Some MPG boosters we should have in cars now, but don't

Discussion in 'The Coffee Shop ~ Chit Chat' started by PantheraUncia, Aug 13, 2012.

  1. PantheraUncia

    PantheraUncia Active Member 3 Years 1000 Posts

    So cars and trucks are not the only vehicles that use fossil fuels and I have been looking at different technologies, some old and some new to improve MPG's.

    Most of these technologies if used to mod 1 car or truck are very expensive, but if it was standard on a car or truck that was produced in the hundreds of thousands, the cost is much more affordable.

    Up first is the technology behind diesel locomotives:

    The important stuff starts on page 4 through 8.

    To take this information and apply it to a silverado:

    Why can't I have a 2 stroke 4 cyclinder engine in a 1500 silverado that takes a third the space of the of the 5.3L v8.
    Couple it with a generator that provides electricity (48volt system) that charges 6 x 8volt batteries.

    These batteries then power pancake traction motors mounted where the wheel hub and rotor should be with different gear ratio's to allow the change in miles per hour from 0 to 150 mph, etc. And then user an air powered drum brake.

    Apparently mini copper is smarter than gm and is already working on a similar system.

    Now I am not a ford fan by any means, but what the ..... has GM been doing when this was a concept truck over 5 years ago:

    You can click around for more pics, but this is the engine...... a F250 Super Duty with a V10 that is "flex fuel" when the super charger in engaged....... the second fuel is Hydrogen.​

    Next is this guy... just google Johnathan Goodwin.

    Turbine Jet engines are some of the most fuel efficient engines around. Technology at universities such as NCSU are working on "nano tubes" and nano technologies where they can build turbine engines smaller than the thickness of human hair. Taking the diesel locomotive as an example........ what if they replaced that 2 stroke v12 with 11.x L per cylinder engine with a jet turbine that was more fuel efficient.

    How about a smaller jet turbine like the one Johnathan is using that would fit in place of the 5.3L in my silverado that is really using 200 year old tech and making the people in oil rich countries richer while we complain about gass and diesel prices?

    Johnathan was invited to visit GM and their engineers told Johnathan that GM told us it was impossible to do what he did.​

    Now I wish I could find the link for the car in Australia that uses this engine, but I coudn't.....
    So here is an article from MSU in Michigan showing the same concept... Why do we need a transmission, we loose about 25% of fuel econ through the transmission.

    Auto manufacturers are wasting our time and money to offer products that basically need to be thrown in a junk yard after a few years of use because the fall apart and aren't really any better on fuel economy than they use to be 10, 15, 20 years ago.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2012
  2. KyleZ71

    KyleZ71 Rockstar 4 Years 500 Posts ROTM Winner

    as much as I love GM, it seems to me that sometimes they have their head so far up their you know what that they can't think straight. you brought up a lot of good points which I would not have thought about. the only way I see that getting changed is if congress makes them, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
  3. PantheraUncia

    PantheraUncia Active Member 3 Years 1000 Posts

    And there are minor things like, why don't they start with the 2013 models and replace all the bulbs with leds from the factory..... simple stuff like would show some level of progess from GM instead of being years behind.

    But I looked at some 2013 Silverado 1500's and quite frankly they really do not show much of a MPG improvement over the past 10 years (generations) of the 5.3L engine/transmission combination. The Hummer that Johnathan rebuilt had the 6.0L Vortec in it. ..... he is getting right around 100 MPG. Now that engine is standard in a 2500 HD Silverado.......

    How many of the 2500 HD owners would kill to have 100 MPG in their 3/4 Ton pickup's? over the what? 13-15 they get now? with technology that you can get NOW, not 50 years from now?

Share This Page

Newest Gallery Photos