Posted on 03/24/2008 5:45:29 AM PDT by Uncledave
No text to post - follow video.
The intriguing bit for me was the gent who invented a gizmo that he activates with a switch when he's traveling over 35 mph. He cuts the fuel to 1/2 the cylinders, and thereby increases his gas mileage to nearly double.
Obviously, passing power and hills would be more challenging with this activated, but can any engineering experts here comment if this is feasible and practical?
You’re probably right. This was a nanotechnology experiment. I guess it makes sense that you’d get more efficiency on the nano scale.
This just isn't the way of the future. We are getting as good as we can with gasoline engines. Diesel, hybrid, plug in, etc. are all better ideas than this. You want a 25% improvement in gas mileage, switch to a diesel. You want sustainable, run it off soybean oil or waste cooking oil.
I've got a full size sedan with a big engine that's ok for my rare long car trip (like on vacation). I'll keep that, or maybe get a smaller conventional car for that purpose, but how many households have a second car (my wife and I have been carpooling to work for the past six or seven years, but that's not going to last much longer). We'll need a second car.
I want a nuclear powered car. Hold on...my commute is about five miles. I run an errand on the way home, maybe got to dinner, say 15 miles per day. Give me a plug in electric car that's good for 40 or 50 miles on a nights charge, and charge it off a nuke heavy electric grid. That's no problem from an engineering standpoint. Maybe something that will give me 80 miles on an eight hour charge? If they can't do that they will be able to soon. It would be a second car, not my household's only car. I have the dinosaur powered car for trips, and my wife can drive it to work. If every two car household did that, and we build nuclear power plants, we could greatly decrease our oil needs.
The problem with poor economy is that people do not know how to drive and their vehicles are improperly tuned. I have an instantaneous millage display on my truck and people's driving habits suck.
One of the issues with the GM V864 systems was they were trying to get it to work with a carburetor and distributor.
The system used a solenoid to disable a rocker arm, preventing fuel and air from being sucked into the engine by closing the intake valve, IIRC.
On top of that, the electronic controls of the era were pretty crude.
The system GM uses now is quite different. With computer control over the spark and injection on a per cylinder basis, the level of control is enormous in comparison. Modern powertrain computers are very much up to the task.
Also, IIRC, someone at GM realized you don’t need to monkey around with the valves like they did originally. If you just prevent fuel and spark from entering the disabled cylinders, then the power used by compressing air on the up stroke is nearly recovered by the air pushing back on the down. You get rid of the problemmatic valvetrain tinkering, and the losses from friction from the disabled cylinders are eclipsed by the mileage gain.
Yep, I think it's the same idea. The ZR-1 used a separate key switch for that, though. Speaking of the ZR-1, the LT-5 engine's successor - the Cadillac Northstar - first reintroduced GM's variable-displacement technology. GM didn't use it to boost fuel economy, though. Instead, it used the system to cut off fuel to cylinders (up to 4, I think) and pump air through them as a "limp-home" cooling system.
Its industry dragging its feet IMO.
Perhaps one of the big three could throw a little money at small diesel tech also. VW hybrid Jetta gets 68 mpg; that’s cost-effective even at $4.00/gal for diesel. Imagine a diesel/hybrid 300 or Lincoln.
Ah, yes, Lucas. That’s why the Brits enjoy warm beer, Lucas refrigerators.
And I am not knocking Tech in the least either. One of the finest schools in the country.
Just a point of correction about car alternators.
They are three-phase, full-wave rectified alternators, producing six voltage peaks per revolution. None of the six half-waves are “discarded.”
Stories about how OPEC will buy this technology to begin in 5...4...3...2...
Just count yourself fortunate you had a Jaguar that ran.
In the latest Consumer Reports issue, they state, "Despite Honda's cylinder deactivation system, the V6 Honda Accord we tested got slightly worse fuel economy than the previous one."
Not really very encouraging ...
“Just count yourself fortunate you had a Jaguar that ran.”
Well, it didn’t a lot of the time. Unless you consider getting 6 miles to the Imperial Gallon (5 quarts) “running.”
I think your average Sherman tank got only a little less than that.
I once read that a study determined 60% of all “news items” were generated via press release.
I am assuming the source of the story was the researchers’ own press release.
Heck no, ya’ can’t knock GA Tech.....
Where else in the world can you go to witness cold fusion????
Pssssttt...BTW, I’ve got the only Flux Capacitor left in existence that I can sell you cheap......meet me by the Varsity if ya’ want it...
What? Mine had 12 cylinders, so it never ran on less than 8.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.