Runboard.com
You're welcome.

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Diesel is Cleaner After All


[url=[sign in to see URL]

Study Finds That Diesel Better for the Environment Than Gasoline
Fri, 07/14/2017 - 2:29pm 6 Comments
by Kenny Walter - Digital Reporter

...
An international team of researchers have discovered that modern diesel cars emit less pollution than gasoline-based cars, which could result in regulators shifting their focus to gasoline-powered cars and other sources of air pollution.

“Diesel has a bad reputation because you can see the pollution but it's actually the invisible pollution that comes from gasoline in cars that's worse,” Université de Montréal scientist Patrick Hayes said in a statement. “The next step should be to focus on gasoline or removing old diesel vehicles from the road.

“Modern diesel vehicles have adopted new standards and are now very clean, so attention needs to now turn to regulating on-road and off-road gasoline engines more,” he added. “That's really the next target.”
...
7/15/2017, 12:09 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


Just what I have always been saying.
The EPA is deliberately being unfair to diesels because US car makers don't know how to make a small diesel. But diesels are obviously superior in terms of being cleaner and emitting less harmful emissions.
That is obvious since VW diesels sold in the US were getting 56 mpg, and in the rest of the world they are getting over 200 mpg.

If you want more proof the EPA is counterproductive, just look at the gasoline Smart car. In Europe it gets 86 mpg, and in the US it only gets 34 mpg.
7/15/2017, 12:14 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 2956
Karma: 8 (+12/-4)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

That is obvious since VW diesels sold in the US were getting 56 mpg



which bizarrely is more than they go in the UK where the gallon is 25% bigger!


quote:

in the rest of the world they are getting over 200 mpg.




really? name one normal production car that ACTUALLY (in normal useage) gets more than 80 miles to the US gallon.

Sure with specialist cars with very finely tuned engines ultra skinny high pressure tires, no alternator you MIGHT get 200 mpg but that isnt really a production car is it?


quote:

look at the gasoline Smart car. In Europe it gets 86 mpg, and in the US it only gets 34 mpg.



there is often a vast difference between what a manufacturer will claim and what Herbert Q Higgingbottom will actually be able to achieve In the UK (with its 25% bigger gallon remember) smart cars are 'supposed' to get 68mpg although whether or no any one actually does I dont know (but I doubt it)

[sign in to see URL]


My family have pretty much driven diesel cars exclusively (apart from my son) for about 20 years we have owned several VW diesels none of which bettered 60mpg in normal usage and our current Honda CRV struggles to better 40 mpg (and again we have a 25% bigger gallon than the US) my daughter's VW 3cyl [sign in to see URL] turbo diesel is claimed to do 72mpg in reality it does about 60 although if you are prepared to sit on the inside lane of a motorway at 45mph Im sure that that would rise (unlike our CRV which does 39 -40 however you drive it)
7/15/2017, 9:58 am Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1702
Karma: 3 (+9/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


I agree on the exaggeration there are NO 200mpg engine driven cars for real use. The truth that diesel exhaust can be visual does not mean it is dirtier as noted it tends to actually be LESS unhealthy yet still unhealthy.

For the US and especially CARB to mandate emissions controls that decrease fuel mileage while as a result increasing consumption for each additional device is stupid. For a miniscule removal of release agent they exponentially increase consumption leading to volumes of increased releases regardless if 'cleaner' it is VOLUMES more released.

I enjoy diesel engines for my farm and my truck, the "Advances" in fuel chemistry not only decreased my fuel mileage by 25% it as cost us far more then direct expense of purchase by leading to internal engine/fuel system damage to the older units. So called 'Benefits' are outweighed by the damage presented.
7/15/2017, 12:37 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

mais oui wrote:

quote:

That is obvious since VW diesels sold in the US were getting 56 mpg



which bizarrely is more than they go in the UK where the gallon is 25% bigger!


quote:

in the rest of the world they are getting over 200 mpg.




really? name one normal production car that ACTUALLY (in normal useage) gets more than 80 miles to the US gallon.

