Engine gets 100mpg in a fox chasis

[Crumpler]

My Vette had a hard time coasting from 80mph to 50 mph and averaging instant MPG over 90. NO WAY a car with a gas powered engine is getting 100mpg unless it weighs 600 pounds

[SDK]

To put it plumbing terms

Here is the traditional water heater

First hour rating = 40
Cost installed $1000
Efficiency 78%

Tankless Water Heaters (Green Movement is pushing these)
First hour rating less = about 4 gallons per minute constant
Cost installed $3,500
Efficiency 82% - $94

Cyclone Water heaters (Which no one knows about)
First hour rating = 126 gallons
Cost installed $2,500
Efficiency 90%-95%


The third option is the best choice but no one really knows about them because the push is on for tankless.

I think the same is true for cars and the push is for electric.

[xjfish]

It is impossible for a V8 over 2L to get 100mpg on gasoline. Carb/Port Fuel/Ultra lean direct injection, not possible.

A 2nd gen Prius can get 100mpg with a kit. How? It runs off fucking batteries more.

The dude with the 100mpg 500hp fox is completely full of shit! And he made national news. Media is stupid.

[SDK]

I don't know why hydrogen never got off the ground. Water my be the issue for creating the hydrogen.

[xjfish]

I don't know why hydrogen never got off the ground. Water my be the issue for creating the hydrogen.

Cost.

[SDK]

Cost.

The cost of the Hydrogen? I guess it takes fossil fuels to make electric to make hydrogen.

[xjfish]

The cost of the Hydrogen? I guess it takes fossil fuels to make electric to make hydrogen.

More so the cost of safe hydrogen compatible vehicle and availability. Also what you said. I think its still a possibility to see production hydrogen vehicles down the road, but not for awhile. Cost of energy from hydrogen itself is currently about the same as energy from gas, if i remember right.

[68GTO]

Im not in that business.

But I assume the there are more limitations on the people who are, then just what is physically possible. Here are a few

Materials
Present manufacturing techniques
Political pressure (To go green, electric)
Cost


Example:
Maybe ceramic heads with 50 to 1 compression. The higher octane gas would be worth it for the 100 mpg but the $50,000 engine would not work out.

No.

The stoichiometric air-fuel ratio is the mass ratio at which all the fuel and all the air are combined in the combustion process. For gasoline fueled, spark ignited engines, the air-fuel ratio is 14.7-1.

[xjfish]

No.

The stoichiometric air-fuel ratio is the mass ratio at which all the fuel and all the air are combined in the combustion process. For gasoline fueled, spark ignited engines, the air-fuel ratio is 14.7-1.

About 23:1 with new direct injection technology. Spark ignited only for cold starts

For standard, dump it down the intake and let it slosh in through the intake valve(s) gassers, yup 14.7-1 is ideal.

[SDK]

No.

The stoichiometric air-fuel ratio is the mass ratio at which all the fuel and all the air are combined in the combustion process. For gasoline fueled, spark ignited engines, the air-fuel ratio is 14.7-1.

You ignored everything else I wrote and only replies to the for instance portion of my post. For that you loose 2 points.

[68GTO]

You ignored everything else I wrote and only replies to the for instance portion of my post. For that you loose 2 points.

Incorrect. I ignored only the ancillary points that did not address the inherent weakness of the fuel's ability to combine with atmosphere and combust efficiently. All of the other things aside, you're still left with this. Wishful thinking and postulating about potential, future, Sci-fi discoveries to come do not address this current claim. Therefore, I direct you back to the claims being made of 100 MPG on gasoline in the aforementioned car. +3 points

[Southern]

<<Doesnt care.

[SDK]

Don't worry I have enough for the both of us.

I guess the thread was about a standard vehicle with a typical driveline. So the only modification to achieve the 100mpg is the engine itself. Also an engine that runs on pump gas.

I still think there is enough energy in the gas to do it. I just don't think it is practical or cost effective for it. I don't think you proved it impossible. In fact the article says most of the heat energy is lost. A secondary combustion chamber or a complicated swirl in the cylinder head may capture more heat but be very expensive to make.

In the water heater example they capture more heat with a swirled flue tube. The obstacle of the swirled flue tube is to glass coat the interior of the water heater and all parts of the flue. The techniques for doing this are getting better all the time and the price is reasonable now.

[SDK]

I saw a Lifetime movie where a guy invented a car with solar panels on the hood that did something to the motor and he was getting humongous gas mileage.

[GoldenPlump]

68GTO if you know so god damn much why aren't you a scientist or engineer making buku money?

Post up some damn credentials for the shit you spew, or go back to working in the jet propulsion lab if you indeed are as smart as you'd like us all to think.