, involves the use of hydrogen as fuel. Electrolysed by the electricity, and burnt as aircraft and/or military and maybe shipboard fuel. However there exists no distribution infrastructure for this as yet.
Biodiesel is a third possibility, but no one has yet shown cost benefit from it, and it still does no more than neutralise the carbon cycle, when possibly what we want is to plant crops and bury them to fix carbon back into solid form...:-)
You have not proven the Prius uses a Miller cycle. You are guessing. The only car I know that uses the Miller is a Mazda. You have written what you have read from HowStuffWorks, or whatever.
I can only go so far in simply explaining something to you and giving you other relevant info. I have to draw the line and right you off as a technical incompetent. You must be a office clerk, as they are useless at most things in life.
You never mentioned that the design is advanced that the internal space is not much short of the externally much larger Camry.
He goes on ....
I gave you the base details..Camry
Oh a quiz!
They have been given. Look back on my posts. What figures have you come up with?
Also the Toyota does not have an air polluting and sound polluting filthy diesel inside it, which emits cacogenics which are poisonous (soot which also blackens buildings, so what is it doing to your lungs?). It emits 90% less than other equiv cars. It is also great fun to drive, which diesels certainly are not, also with a great transmission; it is brilliant. It also looks the part. Quality.
Finances? look at my posts. It was given. If you drive this car around London you will make back the cost of the car over 10 years. You can't do that with a filthy noisy diesel piece of crap made by Fix Or Repair Daily. No contest the Prius wins hands down.
Now look at my posts, all is there for you. That will help you. BTW, the Prius has been a victim of propaganda by companies who missed the hybrid developement band wagon..............and sucked it in.
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
What is this marketing speak crap you are on about?
You lack of understaning and knowledge is shameful indeed.
_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.