Pennock's Fiero Forum
  General Fiero Chat
  Gasoline engines -- the walking dead (Page 2)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Email This Page to Someone! | Printable Version

This topic is 3 pages long:  1   2   3 
Previous Page | Next Page
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Gasoline engines -- the walking dead by formulaWA
Started on: 11-30-2012 10:35 PM
Replies: 98 (2182 views)
Last post by: dobey on 01-19-2014 10:22 PM
olejoedad
Member
Posts: 14015
From: Clarendon Twp., MI
Registered: May 2004


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 10:56 AM Click Here to See the Profile for olejoedadClick Here to Email olejoedadSend a Private Message to olejoedadEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by mattwa:

This may be affected for the better/worse by the greedy gas companies wanting more billions of dollars in revenue.


C'mon, Matt, you do realize that the government makes a LOT more off of oil than the greedy oil companies, don't you?

Corporations are not greedy, they serve only to produce profit through the trade of goods or services for money. The better the corporation is at achieving its set goals, the more profitable it is.

Why is efficiency bad?
IP: Logged
lou_dias
Member
Posts: 5070
From: Warwick, RI
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 65
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 11:04 AM Click Here to See the Profile for lou_diasClick Here to Email lou_diasSend a Private Message to lou_diasEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Engines make great generators:

http://geeknizer.com/worlds...llest-petrol-engine/

All you got to do is shrink the engine and also extract more electricity from the heat it generates and it can be used to recharge the battery for much less gasoline than is used right now. http://www.tegpower.com/

[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 12-03-2012).]

IP: Logged
2.5
Member
Posts: 40899
From: Southern MN
Registered: May 2007


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 178
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 11:11 AM Click Here to See the Profile for 2.5Send a Private Message to 2.5Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post


*

I thought for sure thuis thread was about how really no cars would run because all the fuel would have gone bad, in the TV show The Walking Dead.
IP: Logged
dobey
Member
Posts: 11572
From:
Registered: Sep 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 371
User Banned

Report this Post12-03-2012 11:38 AM Click Here to See the Profile for dobeySend a Private Message to dobeyEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:
C'mon, Matt, you do realize that the government makes a LOT more off of oil than the greedy oil companies, don't you?

Corporations are not greedy, they serve only to produce profit through the trade of goods or services for money. The better the corporation is at achieving its set goals, the more profitable it is.

Why is efficiency bad?


So naïve.
IP: Logged
olejoedad
Member
Posts: 14015
From: Clarendon Twp., MI
Registered: May 2004


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 12:58 PM Click Here to See the Profile for olejoedadClick Here to Email olejoedadSend a Private Message to olejoedadEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by dobey:


So naïve.


So condescending.

Sorry I can only neg you once.
IP: Logged
mptighe
Member
Posts: 3318
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Aug 2009


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 122
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 01:16 PM Click Here to See the Profile for mptigheSend a Private Message to mptigheEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by dobey:


So naïve.


For someone so sure of themselves, you seem to have missed out on quite a bit of info. If battery research has been dead for 20 years, no one seemed to tell Stan Ovshinsky about that. Until his death a little more than a month ago, he was one fo the premier researchers on all things energy, including new battery technology. He was also at the forefront of photovoltaics, even working on a paint that you could paint your house with that would be able to harness solar, and a film more receptive than glass for the same purpose.

You are probably right that the internal combustion gasoline engine isn't going anytime soon. Not everything you claim is right though, and your attitude in a debate certainly isn't warranted when you consider that.
IP: Logged
lou_dias
Member
Posts: 5070
From: Warwick, RI
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 65
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 01:54 PM Click Here to See the Profile for lou_diasClick Here to Email lou_diasSend a Private Message to lou_diasEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
IP: Logged
jscott1
Member
Posts: 21671
From: Houston, TX , USA
Registered: Dec 2001


Feedback score:    (15)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 415
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 02:19 PM Click Here to See the Profile for jscott1Send a Private Message to jscott1Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Pyrthian:


yup. I am starting to see them too.

I agree that battery tech wont be improving enough in 5 years. yes, the Lithium Ion is a great battery - but - nothing beats Hydrogen as energy storage.
but, Hydrogen suffers even more than less dense energy storage, like the hydrocarbon Gasoline, in that storage & delivery are sloppy & hazardous, and not something you want the "average WalMart consumer" doing on their own. It took 50 years to idiot proof our current system of gasoline delivery - and people STILL manage to fruck it up.


If you are in New Jersey or Oregon it's still considered too dangerous for you to fill up your own car. lol

I've gone full circle on Hydrogen. I thought it was great, then I bought into the anti-hydrogen folks, and now I'm coming back around. The key is that it is an energy storage system. By itself, hydrogen is not a fuel, but neither is electricity. What it buys you is a clean way to store energy that has higher density than batteries. Not nearly as dense as gasoline, but as you say we have over 100 years of experience handling gasoline. Still there are the occasional fires at gas stations.

