Last post on Jan 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
Fuel System, Performance Mods, Fuel System, Truck, Sedan, SUV
#342 of 391 Re: Oh, a good one !!! [larsb]
Feb 18, 2010 (11:02 am)
What production car has a 24 volt electrical system? Some of the high end cars probably need 24 volt systems but none of them have them yet.
#343 of 391 Re: Oh, a good one !!! [larsb]
Feb 18, 2010 (11:07 am)
"Oh, but not for use by Hybrid Cars. Foiled Again Am I !!!"
Are you serious? I mean, you actually sound as if you believe the BS in that ad. Say it isn't so.
#344 of 391 Re: Oh, a good one !!! [shipo]
Feb 18, 2010 (12:04 pm)
Um, yeah, that was sarcasm.....
#345 of 391 Re: Oh, a good one !!! [larsb]
Feb 18, 2010 (12:17 pm)
Thanks, that's good to know.
#346 of 391 Re: Oh, a good one !!! [shipo]
Feb 23, 2010 (6:22 pm)
Yeah, your car already has one of those, it's called a voltage regulator.
#347 of 391 Re: Oh, a good one !!! [larsb]
Feb 25, 2010 (3:16 pm)
lars, people here just aren't used to you being humorous.
Mar 08, 2010 (8:34 am)
This is a good development. Just a lab gizmo until they figure out how to put it into production vehicles.
Ultra-Efficient Gas Engine Passes Test - A novel fuel-injection system achieves 64 miles per gallon.
Transonic Combustion, a startup based in Camarillo, CA, has developed a fuel-injection system it says can improve the efficiency of gasoline engines by more than 50 percent. A test vehicle equipped with the technology gets 64 miles per gallon in highway driving, which is far better than more costly gas-electric hybrids, such as the Prius, which gets 48 miles per gallon on the highway.
Efficient exotic: Transonic Combustion put its new fuel-injection technology into this sports car, which weighs about as much as a Toyota Prius hybrid and has similar aerodynamics. Itís not a hybrid, but it gets better gas mileage than a Prius.
The key is heating and pressurizing gasoline before injecting it into the combustion chamber, says Mike Rocke, Transonic's vice president of business development. This puts it into a supercritical state that allows for very fast and clean combustion, which in turn decreases the amount of fuel needed to propel a vehicle. The company also treats the gasoline with a catalyst that "activates" it, partially oxidizing it to enhance combustion.
The technology is one of many being developed to squeeze more efficiency out of existing engines to meet new fuel economy standards and other regulations--without making vehicles more expensive. "It's a time of renaissance for internal combustion engines," says William Green, a professor of chemical engineering at MIT. Improvements include smaller engines boosted with turbocharging, improved valve timing, and direct injection, in which fuel is injected directly into the combustion chamber rather than into an adjacent port. He says Transonic's approach "may be a promising way to improve on conventional direct injection."
#349 of 391 Re: wow [larsb]
Mar 08, 2010 (9:02 am)
Interesting. Certainly in a reputable publication. I'll file this under "I'll believe it when I see it tested by others while meeting all pollution regs." I struggle to understand how it would get 50% increases in economy without addressing the major thermal losses that cause IC engines to get poor energy outputs for the energy released by the burning gas. It's not like 1/3 of the gas leaves the combustion chamber is unburnt.
#350 of 391 Re: wow [larsb]
Mar 08, 2010 (9:42 am)
Sounds super high tech; doesn't it. But the thing is that Smokey Unick did essentially the same thing to a 4 cylinder Pontiac about 25 years ago, and got the same 50% mileage increase; when he installed a supercharger, a smaller radiator, and a heat exchanger on that motor. The supercharger was used to pressurize the air fuel mixture; and the heat exchanger recycled the normally spent heat from the radiator to more thoroughly vaporize the fuel mixture after it was compressed. He subsequently put the system up for sale; but no major company ended up buying it. Interesting how all the sidewalk superintendents are quick to praise a genius like Smokey; who so rightly earned a reputation for repeatedly outperforming the leading experts by coming up with innovations which were outside the traditional box; but when he went so far as to upset the commonly accepted belief (in 1985) that a 2.5 liter engine cannot possibly get 45 miles per gallon and produce 250 HP; these same people suddenly decided that they all knew more than Smokey. It is also curious that, when I taught engine theory at the highly respected Motorcycle Mechanics Institute in 2001, it was accepted that internal combustion engines only burn the relatively small portion of the fuel which is in a vapor state at the time the fuel enters the combustion chamber; and the typically incomplete vaporization of fuel is one of the factors which result in the fact that internal combustion engines only achieve less than 50% of the efficiency which is in their fuel. So I would like to know where Texases got his figures about it being impossible to waste 30% of the fuel in an engine. Better call Shipo for backup on that one!!!
#351 of 391 Re: wow [zaken1]
Mar 08, 2010 (9:44 am)
Not to dispute or confirm any statements, but just to make a point that is sort of related.
Any possible magic devices from the past, if they worked, would have been passed up because it was seen as an added cost that consumers wouldn't pay for. Given the upcoming CAFE regs, all of that is changing. Costly updates will become a necessity rather than a curiosity.