OT: Internal Combustion Breakthrough?

People including those in Washington do not understand there is a fixed amount of energy in the Carbon bond. When the Carbon molecule is oxidized it release a known amount of energy that can be calculated. (This energy can be found in any Handbook of Engineering, Physics, or Chemistry and probably hundreds of sites online) Regardless of what you do, you can only recover 100% of this energy. Hence with cars to get higher miles per gallon you have to reduce the size of the car. A roller skate should be able to get a couple of hundred miles per gallon.

Like Bigfoot, I have heard of the supper carburetor for years, but it still is not real.

I'd have to say that an engine that was introduced in the early 70's that continues to be used in every one of the RX models probably deserves to be called a success. The Corvette is a huge success but not every Chevrolet has a Corvette engine.

Do you buy the same car every time you purchase one? I have never bought the same car twice although I have been very pleased with most of them. Variety is the spice of life.

While any given fuel does in deed only has a fixed amount of stored energy reducing the size of the vehicle is not the only way to increase gas mileage. Simple engine tweaks can do this, advancing the ignition timing will do this. I currently have a heavier, taller truck with an engine that produces approximately 50% more horse power than my previous truck. It gets at least the same, often better gas mileage than the older model did when it was the same age. It is simply a matter of getting more out of the fuel burn than what has been gotten in the past. Some engines burn fuel more efficiently than others. Because most gasoline burning engines do not do not get 100% return on the fuel that they burn they can be improved to do better. With the common day usage of on board computers and fuel injectors gas mileage has improved dramatically over the last 30 years. You can look as fuel injectors as the today's "super carburetor".

Technically, any heat (or sound) produced by an engine is wasted energy. An ideal engine would produce no heat or sound, having converted all the chemical energy into mechanical energy.

Consider my house furnace, for instance...it converts 95% of the fuel energy into useable heat. The exhause is cool enough that it uses plastic pipe for the exhaust.

Given that current car engines are something like 35% efficiency, there is a lot of room for improvement.

Chris

This guy must be claiming exhaust temperatures at room temperature? Regardless of how much of the explosion gets transferred to the drive- shaft, you're still dealing with thermal absorption at the piston and cylinder walls, not to mention what blows out the exhaust.

The trouble is that current cars (or base-load power plants for that matter) do not come anywhere close to recovering 100 percent of that energy. 30 percent is very good for an internal combustion otto-cycle engine, so there is considerable room for improvement.

Or increase the thermal efficiency.

I'm not sure how relevant that is to the engine in question. He's claiming that it gets the performance of a really good diesel or maybe a wee bit more in a much smaller and lighter package--if that's so then in addition to the thermal efficiency benefit the car could be smaller and lighter due to the smaller, lighter engine, which would again provide a gas mileage benefit.

The question is whether he can actually deliver that thermal efficiency in an engine that passes emissions and is reliable and driveable. If he can the world is going to beat a path to his door, but if their engineers thought that he could the car manufacturers would have engaged in a bidding war to get the rights to his design.

Ectually, ------ Porsche is the ultimate in understated snobery.=20

Even used it is head and shoulders above a mere rice burner.

P D Q

dpb wrote: ...

...

In a somewhat more general amplification...

There are many very clever and talented mechanical tinkerers who create wondrous mechanical gizmos of all kinds. However, often they lack sufficient abilities in analysis or precision in measurement or aren't careful enough in the measurement phases of experimentation to realize the results aren't what they would hope for. Or, in some cases, they're so convinced of the basic idea they make flawed conclusions by bending the interpretation to fit their conclusions. And, of course, there have been those who simply downright cheated in knowingly creating false data.

Until the invention and the technology can be brought to an independent testing facility and replicate the results and creation of the device there's nothing to do but wait and see if it "sprouts legs".

B'sides if we just wait someone will pirate the technology and, with no development expense to recover, sell it to us cheaper - kinda like that string trimmer doohickey...

...and in less than two decades the patents will expire anyway, so if it's any good it can sprout legs then.

Or Toyota or Honda, and you'll see it big time...

They still make them and they still race well!

This past summer at Lime Rock, I was checking out an RX-8 that won the

Well, not totally, the heater uaes the engine heat to warm the car in the winter.

Exactly, typically electricity is 4 times more efficient to power a car. Oddly it is cheaper and uses less fuel to create electricity to power that car than it is to use that fuel directly to power the car. Today's car engines are an inefficient design to convert fuel into immediate energy.

While it is true that fuel mileage has improved over the last few years, Ford's Corporate Average Fuel Economy for the whole fleet is the same as it was in 1919 with the model "T" - aprox 21MPG US.

Damn, an encouraging thought. ;~) Only if they get there first.

Well, you are talking "Ford". ;~)

Given that comment which is not a fair comparison, considering the amount of work being done by current fleets to the 1919 fleet. The 1919 model fleet probably got better gas mileage but could a 1919 vehicle pull 50,000 lbs. or did they have AC, power steering, or an automatic transmission. Or could they pass emission tests designed for 2009 model car?

If you want to do a fair comparison, do it with that Model T and say, the Focus.

Good points...

But don't forget:

- can it be manufactured? what about manufacturing tolerances? Lab boys can make a lot of things that cannot be put on an assembly line for mass production and get the same results time and time again.

- how long of a life of engine? 100,000 miles? or is it a major overhaul every 20,000 miles?

- will that engine start when air temp is below -10 F? How about running all afternoon in August way out in Nevada waste lands?

I think I will wait to pass judgment.

...

Isn't that what I've said in every response??? :(

--

And of course the Model T is capable of highway speeds and passes all Federally mandated safety and emissions regulations.

Hint, Congress took gas mileage out of the auto manufacturers hands years ago. They build to the regulations. If you don't like the regulations, take it up with Congress.