Electricity and Hydrogen are attractive in that you have the option to generate it from multiple energy sources, (coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, wind, hydro, etc). In theory this makes our transportation system far less reliant on imported oil, or oil of any kind. For that reason alone I think it's a good thing.

As for the charging stations you see popping up. It's more for show than anything. They have to be paid by government grants because I can't imagine the business model where someone parks for an hour and I get 9 cents for the kilowatt hour they used. And level 1 charging is a joke anyway. So I'm at the Cracker-barrel having lunch, and I park for an hour and I get that kilowatt hour, now I have enough energy to drive for what 3 to 4 miles? For charging stations to work they have to be far more common than gas stations...they have to be everywhere I ever intend to park my car. And they have to be level III or at minimum level II. Using today's charging model I have to stop at Cracker-barrel for a couple of hours every day just to make it home safely.
IP: Logged
dobey
Member
Posts: 11572
From:
Registered: Sep 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 371
User Banned

Report this Post12-03-2012 02:25 PM Click Here to See the Profile for dobeySend a Private Message to dobeyEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by mptighe:
For someone so sure of themselves, you seem to have missed out on quite a bit of info. If battery research has been dead for 20 years, no one seemed to tell Stan Ovshinsky about that. Until his death a little more than a month ago, he was one fo the premier researchers on all things energy, including new battery technology. He was also at the forefront of photovoltaics, even working on a paint that you could paint your house with that would be able to harness solar, and a film more receptive than glass for the same purpose.

You are probably right that the internal combustion gasoline engine isn't going anytime soon. Not everything you claim is right though, and your attitude in a debate certainly isn't warranted when you consider that.


I didn't say battery research has been dead. I said that most of the advancements in the realm of battery-using devices has been lower consumption. Sure there have been some improvements in battery technology as well, but nothing terribly significant. It's the lower energy consumption that made things like the great leap from dumb cell phones to today's smart phones possible.

And I didn't realize this was a debate. It's a public forum. I'm merely pointing out among all the discussion that EVs are going nowhere because batteries are not very great, that batteries aren't the future and it is unlikely any great leaps forward will be made in storage of electrical energy in the next several years. It is much more likely for great leaps forward to occur in alternative energy sources, however, and that is where interesting research is happening.

So stop being so dramatic. I'm simply stating things as they are. I really don't give a damn if you like it or not. The vast majority of people in the US will blatantly ignore facts staring them in the face, and those numbers do not transfer nonproportionately to Internet forums.
IP: Logged
dobey
Member
Posts: 11572
From:
Registered: Sep 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 371
User Banned

Report this Post12-03-2012 02:35 PM Click Here to See the Profile for dobeySend a Private Message to dobeyEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:
So condescending.

Sorry I can only neg you once.


Yes you are. I guess I'll have to repay you the favor. And this is exactly what's wrong with the ratings system on this site. People like you will use it simply because you disagree with someone or don't "like" them, regardless of whether the person provides useful information about the primary purpose of this forum; which is not to satisfy your dramatic whims. Every section on this forum isn't Totally O/T (which is where this thread probably really belongs anyway), even though some of you treat it like it is.

I'm sorry, but Corporations do not exist to better mankind. If you think oil companies raking in the profits they have been over the last several years is due to their "increased efficiency" or because they are somehow providing a good product and/or service, you are ignorant. The only goal of a Corporation is to make profit. There are no other goals. Manipulation is one very important way to achieve that goal. You don't need to look very far to see just what extremes Corporations (and obviously the people who run them) will go to to make that profit.
IP: Logged
mptighe
Member
Posts: 3318
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Aug 2009


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 122
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 03:01 PM Click Here to See the Profile for mptigheSend a Private Message to mptigheEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by dobey:
I didn't say battery research has been dead. I said that most of the advancements in the realm of battery-using devices has been lower consumption. Sure there have been some improvements in battery technology as well, but nothing terribly significant. It's the lower energy consumption that made things like the great leap from dumb cell phones to today's smart phones possible.

And I didn't realize this was a debate. It's a public forum. I'm merely pointing out among all the discussion that EVs are going nowhere because batteries are not very great, that batteries aren't the future and it is unlikely any great leaps forward will be made in storage of electrical energy in the next several years. It is much more likely for great leaps forward to occur in alternative energy sources, however, and that is where interesting research is happening.

So stop being so dramatic. I'm simply stating things as they are. I really don't give a damn if you like it or not. The vast majority of people in the US will blatantly ignore facts staring them in the face, and those numbers do not transfer nonproportionately to Internet forums.


I'm not being dramatic, you are. When you stoop to personal insults to make your point and use condescension in your choice of words, you're attempting to be dramatic. I simply called you on it. You're stating things as you believe them to be, not necessarily as they are. I can go and quote where you've now contradicted yourself, but honestly it's just not that important to justify the extra effort.

Your statements aren't facts, unless you post up the corroborating evidence, which you haven't. Until then, you're just another internet know it all.

