🚀 go-pugleaf

Franc Zabkar wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 10:59:46 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
> put finger to keyboard and composed:
> 
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:45:34 -0700, Joerg
>> <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The concept of electric cars is a whole lot older than 30 years:
>>> http://www.thoroughbred-cars.com/electric.htm
>> I have a repair manual for an electric delivery vehicle made prior to
>> WWI.  It was used for delivering milk to homes (no refridgeration) in
>> the pre-dawn hours.  Since noise was then considered a serious
>> problem, electric delivery vehicles were the only option.
>>
>> Note that there are several Li-Ion conversions for Prius hybrids
>> effectively making them electric cars.  
>> <http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34422/113/>
>> The new battery and plug-in charger extends the battery only range of
>> the Prius from about 7 miles to about 20 miles.
>>
>> However, gas, electric, and such will soon be out of fashion.  What we
>> need is a nuclear powered automobile.:
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon>
> 
> Australia has plenty of gas. Maybe this car would be a viable option:
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Turbine_Car
> 
> "The fourth-generation Chrysler turbine engine ran at up to 60,000 rpm
> could use diesel fuel, unleaded gasoline, kerosene, JP-4 jet fuel, and
> even vegetable oil. The engine would run virtually on anything and the
> president of Mexico tested this theory by running one of the first
> cars - successfully - on tequila. No adjustments were needed to switch
> from one to another. The engine had a fifth as many moving parts as a
> piston unit (60 rather than 300). The turbine was spinning on simple
> sleeve bearings for vibration-free running. Its simplicity offered the
> potential for long life, and because no combustion contaminants enter
> engine oil, no oil changes were considered necessary. The 1963
> Turbine's engine generated 130 brake horsepower (97 kW) and an instant
> 425 pound-feet (576 N�m) of torque at stall speed, making it good for
> 0-60 mph in 12 seconds ..."
> 

Rover had built a similar car but AFAIR only one. The manager once let 
another guy whom he'd picked up somewhere take it for a spin and he was 
thoroughly impressed. But as usual the gas mileage was quite terrible. 
Probably there is a lot of load change lag as well. Somehow a great 
concept if one could get the NOX under control but nowadays all that is 
water under the bridge anyhow.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.