Gasoline vehicle with 100 MPG possible ???

[expat]

Originally Posted By: turtlevette
There's a point of diminishing returns and we're already close to it. We need to focus on allowing people to work closer to home. Its insane the traffic in and out of Boston. Why do people need to drive into the city and work in some massive very expensive building in tiny cubicles like rats?




Bingo!

I was in Vancouver last week, sitting in traffic with many others, all getting ZERO MPG!!

I was looking around trying to imagine why the occupants of the vehicles needed to be there.

My conclusion was many were office workers. Could they work from home, or closer to home?
Yes, for the most part. But still 'Face time' is important in our society.

But why do we need our offices in congested, expensive downtown areas and force our workers to pay $1 million + for a home OR commute in traffic or public transport??

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'll play...

So, no I don't believe that 100MPG in what we would term and use as a 4 seat car is possible.

I don't believe it is possible to design a gasoline car that can carry 4 average size persons at speed limit of 80 MPH and return 100 MPG, and comply with all safety and emission in US, with current technology.

As far as I know the most fuel efficient available in US that passed all regulations and can carry 4 person returns less than 50 MPG on highway. The most fuel efficient hybrid returns about 55 MPG.

I read that Quora/Newsweek article few days ago and decided to post last night. I didn't believe a "Physics Professor at UC Berkeley" can made that statement.


Originally Posted By: Shannow
... EVs can't in any way, shape of form be considered Zero Emission...it's just a feel good NIMBY boondoggle...as for hydrogen...even more so.

US, California and many other states defined a Zero Emission vehicle as the one that produces no emission at tail pipe. BEV has no tail pipe so it doesn't produce any emission, may be the tires may emit some.

US, California and few other states currently have incentives for BEV and FCV for being ZEV.

California demands a percentage of all vehicles sold in the state to be ZEV, some companies are making plug-in hybrid, BEV ... as compliance vehicles and sold them at a lost rather than buying carbon credit from Tesla.

Sources of electric to charge battery, battery manufacture and recycle ... are different story.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
1) Physics is not engineering.
2) Being a professor at a big name school, if true, doesn't mean you understand a specific area particularly well.
3) Liquid fuels are far more energy dense than batteries, even future batteries, will be.
4) I agree that hybrids are the best option, since start/stop, idling, and braking are huge energy wasters.

Diesels can be in excess of 50% thermal efficiency. Fuel cells and combined systems possibly higher. I'm stil a believer that if one understands the limitations of something like the BMW i3, the undersized engine with a battery pack is a better option than some other things, like Tesla's pure battery solution.

Then you should not talk about it. A high school drops out may talk garbage but a professor at any school shouldn't.

I don't know much about engine efficient, I don't know much about what are needed to change to improve gas mileage, but I know the basic that car companies tried very hard to improve 1-2 MPG every new car cycle of about 4-5 years, but as with current technology they could not make any gasoline car get better than 50 MPG, only hybrid can achieve that.

Even hybrid can't get over 60 MPG how a gasoline car can make 100 MPG with current technology ?

If you make a poll of whom to trust, I bet that of these two person: University Professor and a college graduate people would choose University Professor as a more knowledge person, and they would trust him more than a college graduate.

 

[turtlevette]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR


If you make a poll of whom to trust, I bet that of these two person: University Professor and a college graduate people would choose University Professor as a more knowledge person, and they would trust him more than a college graduate.


No way. A college grad that has a job and experience has had to get things done in the real world. College professors write books and papers but are not responsible for building or proving anything.

 

[Nebroch]

Develop a gas engine with 50 % thermal efficiency and drop aerodynamic drag coefficient to 0.18, and you might have a hybrid which gets appr. 80 MPG on highway and city driving. 100 MPG with traditional gas car seems very distant to me.

 

[Nate1979]

The question is what are the design restrictions that are artificially placed to reach the 100mpg target. 95mpg (E0) @ 65mph was demonstrated in an eco modded Honda Civic. http://www.aerocivic.com/

Extreme drag coefficient (
The design details to reach extreme mpg are not consumer friendly. But impossible? Just depends on what constraints you put on the design or in other words how much the consumer is willing to compromise.

 

[grampi]

Even if it was possible, nobody would buy it because they think they gotta be driving around in an apartment build-sized vehicle...

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Originally Posted By: Shannow
... EVs can't in any way, shape of form be considered Zero Emission...it's just a feel good NIMBY boondoggle...as for hydrogen...even more so.

US, California and many other states defined a Zero Emission vehicle as the one that produces no emission at tail pipe. BEV has no tail pipe so it doesn't produce any emission, may be the tires may emit some.

US, California and few other states currently have incentives for BEV and FCV for being ZEV.

California demands a percentage of all vehicles sold in the state to be ZEV, some companies are making plug-in hybrid, BEV ... as compliance vehicles and sold them at a lost rather than buying carbon credit from Tesla.

Sources of electric to charge battery, battery manufacture and recycle ... are different story.


Yeah, you said that...and I responded that it was a NIMBY burying your head mentality...especially as running the numbers on the leaf, it's no better than a hybrid GHG wise, and probably worse.

 

[Nebroch]

EVs will get better what comes to consumption. With lovered drag and better inverters/motors a car like Leaf could reach 18-20 kWh/100 miles. SiC inverter is one nice innovation.

Leaf's CdA is very poor for an EV, comparable to ICE car.

 

[Cujet]

The 2016 Prius has an engine with 40% thermal efficiency. The best internal combustion ever made is just a tick over 50% thermally efficient. And it is an absolutely huge diesel.

It's not likely we will see significant gains in internal combustion technology. As 40% is already pushing the limits for small gasoline engines.