**EDIT** Just because I know you're going to argue whether or not you contradicted yourself...

 
quote
Originally posted by dobey:
First of all, "making a better battery" is dead research. Any real research for improved power in the future is looking toward alternate ways to provide power, not alternate ways to store it.


Consumption has little to do with the battery, it has much more to do with the amount of draw each component of the gadget causes. This wouldn't be battery research. True battery research is very much happenning on how to more efficiently store larger amounts of energy, and is still happenning.

[This message has been edited by mptighe (edited 12-03-2012).]

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
dobey
Member
Posts: 11572
From:
Registered: Sep 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 371
User Banned

Report this Post12-03-2012 03:50 PM Click Here to See the Profile for dobeySend a Private Message to dobeyEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by mptighe:
I'm not being dramatic, you are. When you stoop to personal insults to make your point and use condescension in your choice of words, you're attempting to be dramatic. I simply called you on it. You're stating things as you believe them to be, not necessarily as they are. I can go and quote where you've now contradicted yourself, but honestly it's just not that important to justify the extra effort.

Your statements aren't facts, unless you post up the corroborating evidence, which you haven't. Until then, you're just another internet know it all.

**EDIT** Just because I know you're going to argue whether or not you contradicted yourself...

quote
Originally posted by dobey:
First of all, "making a better battery" is dead research. Any real research for improved power in the future is looking toward alternate ways to provide power, not alternate ways to store it.

Consumption has little to do with the battery, it has much more to do with the amount of draw each component of the gadget causes. This wouldn't be battery research. True battery research is very much happenning on how to more efficiently store larger amounts of energy, and is still happenning.


Oh, sorry, I moved on with my life, and the conversation, since hyperv6 already pointed out contradiction to that "dead research" comment. But you seem to be stuck on it, and willfully ignoring everything I've stated since then; or just arguing for the sake of arguing.

And the "I'm not, you are" thing is played out. But if we're going to be six year olds about it, let's do it right. I didn't know it was condescending to call a naïve comment, naïve. I simply called it as it is. If I wanted to be condescending, I would be. Of course it likely wouldn't get noticed on here. (See, that is how one would be condescending. And yes, it was only an example. I'm not actually trying to be condescending to you. Just in case it wasn't clear, since this is a forum on the Internet, and not a bunch of guys having beers at the pub and talking about cars.) And I made no personal insults. I called the dramatic replies to my post dramatic. That is all.

IP: Logged
mptighe
Member
Posts: 3318
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Aug 2009


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 122
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 04:09 PM Click Here to See the Profile for mptigheSend a Private Message to mptigheEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by dobey:


Oh, sorry, I moved on with my life, and the conversation, since hyperv6 already pointed out contradiction to that "dead research" comment. But you seem to be stuck on it, and willfully ignoring everything I've stated since then; or just arguing for the sake of arguing.

And the "I'm not, you are" thing is played out. But if we're going to be six year olds about it, let's do it right. I didn't know it was condescending to call a naïve comment, naïve. I simply called it as it is. If I wanted to be condescending, I would be. Of course it likely wouldn't get noticed on here. (See, that is how one would be condescending. And yes, it was only an example. I'm not actually trying to be condescending to you. Just in case it wasn't clear, since this is a forum on the Internet, and not a bunch of guys having beers at the pub and talking about cars.) And I made no personal insults. I called the dramatic replies to my post dramatic. That is all.


You JUST made a comment (to me) that you never said it was dead, so I showed you that you indeed had. Now I'm "stuck on it" because I responded to a comment you made to me, even after someone else apparently pointed something out to you which only slightly coincides with my reason (again I was responding to a comment you made to me)? Umm...ok.

I'm calling your behavior as a whole condescending. Overall, any time you get into an argument that I've witnessed, it goes this way. I'm not here to nitpick, it really isn't that big of a deal to me. I get irritated when people take criticism or disagreement to a level they wouldn't dream of doing to someone's face, but for some reason think is perfectly acceptable online. When it catches my attention I call it out.

And again, you weren't correct in some of your statements, which doesn't justify the condescension. That's all I am saying, but you can try to make this be about whatever else you want.

[This message has been edited by mptighe (edited 12-03-2012).]

IP: Logged
dobey
Member
Posts: 11572
From:
Registered: Sep 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 371
User Banned

Report this Post12-03-2012 04:35 PM Click Here to See the Profile for dobeySend a Private Message to dobeyEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by mptighe:
You JUST made a comment (to me) that you never said it was dead, so I showed you that you indeed had. Now I'm "stuck on it" because I responded to a comment you made to me, even after someone else apparently pointed something out to you which only slightly coincides with my reason (again I was responding to a comment you made to me)? Umm...ok.

I'm calling your behavior as a whole condescending. Overall, any time you get into an argument that I've witnessed, it goes this way. I'm not here to nitpick, it really isn't that big of a deal to me. I get irritated when people take criticism or disagreement to a level they wouldn't dream of doing to someone's face, but for some reason think is perfectly acceptable online. When it catches my attention I call it out.