Sure with specialist cars with very finely tuned engines ultra skinny high pressure tires, no alternator you MIGHT get 200 mpg but that isnt really a production car is it?


quote:

look at the gasoline Smart car. In Europe it gets 86 mpg, and in the US it only gets 34 mpg.



there is often a vast difference between what a manufacturer will claim and what Herbert Q Higgingbottom will actually be able to achieve In the UK (with its 25% bigger gallon remember) smart cars are 'supposed' to get 68mpg although whether or no any one actually does I dont know (but I doubt it)

[sign in to see URL]


My family have pretty much driven diesel cars exclusively (apart from my son) for about 20 years we have owned several VW diesels none of which bettered 60mpg in normal usage and our current Honda CRV struggles to better 40 mpg (and again we have a 25% bigger gallon than the US) my daughter's VW 3cyl [sign in to see URL] turbo diesel is claimed to do 72mpg in reality it does about 60 although if you are prepared to sit on the inside lane of a motorway at 45mph Im sure that that would rise (unlike our CRV which does 39 -40 however you drive it)




No, the imperial gallon is never used in the calculations.

Here is a limited production VW that gets 261 mpg.
][sign in to see URL]
But it is expensive.

{...
Orders For 261-MPG Volkswagen XL1 Exceed Production of 200

Volkswagen's XL1 might be one of the most exciting and unusual green vehicles of recent years, but it's certainly not one of the most accessible.
Pricing around the $150,000 mark, based on the German price of 111,000 Euros, puts it in the same league as high-end sports cars. But as we've come to expect with the rare and the bespoke, there'll always be someone out there who doesn't mind paying for something exclusive.

It comes as no surprise that demand is outstripping supply for the sleek 261 mpg XL1. According to Inautonews, VW has more customers for the car than its 200-unit production run can accommodate.

In an unofficial statement, Volkswagen told the site, "Since we have many more interested customers than vehicles, we will have a selection process. At the moment we cannot give any more information on this process." That's going to leave a lot of disappointed customers in the XL1's aerodynamic wake...

A two-seat, low-slung diesel plug-in hybrid, the XL1 marks the culmination of years of ultra-efficient concept vehicles from VW, beginning with 2002's "1-liter car". The 1L was a pet project of then-chairman Dr. Ferdinand Piech, and over the years the car transformed into the VW L1 concept and the VW Up! Lite.

The XL1 was finally confirmed for production in February this year and was launched at the 2013 Geneva Motor Show.

The production car uses an [sign in to see URL], twin-cylinder turbocharged diesel engine, paired with an electric motor.
...}

But it is easy to get 100 mpg.
Here is a do it yourself example from "Mother Earth News".
][sign in to see URL]

Here is a production car no longer built.
{...
How many miles per gallon does your car get? 34? 35?

If you ask Jerry Bartlett, the answer would be 200–and not in a Pruis.

“As far as I know there are only three of these vehicles in existence,” Bartlett said.

The car is a modified Urba Centurion originally designed by Robert Q. Riley–one of only three in existence; the Lane Motor Museum in Nashville, Tennessee displays one and the other was used in the 1990 movie Total Recall starring Arnold Schwarzenegger (in fact, the original wheels used on the Total Recall car are on Bartlett’s Centurion).

Bartlett, a computer technician at SUNY Canton (a New York college just south of the Canadian border) was inspired to build the car by a February 1982 copy of Popular Mechanics, then Mechanix Illustrated, which now hangs on the wall above his desk at the college.

The Centurion is built on a 1966 Triumph Spitfire frame with a custom body made with fiberglass over foam and runs on a three-cylinder Kubota diesel engine. Its top speed: 65 mph.

On April 11, 2014, the Centurion tied for the Most Fuel-Efficient Vehicle award in the Toyota Green Grand Prix Doris Bovee Memorial Road Rally at Watkins Glen International racetrack.
...}
][sign in to see URL]


Last edited by Rigby5, 7/16/2017, 1:25 am
7/16/2017, 1:05 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


Here is 150 mpg.

][sign in to see URL]

--Log in or sign up to see linked image content--

{...
German startup Loremo AG will debut its concept car at the Geneva Motor Show this week. "Loremo" is derived from "low resistance mobile," and embodies the company's philosophy of efficient transportation that consumes minimal resources during both production and operation. In practice, this means lightweight, aerodynamic vehicles with phenomenal fuel efficiency.

The Loremo will be offered in two models, the LS and GT. The LS is powered by a 20 hp, 2-cylinder turbodiesel, while the GT gets a 50 hp, 3-cylinder unit. Both are 2 2, mid-engine/RWD configurations with a 5-speed gearbox. The GT will go from 0-62 mph in 9 seconds, but the real strength of the Loremo is fuel efficiency - the GT consumes only 2.7 liters per 100 km, while the LS needs only 1.5 liters/100 km. According to my calculator, the LS will go over 150 miles on a gallon of diesel! More after the jump.