100mpg in a full size car is bucking the laws of thermodynamics.

 

[KrisZ]

The obvious undertone of this thread is to compare ICE to Tesla, that's where the 4 door, comfortable, doing 80mph requirements come from. Tesla is not getting an equivalent of 100mpg although I'm sure OP will quickly quote me the "official" numbers fro EPA.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
The obvious undertone of this thread is to compare ICE to Tesla, that's where the 4 door, comfortable, doing 80mph requirements come from. Tesla is not getting an equivalent of 100mpg although I'm sure OP will quickly quote me the "official" numbers fro EPA.

This post isn't about comparing ICE with Tesla, I started this thread to point to "Physics Professor at UC Berkeley" said that a gasoline car can achieve 100 MPG with current technology. He clearly hated BEV and tried to stop it and promoting ICE vehicle.

If you click on the link and read that article you will be amazed by the nonsense opinion of a highly educated person.

To most people the most knowledgeable person is university professor.

I think you know that I deposited $1k for Tesla model 3. Electric in California is fairly clean mostly from hydro damp and natural gas, no power plant in California used coal.

My estimate is model 3 will use 1 kW per 3.5 miles, I will charge overnight at lowest rate of about 10 cent per kW, so it will cost about $1 every 35 miles. The Current E430 use premium gas at $3.xx/gal and about 18 MPG average. So we save about $5-6/day on fuel cost. Also, very little maintenance for BEV.

As I said, there will be 2-3 BEV's at less than $40k with 200 miles range available in 2018 and after, Tesla model 3 is much better looking than others, that why I like it.

There isn't anything wrong in liking Tesla car. With pictures below you think I should buy Bolt instead ?

Latest pictures of Tesla Model 3 prototype captured at an event at Gigafactory few days ago, $35,000 base price.

Chevy Bolt at $37,500 (base price)

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
The obvious undertone of this thread is to compare ICE to Tesla, that's where the 4 door, comfortable, doing 80mph requirements come from. Tesla is not getting an equivalent of 100mpg although I'm sure OP will quickly quote me the "official" numbers fro EPA.

Requirements:
1. Carry 4-person is the reason because even a mini-compact or subcompact sedan can transport 4-person from point A to point B easily.

2. Comfortable so people can travel medium to long distance if they choose to, just like most cars we can buy now. Even compact cars like Corolla is very comfortable for long distance travel.

3. 80 MPH is because that is the speed limit in some states, Texas has some highway with 85 MPH. There is no gasoline car in US can't go to 80 MPH, all of them can go faster than 90-100 MPH. So 80 MPH is the very minimum.

All the requirements are posted here to eliminate weird vehicles such as 2-wheeler, 3-wheeler with top speed of 30-40 MPH and carry only 1 person, and these are not a normal car most families like to own.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
I think you know that I deposited $1k for Tesla model 3. Electric in California is fairly clean mostly from hydro damp and natural gas, no power plant in California used coal.


LOL, still a lot of NIMBY in Ca's definition of "green"...

http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Cujet
The 2016 Prius has an engine with 40% thermal efficiency. The best internal combustion ever made is just a tick over 50% thermally efficient. And it is an absolutely huge diesel.

It's not likely we will see significant gains in internal combustion technology. As 40% is already pushing the limits for small gasoline engines.


Just for giggles, here's the efficiency of Ca's electricity fleet.

http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/web_qfer/Heat_Rates.php

The last column is "heat rate', the amount of BTU required for 1KWh of electricity...divide 3412 (BTU in a KWh), by the heat rate (BTU needed to PRODUCE a KWh), and you have thermal efficiency.

e.g.
Intermountain Power Project H.R. 9,818 - thermal efficiency is 34.75%, and it's one of the best ones on the page.
Coalinga Cogeneration Facility H.R. 14,686 - thermal efficiency 23.23...and it's about par.

A Natural gas Prius would do a FAR better job of turning energy into miles than an EV fed off the above.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
I think you know that I deposited $1k for Tesla model 3. Electric in California is fairly clean mostly from hydro damp and natural gas, no power plant in California used coal.


LOL, still a lot of NIMBY in Ca's definition of "green"...

http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html

My power supplier is SCE(Southern California Edison), approximately about 15 years ago they said the last coal power plant was shut down. San Diego power supplier shut down their coal power plant about the same time.

I didn't know that Northern California still have coal power plant. But by any measure 0.3% in state power generated by coal is very much minimum, probably less than most states in US.

Now, the import coal power is another story, I didn't know we import that much power from outside the state, probably from Mexico.

Personally, I can't do much about how and where power is generated, I just use as little power as I can. By any statistic, the West in general and California in particular is greener than most states in US in term of power generators.

I am not a tree hugger, I just don't like to waste natural resource.

 

[splinter]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
...To most people the most knowledgeable person is university professor...

Only until students have successfully transitioned away from ivory towers and into the real world.

 

[turtlevette]

You're gonna lose that grand when Tesla files for bankruptcy.

 

[HTSS_TR]

I may lose my $1k deposit if Tesla files for chapter 7 bankruptcy, but many people will loose a lot more.

$1k is a good amount of money, but it is worth the risk because I like the model 3 I saw on the night they unveiled it 3 months ago.

One thing about model 3 I don't know yet is the wheel/tire size, I hope the base comes with 18" or smaller. I hate 19-20" with 30-35 aspect ratio.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR

There isn't anything wrong in liking Tesla car. With pictures below you think I should buy Bolt instead ?

Latest pictures of Tesla Model 3 prototype captured at an event at Gigafactory few days ago, $35,000 base price.

Chevy Bolt at $37,500 (base price)

The Tesla is a very nice looking car, but it is currently vaporware. The Bolt is a real car.