And again, you weren't correct in some of your statements, which doesn't justify the condescension. That's all I am saying, but you can try to make this be about whatever else you want.


Now who's making personal insults? Again, I have not been condescending at all.

And for the record, I don't act any differently on-line or in person. If I think you're an idiot, I will point out how you are an idiot if necessary. If you're wrong, I'll tell you you're wrong. If you're being naïve, I'll say your comment is naïve. I don't care who you are, what you look like, or what your situation is. I don't take criticism or disagreement to a different level either way.

However, you have clearly overreacted to what I said some time ago. So I said "battery research is dead." Big deal. Latin is dead too. But some people still speak it. Other people on this forum constantly overreact to everything people say, too. It's pretty ridiculous. But I'm sure I'm not the first or last person on this forum that people are going to go making wild assertions about on a personal level because of disagreeing, or misunderstanding one's use of proper spelling or think critically or whatever.
IP: Logged
mptighe
Member
Posts: 3318
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Aug 2009


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 122
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 04:45 PM Click Here to See the Profile for mptigheSend a Private Message to mptigheEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by dobey:


Now who's making personal insults? Again, I have not been condescending at all.

And for the record, I don't act any differently on-line or in person. If I think you're an idiot, I will point out how you are an idiot if necessary. If you're wrong, I'll tell you you're wrong. If you're being naïve, I'll say your comment is naïve. I don't care who you are, what you look like, or what your situation is. I don't take criticism or disagreement to a different level either way.

However, you have clearly overreacted to what I said some time ago. So I said "battery research is dead." Big deal. Latin is dead too. But some people still speak it. Other people on this forum constantly overreact to everything people say, too. It's pretty ridiculous. But I'm sure I'm not the first or last person on this forum that people are going to go making wild assertions about on a personal level because of disagreeing, or misunderstanding one's use of proper spelling or think critically or whatever.


I still haven't personally insulted you. Commenting about your behavior towards others is not the same as calling you a name. Some of the statements you made were incorrect (and no, this isn't just about that one statement you want to dwell on, you've made several incorrect statements in this thread), but you were acting like you were some kind of authority. I'm not bent out of shape about you in the least so I don't see how I over-reacted by saying what I did. I've earned my red, as have you. Feel free to earn more and chalk it up to everyone else on the forum being "idiots", naive, etc.
IP: Logged
dobey
Member
Posts: 11572
From:
Registered: Sep 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 371
User Banned

Report this Post12-03-2012 05:00 PM Click Here to See the Profile for dobeySend a Private Message to dobeyEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by mptighe:
I still haven't personally insulted you. Commenting about your behavior towards others is not the same as calling you a name. Some of the statements you made were incorrect (and no, this isn't just about that one statement you want to dwell on, you've made several incorrect statements in this thread), but you were acting like you were some kind of authority. I'm not bent out of shape about you in the least so I don't see how I over-reacted by saying what I did. I've earned my red, as have you. Feel free to earn more and chalk it up to everyone else on the forum being "idiots", naive, etc.


You personally insulted me, as much as you claim I have personally insulted anyone else in this thread, if not more so.

If any statements I made are incorrect, please feel free to correct them. I am not dwelling on any one statement. I made a statement, and you (and perhaps others) chose the incorrect definition of a word which I said, to use as an argument that I am somehow incorrect on that point.

If you haven't over-reacted then at least please stop trying to twist what I said around like you're competing against me for some political office, and stop making assumptions about me.
IP: Logged
hyperv6
Member
Posts: 5440
From: Clinton, OH, USA
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 05:41 PM Click Here to See the Profile for hyperv6Send a Private Message to hyperv6Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Let just keep to the topic here as this has been a fun debate.

The bottom line is electrics are here and every major MFG will offer them and will continue to invest in them. They will remain a small market but there will be growth over the years. The hope by the industry is that electrics will get o 20% around 2030.

We only have to look back at the start of the gas auto and how many said it would never pass up the horse. It was too complicated, expensive and there were no places to get fuel. [note many were going to drug stores and making their own]. It took till the mid 20's before the prices dropped and reliability increased.

In the long run we will have a segment of choices of electric vehicles and they will keep improving. But the majority of the market will remain gasoline as oil even if it goes up will still be cheaper than most fuels.

The lack of a engergy plan for this country has cost us. Neither side wants to take a stand on a energy plan and that will remain an issue.

I still say that getting corperations to work with well invested NASA could bring a new on rush of technology that would help in many areas. Even if it is not ever used in space the best minds working together have always reaped the best benefits.