Light weight and low drag are the watchwords for Loremo - the LS weighs only 990 lb, with a Cd of 0.2.

According to Loremo, the LS will be priced at about $13,100, while the GT will sell for less than $18,000.
...}
7/16/2017, 1:28 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1702
Karma: 3 (+9/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


Not just or STRICTLY diesel, but a Diesel Electric Hybrid. The engine does not actually ever drive the machine but recharges the storage cell to power an electric motive motor.

Still a plug in after use and still draws grid power to fully recharge.
7/16/2017, 4:12 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

Not just or STRICTLY diesel, but a Diesel Electric Hybrid. The engine does not actually ever drive the machine but recharges the storage cell to power an electric motive motor.

Still a plug in after use and still draws grid power to fully recharge.



True it does have an electric motor and batteries as well, but what about the other 3 after that, which get 200, 100, and 150 mpg and only use internal combustion, no electric motors?
7/17/2017, 12:28 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1702
Karma: 3 (+9/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


Ultralight weight, two passenger, one 20hp the other 50hp given to that low power to weight as well low weight and aerodynamics, only good for open road short term travel. In-city aerodynamics plays "0" percentage, on the road lack of capability rules out family use or travel use for anyone with compound baggage.

My 1971 VW Beetle made 38-44 mpg on good days when I paid attention to speed limits had little load inside the machine and fair winds assisted.
7/17/2017, 11:29 am Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

Ultralight weight, two passenger, one 20hp the other 50hp given to that low power to weight as well low weight and aerodynamics, only good for open road short term travel. In-city aerodynamics plays "0" percentage, on the road lack of capability rules out family use or travel use for anyone with compound baggage.

My 1971 VW Beetle made 38-44 mpg on good days when I paid attention to speed limits had little load inside the machine and fair winds assisted.



All true.
But, take your 1971 beetle and reduce the weight intended for off road use, make it even lighter with carbon fiber and fiber glass, add computerized ignition and fuel injection, increase the compression, add exact overhead camshaft timing, etc., and it likely could easily have gotten twice the mileage.
Things like turbo charging can add the hp of a larger engine without adding weight or reducing mileage if you do not hit the gas hard enough to make it spool up.
We have had over 40 years to be able to do better, and still have not.
Instead we are just making cars even heavier, with even worse mileage. Blunt, steel, large engines, etc.
7/17/2017, 3:07 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1702
Karma: 3 (+9/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


Fuel economic for a internal combustion engine is fairly straight forward strict physics. Takes X btu to derive Y HP, it taks a fixed value HP to move one pound material in a straight line. Those factors do not change much where the old wive's tale cars of the 50's/60's getting humongous MPG with carburation was as much far fetched.

Make the car too light it is endangered by strong winds even with aerodynamic design cannot compensate for 50-80mph side blasts as in KS. Have to have some weight for tire adhesion to road surface then there are the inconsequential conditions as accidents where the machine parks on the road awaiting release by the police and eating fuel to no miles to stay cool. Rain is not factored anymore than slippery stuff like snow/ice. Again cannot beat physics and the rules that apply to machines of motion.
7/17/2017, 7:57 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

Fuel economic for a internal combustion engine is fairly straight forward strict physics. Takes X btu to derive Y HP, it taks a fixed value HP to move one pound material in a straight line. Those factors do not change much where the old wive's tale cars of the 50's/60's getting humongous MPG with carburation was as much far fetched.

Make the car too light it is endangered by strong winds even with aerodynamic design cannot compensate for 50-80mph side blasts as in KS. Have to have some weight for tire adhesion to road surface then there are the inconsequential conditions as accidents where the machine parks on the road awaiting release by the police and eating fuel to no miles to stay cool. Rain is not factored anymore than slippery stuff like snow/ice. Again cannot beat physics and the rules that apply to machines of motion.



All true, but if a VW bug can get 40 mpg 50 years ago when they did not really even care about gasoline prices, it should not be at all hard to get at least twice that now.

If instead of the emissions testing only checking parts per million, they tested for total emissions, then cars would be getting a whole lot smaller and lighter, and be getting a lot better mileage.
7/18/2017, 5:12 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1702
Karma: 3 (+9/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


VW weighed in at one ton(US 2000#) while the engine was only rated 60 HP in 1971. Air cooled with belt driven fan, no water pump, power steer pump, no A/C compressor, no real parasitic engine loads to speak of. Had but six fuses and a 35amp 12v generator.

