Re: interesting new engine design
[Re: stumpy]
#3175698
09/16/23 06:41 PM
09/16/23 06:41 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,969
North Dakota
6PakBee
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,969
North Dakota
|
The way to gauge if it will be successful is to watch the reaction of the EV promoters. If they are silent, they don't view it as a threat. If they start attacking it tooth and nail, then yes, it has promise as it could invalidate much of their agenda. This is NOT meant to be political, just realistic.
"We live in a time when intelligent people are being silenced so that stupid people won't be offended".
|
|
|
Re: interesting new engine design
[Re: Jer]
#3175728
09/16/23 10:07 PM
09/16/23 10:07 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,918
Between Houston & Galveston TX
SattyNoCar
Smarter than no class Flappergass by a mile
|
Smarter than no class Flappergass by a mile
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,918
Between Houston & Galveston TX
|
LINKY directly to engine It looks promising, but I question the acceptance of 160 torque and 170hp. Look at how many vehicles running around now with 300 or more horsepower and enough torque to rip your head off. Unless it produces insane MPG numbers will the American consumer be ready to go back to ho-hum again? This seems more suited for the European market.  Per the article you linked - "Two modules make for 31.8 kg (70 pounds) (total weight), output of 320 horsepower and 340 pound-feet (460 Nm). Just to put things in perspective, Toyota’s 2JZ GTE engine makes 330 horsepower in its most powerful factory trim and weighs in at a whopping, by comparison, 269 kg (592 pounds), while BMW’s B58 engine has a dry weight of 139 kg (306 pounds)." 320 hp from an engine weighing less than two bags of cheap kitty litter is pretty impressive. I skimmed too fast. I quoted single module, you quoted dual module. Dual is more impressive. My bad. 
John
The dream is dead, long live the dream.......😥
|
|
|
Re: interesting new engine design
[Re: TJP]
#3175830
09/17/23 01:59 PM
09/17/23 01:59 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2021
Posts: 1,153
rust belt
Moparite
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2021
Posts: 1,153
rust belt
|
has the potential to run on hydrogen fuel you can run any IC engine on Hydrogen. Problem is it is dangerous to transport and highly flammable(bomb on wheels). Problem isn't the engine the fuel to run it is.
|
|
|
Re: interesting new engine design
[Re: Moparite]
#3175868
09/17/23 05:49 PM
09/17/23 05:49 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 536
SW CO
HemiSportFury
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 536
SW CO
|
No discussion in the article on emissions. NOx could be a deal killer. If not they will come up with some other excuse. It's still an IC and all ICs are bad.
'64 Sport Fury, 528 Hemi, FiTech EFI, 4-speed, 4.10 Dana 60
'57 Belvedere 2dr sedan, current project in process
'19 Cherokee Trail Hawk Elite
'03 Ram 2500 CTD HO, 6-speed 214,000 miles and still going strong
|
|
|
Re: interesting new engine design
[Re: SattyNoCar]
#3175924
09/17/23 09:59 PM
09/17/23 09:59 PM
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,908
South Bend
John Brown
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,908
South Bend
|
LINKY directly to engine It looks promising, but I question the acceptance of 160 torque and 170hp. Look at how many vehicles running around now with 300 or more horsepower and enough torque to rip your head off. Unless it produces insane MPG numbers will the American consumer be ready to go back to ho-hum again? This seems more suited for the European market. Per the article you linked - "Two modules make for 31.8 kg (70 pounds) (total weight), output of 320 horsepower and 340 pound-feet (460 Nm). Just to put things in perspective, Toyota’s 2JZ GTE engine makes 330 horsepower in its most powerful factory trim and weighs in at a whopping, by comparison, 269 kg (592 pounds), while BMW’s B58 engine has a dry weight of 139 kg (306 pounds)." 320 hp from an engine weighing less than two bags of cheap kitty litter is pretty impressive. I skimmed too fast. I quoted single module, you quoted dual module. Dual is more impressive. My bad. If two is good, four would be even moar better. 140 pounds, 640 HP. Ooooooh.
July 19th should be "Drive Like Rockford Day". R.I.P. Jimmie.
|
|
|
Re: interesting new engine design
[Re: Moparite]
#3176237
09/19/23 08:09 AM
09/19/23 08:09 AM
|
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 6,558
nowhere
Sniper
master
|
master
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 6,558
nowhere
|
you can run any IC engine on Hydrogen. Problem is it is dangerous to transport and highly flammable(bomb on wheels). Problem isn't the engine the fuel to run it is.
lol bomb on wheels Just stop. In use, gasoline is more dangerous.
|
|
|
Re: interesting new engine design
[Re: 360view]
#3176330
09/19/23 02:20 PM
09/19/23 02:20 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,487
Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,487
Kalispell Mt.
|
The article curiously avoids giving hard numbers on compression ratio and thermal efficiency, and instead emphasizes high maximum power from a small size foot print, similar to two stroke engines.
Perhaps the very high supercharger pressures are due to inherent compression ratio limitations.
Turbine engines have high max power from a small package with smooth vibration characteristics,
but so far have not exceeded the very best thermal efficiency a piston engine can reach.
It might be deliberate “misdirection” by the article authors to not compare this design to a same size/same weight modern turbine.
Automotive engine manufactures have long complained that aircraft turbine engines can legally emit far more NOx.
Perhaps we should stay silent about this
or we might see cruise missiles fitted with catalytic converters? I was kinda wondering the same thing, I thought to myself "is it limited to 3 to 1 compression so they have to run 100 PSI of boost?"
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
|
|