Just look at what 2 men from GM did with NASA on the rover. Not only did they come up with a electric vehicle to work in one of the harshest elements but they figured a way to pack it on a space ship with skin as thin as foil to get it there. This kind of work has been lost and there is little oversite to much of what is going on now. Too many companies are just looking good on paper and are frauds in real life.
IP: Logged
MadMark
Member
Posts: 2935
From: Owosso, Michigan, USA
Registered: Feb 2010


Feedback score: (4)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 06:47 PM Click Here to See the Profile for MadMarkClick Here to Email MadMarkSend a Private Message to MadMarkEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I almost hate to post on this topic, but I have had some experience with what I call low energy vehicles. I was a long time member of the IHPVA and competed and won many races over the years. I got out of that because of the politics that came into the organization. I also worked as an advisor to a local high school with their HPV program which morphed into an electric vehicle program and then into a solar vehicle program. I also worked at GM's steering gear plant with the engineers who developed the electric power steering on the EV1.

To me an electric drive system is a very good platform to work from. You can run just off of batteries, you can run off of batteries and a gasoline powered generator, you can run it with a fuel cell and sometime in the future you will be able to use induction power to go down the highway. Personally my choice would be for something like the platform that GM has developed and tested that looks like a surfboard and has electric motors to drive each wheel. Then you can add some amount of battery power to assist with acceleration and use a small gasoline powered generator that is highly efficient to drive the car down the road and using the small battery to help with the acceleration and dynamic braking to recover some of the energy from slowing down. So I think something like this will be coming from car manufacturers in the near future.

One thing is for sure though. That for cars to become efficient enough to significantly reduce energy consumption by 50 to 75% you need to make them smaller and lighter and more aerodynamic. It doesn't really make any difference what the fuel is if we still want to maintain the same size and weight of vehicles, we won't gain much in energy savings. Things like the Smart 4/2 might end up being a large vehicle, but they had better be a whole lot more economical to operate than that silly little thing. I can get over 30 mpg in my Impala and the 4/2 might get slightly over 40 mpg. Not really what I would call a leap forward.

One of the reasons that electric powered cars of today are cheaper to run that gasoline powered ones is that you have a much more efficient method of extracting the energy in an electrical generating plant, whether it is coal, natural gas or nuclear powered. Therefore the price per unit of energy is lower even when you consider the extra cost of transmission.
IP: Logged
Gokart Mozart
Member
Posts: 12143
From: Metro Detroit
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 159
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 07:34 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Gokart MozartClick Here to visit Gokart Mozart's HomePageSend a Private Message to Gokart MozartEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by 2.5:
*

I thought for sure thuis thread was about how really no cars would run because all the fuel would have gone bad, in the TV show The Walking Dead.


In either case this should be in to/t
IP: Logged
Darth Fiero
Member
Posts: 5888
From: Waterloo, Indiana
Registered: Oct 2002


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 360
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 08:17 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Darth FieroClick Here to visit Darth Fiero's HomePageClick Here to Email Darth FieroSend a Private Message to Darth FieroEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
The other day while I was at the tire shop waiting for some tires to get put on, I picked up a car magazine and started reading an article about modern diesel engines and one in particular that was in a 2013 Porsche Cayenne. The Cayenne has a 3.0-liter turbo-diesel V-6 and eight-speed automatic; the engine makes 240hp and 406 ft/lbs of torque. EPA fuel economy is 19 city, 29hwy - IN A 4800 lb SUV!

Every time you turn around we are finding more oil inside our borders. At last estimate, we have more than 300 years of an oil supply at current usage levels JUST INSIDE NORTH AMERICAN BORDERS. All this talk about running out of oil is complete BS. There's even an old theory being talked about more and more these days that says NEW oil is being constantly produced in the earth's crust and it may not be just a dwindling amount like we used to believe. Think of that; OIL: The new renewable resource.

Regardless of supply, one thing is for sure…I can't eat oil. I can eat corn, beans, and sugar. More and more farmland these days is being used to grow crops that get turned into ethanol. As a result, the price of food has skyrocketed. It seems foolish to me that we would use land and resources for growing fuel that could otherwise be used to feed starving people just because a group of people doesn't like oil.

Current battery technology isn't that great and it hasn't improved as much as some people would like to believe. The 500 pound gorilla in the room that nobody wants to talk about is all the strip mining and other environmental destruction that is required to produce batteries. These batteries are also extremely toxic, and battery waste should be as much of a concern as nuclear waste, IMHO. But nobody wants to talk about that. And that doesn’t even discuss what you have to do in order to charge that battery. I bet no matter where you live, if you are relying on a power grid to charge your battery, something has to burned or dammed in order to produce the electricity you need. So the entire story of environmental impact electric cars have isn’t ever considered. People think just because something isn’t being burned under their hood in order to propel their car down the road means their car is “green”. In most cases, their electric car is much more harmful to the environment than a modern gasoline or diesel powered car is.

Burning fuel in modern engines creates CO2 and H2O, and very little else. In nature, with the help of sunlight, plants convert CO2 and H2O into O2 - which is a renewable resource. I don't see why we don't use all of this otherwise "useless" oil we have just lying in the ground to drive around on - for now at least, until something better (like Mr. Fusion, for example) comes along on its own. We've already seen what happens when special interest groups and the government try to force technology. The result is just wasted money that could be otherwise saved or used to pay down the national debt.