It was wind prone on the highway, had a maximum speed of 81mph(I did try it) rode on 15" very narrow low rolling resistance bias ply tires which I converted to radials late in its life due to accessibility and price yet did not change fuel economy.

With four persons in the car maximum speed declined to 76mph, flat on floor on flat highway. Was pretty well useless as to carrying any real load as luggage/gear with passengers. My cousin's 1969 VW Microbus had been upgraded to 73HP(1600cc) from 57HP(1340cc) with roof rack and could carry six relatively easy at 65mph with gear or luggage but that was maximum speed attainable.
7/18/2017, 12:52 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

VW weighed in at one ton(US 2000#) while the engine was only rated 60 HP in 1971. Air cooled with belt driven fan, no water pump, power steer pump, no A/C compressor, no real parasitic engine loads to speak of. Had but six fuses and a 35amp 12v generator.

It was wind prone on the highway, had a maximum speed of 81mph(I did try it) rode on 15" very narrow low rolling resistance bias ply tires which I converted to radials late in its life due to accessibility and price yet did not change fuel economy.

With four persons in the car maximum speed declined to 76mph, flat on floor on flat highway. Was pretty well useless as to carrying any real load as luggage/gear with passengers. My cousin's 1969 VW Microbus had been upgraded to 73HP(1600cc) from 57HP(1340cc) with roof rack and could carry six relatively easy at 65mph with gear or luggage but that was maximum speed attainable.



The original design was not for civilian use, but instead as an off road military jeep.
They only made 2 of the civilian body before or during the war, so they could sell a wage withholding plan from suckers.
The VW Thing is much more what was actually made. The difference mostly being suicide doors, 19" tires, and a huge military style gas filler flap.
--Log in or sign up to see linked image content--
The solid pan and heavy torsion bar beam front suspension was much heavier than was necessary for a civilian car.
Part of the wandering in the wind was the narrow off road wheelbase, and the high ground clearance.
I could change a clutch on a VW van in less than 20 minutes. Nothing was at all hard to do. Probably the most difficult thing was if the heater cable broke, because you had to ream the dirt out of the tubes before the new cable would pass through the tubes to the flaps on the engine. And the poor heat in the winter was likely its worst feature. ( lived in WI at the time)
7/18/2017, 9:56 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1702
Karma: 3 (+9/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


I liked the early VW's, they were built to a purpose and performed it well, nowadays the auto industry tries for some form of excellence that really no one 'needs' has too much parasitic load on engines and use too much fuel regardless the 'economy' as noted for overly light, somewhat comfortable yet overly complex machines.

People of the 1960's traveled far less than today, my brothers and I can remember a high mile five year old auto 'in the day' receiving less than 10,000 miles/year, that is now around 25-30,000/year.
7/19/2017, 11:41 am Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

I liked the early VW's, they were built to a purpose and performed it well, nowadays the auto industry tries for some form of excellence that really no one 'needs' has too much parasitic load on engines and use too much fuel regardless the 'economy' as noted for overly light, somewhat comfortable yet overly complex machines.

People of the 1960's traveled far less than today, my brothers and I can remember a high mile five year old auto 'in the day' receiving less than 10,000 miles/year, that is now around 25-30,000/year.



Yes things have changed.
I typically do not driver over 65 mph because I notice my fuel consumption rapidly goes up at higher speeds.
But now I am almost the slowest person on the roads.
Cops, passengers, trucks, etc., are all passing me by at least 10 mph or so.
Many must be doing well over 80 mph, especially cops.
7/19/2017, 11:24 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1702
Karma: 3 (+9/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


Personally I have no desire to return to the 60's, they were fine right where and when they were. Still need to change the mentality of the US driver, to less time behind a wheel and more time productive.
7/19/2017, 11:27 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 2956
Karma: 8 (+12/-4)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

No, the imperial gallon is never used in the calculations.



It is in the UK!!!

all the other vehicles you mention has having astronomical mpg figures are either concept or specialist vehicles NOT normal mass produced cars for the mass market.


a 1970s beetle might well have achieved 40mpg but it only produced about 40bhp had no electric windows, crappy lighting and no air con (a major power drain)as was pointed out a gallon of fuel only has a certain amount of energy in it and it takes a fixed amount of energy to accelerate a mass from zero to what ever speed, actually maintaining that speed on flat level road actually takes very little power.

the only way that you can improve mpg is by increasing efficiency at that is currently maxing out at about 35% efficient (the rest being converted into wasted heat)- a figure which is theoretical more than practical - the faster an automobile can accelerate the more fuel it uses, having a engine which doesnt automatically stop when the vehicle is stationary wastes more fuel - air can (as previously stated uses masses of power - up to 5 horse power) add in such other niceties as power steering a decent sound system, electric seats etc etc and your engine might be having to generate 7 horse power before you even progress down the road - the first Beetles only made 25BHP!