The gasoline engine isn't dead but I don't think it is the best thing available TODAY. I think DIESEL is the near-term solution and I just wish the domestic automakers would pull their heads out of their behinds and start producing 4cyl and V6 diesels as an alternative to gasoline engines in most of their vehicles. If GM produced and sold a 1/2 ton 4WD pickup truck with a V6 diesel that made over 200hp and 400 ft/lbs of torque and it could get 30mpg hwy fuel economy; they wouldn't be able to keep them in stock!

As far as cars are concerned, the 2012 Volkswagen Passat 2.0L 4 cyl diesel with a Manual 6-speed gets 31 city / 43 hwy mpg fuel economy. That’s better than some hybrids that don’t look anywhere near as good as the Passat. Other diesel vehicle specs can be found here: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/...y+Cars,%20Station+Wa gons&srchtyp=newDslCars
IP: Logged
hyperv6
Member
Posts: 5440
From: Clinton, OH, USA
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2012 10:35 PM Click Here to See the Profile for hyperv6Send a Private Message to hyperv6Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
The sad fact of diesel is the growing issues with goverment control again. At a time and place where diesels could be a big help we now get tighter rules, poorer fuels and tanks to with fluids to meet the new emission standard on an engine that is pretty clean today to start with.

The other factor is Americans often have issues with diesels. Granted they are unfounded today but between years of old dirty buses and the horror stories of some of the Old Diesels have created a poor enviroment for those with no clue to really give them a chance.

It has gotten so bad that many aftemarket companies that make performance parts for the trucks are leaving or not offering anything for the new trucks because of the new regs. The EPA has finally scared them enough that they are not willing to take the chance. Yes even things as simple as exhaust.
IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
Gall757
Member
Posts: 10622
From: Holland, MI
Registered: Jun 2010


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post12-04-2012 10:04 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Gall757Send a Private Message to Gall757Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
One important aspect of the diesel discussion that you leave out is that North American diesel fuel has historically been dirtier than European diesel. The EPA has been trying to correct that, but the impression has already been made with the public and it will take decades to alter that. The North American fuel was so bad that newer technology diesel vehicles made in Europe could not run on the stuff. I have read that the situation is better now, but I can't say how much better.
IP: Logged
topcat
Member
Posts: 5482
From: Charleston SC
Registered: Dec 2001


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 147
Rate this member

Report this Post12-04-2012 02:14 PM Click Here to See the Profile for topcatClick Here to Email topcatSend a Private Message to topcatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I agree that battery technology is no where near what it has to be in order to make the gasoline engines obsolete, but I temper that fact with knowing that there has to be baby steps, for them to become a real viable option. I am one of the few folks that seriously considered buying a gas/electric hybrid, aka Volt. The ONLY thing that stopped me was the price for what you get. 42K for a car with little in terms of luxury and comfort is a hard pill to swallow. Now the Telsa? I can see myself paying 50K for one of those - at least if they look like anything the commercials show. When/if, a Telsa dealer opens local to me, I will definitely look into those.

Someone has to buy them for the technology to evlove...

As far as European turbo diesels, I lived over there for a stint, and fell in love with those engines. I too wish the US will put more effort into developing that technology. They burn clean has gobs of torque, get great milage and are durable.

IP: Logged
hyperv6
Member
Posts: 5440
From: Clinton, OH, USA
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-04-2012 06:19 PM Click Here to See the Profile for hyperv6Send a Private Message to hyperv6Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Gall757:

One important aspect of the diesel discussion that you leave out is that North American diesel fuel has historically been dirtier than European diesel. The EPA has been trying to correct that, but the impression has already been made with the public and it will take decades to alter that. The North American fuel was so bad that newer technology diesel vehicles made in Europe could not run on the stuff. I have read that the situation is better now, but I can't say how much better.


The diesels are much cleaner and the engines are much more efficent but the fuel is not cheap and the cost of the engines as gone up much with the new things that are required. The things the EPA want to bring in will only add to the cost. GM was not sure if they wanted to bring the Auto Diesel back but due to cost but we will soon get the Cruze Diesel.
IP: Logged
Mickey_Moose
Member
Posts: 7284
From: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Registered: May 2001


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 142
Rate this member

Report this Post12-05-2012 03:17 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Mickey_MooseClick Here to visit Mickey_Moose's HomePageClick Here to Email Mickey_MooseSend a Private Message to Mickey_MooseEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Ok, on this whole battery thing...

Yes newer devices are more efficient, but battery technology has also improved somewhat (although small). Can also tell you that battery research is far from dead, there are a large number of people working on the problem and there have been some really interesting discoveries in the last little while. The big problem here is being able scale these discoveries up and for them to become a viable option. There are even people working on super capacitors to help with battery technology as well. There is even the odd ideal out there, like using egg shells as a storage medium for super capacitors – but results have so far been impressive.

In any event I would not expect to see anything substantial in the next 5 years, maybe 15-20.
IP: Logged
engine man
Member
Posts: 5204
From: Lebanon NH
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-05-2012 03:59 PM Click Here to See the Profile for engine manClick Here to Email engine manSend a Private Message to engine manEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
why cant this be done take 50% hydrogen peroxide and a activator to power a Tesla turbine to make electricity to drive the car ? the byproduct is water and oxygen
the cost of it is about $2 a gallon on alibaba
http://www.alibaba.com/show...drogen-peroxide.html

[This message has been edited by engine man (edited 12-05-2012).]

IP: Logged
hyperv6
Member
Posts: 5440
From: Clinton, OH, USA
Registered: Mar 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-05-2012 04:50 PM Click Here to See the Profile for hyperv6Send a Private Message to hyperv6Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
The issue with better batteries are that they could be 2 years away or 32 years as if anyone comes up with something good they will not say much till it is secured under their own legal control. So much of this is clamped down anymore that most do not advertise many advancments till nearly ready for market.
IP: Logged
mitchjl22
Member
Posts: 1139
From: Boise, Idaho
Registered: Sep 2011


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-06-2012 11:05 AM Click Here to See the Profile for mitchjl22Click Here to Email mitchjl22Send a Private Message to mitchjl22Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by n7vrz:

From Teslas own web page:
62 miles of range per hour of charge

That is using the 240V charging. So the 'stop for lunch' isn't going to charge enough to make that trip across the country. I also don't know very many diners that have 240V outlets that they will let you use.
Will we have power stations across the US like we now have gas stations? Again, doubtful. My reasoning is that we are already straining the grid as it is. We have to make power somehow and most of those options are pretty much tapped out.
You can dam only so many rivers. You can only build so many coal/gas/oil/methane/(some other fuel type) plants. Look at the government regulations covering the building of these and you'll understand more.
Then there is distribution of the generated power. Another problem to over come.
I can see the near future electric car as a commuter/grocery getter, not a long distance vehicle. Not until a whole bunch of obstacles are over come. And they aren't on Teslas back to fix them.
Would I buy one? Yes, I would. If I had the money to do so. But I would not be able to use it for more than what I've already mentioned: local commute and grocery getting.


The original post is correct in saying you can stop for lunch and have it charge. Tesla is implementing a series of "superchargers" across the country. These high capacity chargers send 10,000 volts of DC current into the batteries, achieving a full charge in 30 min, giving you another 300 miles in driving range. The chargers are free to use also, if you own a certain model of the Tesla S.
IP: Logged
mkiker2089
Member
Posts: 124
From: NC
Registered: Nov 2012


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-06-2012 11:21 AM Click Here to See the Profile for mkiker2089Click Here to Email mkiker2089Send a Private Message to mkiker2089Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by mitchjl22:


The original post is correct in saying you can stop for lunch and have it charge. Tesla is implementing a series of "superchargers" across the country. These high capacity chargers send 10,000 volts of DC current into the batteries, achieving a full charge in 30 min, giving you another 300 miles in driving range. The chargers are free to use also, if you own a certain model of the Tesla S.


Nissan tried that. It destroys the batteries and voids the warranty.

You can quickcharge a Leaf at Nissan dealerships, just be prepared to lose your battery warranty and the car after only 2 years.

edit--

It's also 150 miles per 30 minute "supercharge" and their page about it doesn't make sense. How can it charge at "highway speeds"
when it's plugged in? Tesla needs to pay more attention to details. That's been their biggest problem all along. I'm surprised they weren't sued out of existence the first time he "messed up" on the price and demanded double what people had paid for their pre-ordered cars.

If you want an electric car Fiskar currently makes the best one. Honda has dabbled in at well. The answer isn't charging, it's carrying a generator on board.

[This message has been edited by mkiker2089 (edited 12-06-2012).]

IP: Logged
mitchjl22
Member
Posts: 1139
From: Boise, Idaho
Registered: Sep 2011


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-06-2012 09:46 PM Click Here to See the Profile for mitchjl22Click Here to Email mitchjl22Send a Private Message to mitchjl22Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I do believe that batteries have a 9 year warranty or better. I cont remember exactly though.
IP: Logged
Dennis LaGrua
Member
Posts: 13494
From: Hillsborough, NJ U.S.A.
Registered: May 2000


Feedback score:    (13)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 320
Rate this member

Report this Post12-07-2012 09:35 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Dennis LaGruaClick Here to Email Dennis LaGruaSend a Private Message to Dennis LaGruaEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I cannot see the gasoline engine becoming obsolete for a long time. Some estimates show an oil supply that could last over 100 years and we have a 200 year supply of coal that can be used to make gasoline if needed. A modern gasoline engine with proper maintenance can last 150,000 to 200,000 miles. Battery's can only last a short period of time before they need to be replaced. Deep cycling dramatically shortens battery life. If you are driving an electric good luck trying to find a place to plug in and charge. Average charging time for a full charge on 120V is 6-8 hours. The poster mentions driving a Tesla but that vehicle costs over $150K. A Chevy Volt costs $40K and you get 25 miles on a full charge. The gasoline engine will be with all of us through our lifetime.