Once you have maximised engine performance - and maintaining the standards of comfort we have come to demand the only other route is to reduce rolling resistance and air resistance, air resistance isnt a big problem at low speeds - it relates to the cube of the speed other things being equal if you want to double your top speed you must cube your engine power (if 25BHP lets you reach 70 MPH to reach 140 MPH you will need 625 BHP!!!) you can reduce rolling rersistance to a point larger diameter tires thinner tires harder tires all of which will reduce rolling resistance - but will make the handling and comfort awful - although if you limit top speed to 45MPH that might not matter much!

Incidentally where I am currently situated a significant number of cars are electric I have seen every thing from a "Gwizz" (google it) to a Tessla! there are charge points almost every where but surprisingly few gas stations - although at £[sign in to see URL] per liter I suppose that isnt too surprising

Last edited by mais oui, 7/20/2017, 9:59 am
7/20/2017, 9:25 am Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 3705
Karma: 5 (+15/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Diesel is Cleaner After All


quote:

mais oui wrote:

quote:

No, the imperial gallon is never used in the calculations.



It is in the UK!!!

all the other vehicles you mention has having astronomical mpg figures are either concept or specialist vehicles NOT normal mass produced cars for the mass market.


a 1970s beetle might well have achieved 40mpg but it only produced about 40bhp had no electric windows, crappy lighting and no air con (a major power drain)as was pointed out a gallon of fuel only has a certain amount of energy in it and it takes a fixed amount of energy to accelerate a mass from zero to what ever speed, actually maintaining that speed on flat level road actually takes very little power.

the only way that you can improve mpg is by increasing efficiency at that is currently maxing out at about 35% efficient (the rest being converted into wasted heat)- a figure which is theoretical more than practical - the faster an automobile can accelerate the more fuel it uses, having a engine which doesnt automatically stop when the vehicle is stationary wastes more fuel - air can (as previously stated uses masses of power - up to 5 horse power) add in such other niceties as power steering a decent sound system, electric seats etc etc and your engine might be having to generate 7 horse power before you even progress down the road - the first Beetles only made 25BHP!

Once you have maximised engine performance - and maintaining the standards of comfort we have come to demand the only other route is to reduce rolling resistance and air resistance, air resistance isnt a big problem at low speeds - it relates to the cube of the speed other things being equal if you want to double your top speed you must cube your engine power (if 25BHP lets you reach 70 MPH to reach 140 MPH you will need 625 BHP!!!) you can reduce rolling rersistance to a point larger diameter tires thinner tires harder tires all of which will reduce rolling resistance - but will make the handling and comfort awful - although if you limit top speed to 45MPH that might not matter much!

Incidentally where I am currently situated a significant number of cars are electric I have seen every thing from a "Gwizz" (google it) to a Tessla! there are charge points almost every where but surprisingly few gas stations - although at £[sign in to see URL] per liter I suppose that isnt too surprising



The point is not what is being sold but why better mileage cars are not being sold, even though they could be.

And before we once again get derailed on electric vehicles, again, most electricity not only is from burning fossil fuels, but also the efficiency of generating, transmitting, storing, retrieving, and converting electricity back into kinetic energy is very wasteful, and we would need to spend trillions on 4 times the power plants we have now, in order to charge all those electric vehicles.

We do not need electric windows, power steering, electric door locks, or even AC. Moving vehicles can do quite well with swamp coolers that only require a little water.

The 1970s beetle was intended to be cheap, not the ultimate. By increasing the compression ratio and breathing, you can double its power. There are people who drag race VWs and sell kits to get over 500 hp out of the same old 1970s air cooled engine.
But there are far more efficient engines than that, and can be better than 50% efficient. A 2 stroke diesel weighing less than 80 lbs can put out more than 80 hp.
The main problem with fuel efficiency is weight, (acceleration or up hills), so making everything lighter is the main key.

The point is that EVs just move where the fossil fuels are burned, so don't solve anything. Instead we have to make vehicles lighter so they don't consume as much energy, and then we may be able to use renewables, like peanut oil.
7/20/2017, 11:08 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 


Add a reply



You are not logged in (login)
Back To Top