------------------
" THE BLACK PARALYZER" -87GT 3800SC Series III engine, custom ZZP /Frozen Boost Intercooler setup, 3.4" Pulley, Powerlog manifold, Northstar TB, LS1 MAF, 3" Flotech Afterburner Exhaust, Autolite 104's, MSD wires, Custom CAI, 4T65eHD w. custom axles, HP Tuners VCM Suite.
"THE COLUSSUS"
87GT - ALL OUT 3.4L Turbocharged engine, Garrett Hybrid Turbo, MSD ign., modified TH125H
" ON THE LOOSE WITHOUT THE JUICE "

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
dobey
Member
Posts: 11572
From:
Registered: Sep 2001


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 371
User Banned

Report this Post12-07-2012 09:38 AM Click Here to See the Profile for dobeySend a Private Message to dobeyEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by mitchjl22:

I do believe that batteries have a 9 year warranty or better. I cont remember exactly though.


 
quote

Model S comes with a 4 year or 50,000 mile, whichever comes first, new vehicle limited warranty. An additional warranty covers the battery and varies by kilowatt hour capacity.

As energy storage capacity increases, so does the battery’s long-term mileage capability. Each battery comes with an 8-year warranty but the mileage differs.


This is from http://www.teslamotors.com/models/facts

8 years is a long time for a Li-Ion battery warranty. I suspect they will be replacing a lot of batteries over the next few years (assuming they don't just go out of business).
IP: Logged
CarverToo
Member
Posts: 374
From: Winchester, VA 22603
Registered: Apr 2009


Feedback score:    (12)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-07-2012 11:22 AM Click Here to See the Profile for CarverTooClick Here to Email CarverTooSend a Private Message to CarverTooEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Very interesting debate. lots of good points and some misconceptions as well. But we can all be certain that change is coming, and coming fast, or else...

Let's put our energies (pun intended) into making it happen. Want to get rich? Very rich?? Solve the electrical production and storage problem. OR find a real cure for male baldness!
IP: Logged
GADJet
Member
Posts: 1464
From: Star City, AR, USA
Registered: Sep 2010


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-07-2012 12:59 PM Click Here to See the Profile for GADJetSend a Private Message to GADJetEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Frizlefrak:

Here's an idea....for the next 5 years, we bump this thread monthly so it doesn't go into the archives. 60 times.

We will see if your prediction comes true.


No need.... Everyone knows the world is going to end in 2 weeks! LMBO.

Yeah, keep bumping it. Id like to see what happens in 5 years.
IP: Logged
PePe-LePu_For_2
Member
Posts: 275
From: San Ramon, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2005


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-22-2013 10:46 PM Click Here to See the Profile for PePe-LePu_For_2Send a Private Message to PePe-LePu_For_2Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Looks like you guys forgot to
BUMP!

------------------

"88 GT converted to electric drive"

IP: Logged
engine man
Member
Posts: 5204
From: Lebanon NH
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-23-2013 07:46 PM Click Here to See the Profile for engine manClick Here to Email engine manSend a Private Message to engine manEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
good looking 88 GT Electric
IP: Logged
PePe-LePu_For_2
Member
Posts: 275
From: San Ramon, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2005


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-03-2013 09:53 PM Click Here to See the Profile for PePe-LePu_For_2Send a Private Message to PePe-LePu_For_2Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Thanks
IP: Logged
MalleableList
Member
Posts: 31
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Registered: Dec 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-05-2013 02:55 AM Click Here to See the Profile for MalleableListClick Here to Email MalleableListSend a Private Message to MalleableListEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Disregard this post, lol ;>_>

[This message has been edited by MalleableList (edited 12-05-2013).]

IP: Logged
no2pencil
Member
Posts: 1494
From: Baltimore, MD
Registered: Oct 2009


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-05-2013 10:20 AM Click Here to See the Profile for no2pencilClick Here to Email no2pencilSend a Private Message to no2pencilEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by formulaWA:

Had a Tesla model S out 4 a drive today.
...
It was an amazing car.

Don't those catch on fire?

IP: Logged
formulaWA
Member
Posts: 286
From: Sumas WA
Registered: May 2004


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-06-2013 12:17 AM Click Here to See the Profile for formulaWASend a Private Message to formulaWAEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Now if this thing actually worked

E-cat sales

The future of oil would be in doubt in many different applications.

However I am deeply skeptical.
IP: Logged
Previous Page | Next Page

This topic is 3 pages long:  1   2   3 
next newest topic | next oldest topic

All times are ET (US)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Back To Main Page

Advertizing on PFF | Fiero Parts Vendors
PFF Merchandise | Fiero Gallery | Ogre's Cave
Real-Time Chat | Fiero Related Auctions on eBay



Copyright (c) 1999, C. Pennock