Search for the 100mpg car

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: andrewg

Interesting article. I did not know for instance how electric vehicles could cause a grid collapse.

You can't get blood out of a stone.
 
"54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 -- a mileage standard that not even a Harley-Davison motorcycle can achieve"

Now there is an icon of efficiency!

I recently had an imposed Vacation for inadvertently linking to a biased site.
Be careful, look in the sites background before you link.

I personally have no issues , I just read what you bring to our attention and ignor thre political garbage, but others obviously don't.
 
Last edited:
The conclusion that "the internal combustion engine has not undergone an improvement in efficiency" is fundamentally flawed. The author compares the Model T at 25 MPG to the modern Corolla at 25 MPG.

But he ignores the tremendous increase in weight and equipment, mostly safety and creature comforts. Strip the Corolla down to Model T safety standards (none) and comforts (nearly none) and you would easily get over 50 MPG, particularly if you reduced the Corolla engine size to keep the same power/weight ratio...

The internal combustion engine has improved tremendously since the days of the Model T....but that point is conveniently ignored for the sake of making a specious argument...
 
Last edited:
political-aside: everytime I see these so-called 100mpg automobile ideas and contraptions, etc. I laughed.

Yes, it may be doable in the future, but at this moment: it's impossible due to the luxury and features we want in terms of comfort (ABS, EBD, airbags, etc.) and safety (high strength steel, crumple zones, etc.

Also: not to mention the idea of friction throughout (fricion loss throughout the transmission, tire's friction coefficient, energy conversion in ICE, air-drag,etc.).

Suddenly, 100MPG doesn't seem to be at all possible at this moment, afterall.

armchair scientist take note: you will win the biggest prize on earth if you can find means of defying friction and the laws of physics on the surface of the earth, and so as to be able to lay down the very foundation of achieving 100mpg automobiles for humanity.


(**but then again: being an armchair scientist that has no formal academic background and training(not even the mindset to begin with), I kinda doubt that would be possible due to lack of merit**)

*laughs*

Q.
 
Originally Posted By: daves87rs
Let's get to 50 first...


Certainly. I think the hybrid diesels in Europe have this now.I like the Honda idea of the home refueling station. Where you have your own high efficiency solar set up to produce hydrogen. Independent of the grid and you won't have to go to a gas station except for a Dr Pepper.
 
I think we would first (at this point in time) have to re-think what we want from an Automobile. We tend, I think, to want the most economical vehicle that fits ALL our needs and desires.
ie. we buy a car to seat 5 when most of the time we only need to seat 1 and a bit. We buy a car that will haul on the freeway long distances, yet use it for short hops into town.

Yes, 100 mpg IS doable, for many people, much of the time, if they could do without what they are not using.
 
We might not have 50 mpg cars today, but we do have lots of 40 mpg cars. Going from a 25 mpg car to a 40 mpg car was a good change in the fuel bill. A lot of folks are trading in 15 mpg SUV's on 40 mpg cars, and that has a giant impact on total fuel consumption.

It's the gallons that kill one, not the MPG. Reducing the total number of gallons consumed is the ultimate goal, not getting super-high MPG.
 
Originally Posted By: rshaw125
Originally Posted By: daves87rs
Let's get to 50 first...


Certainly. I think the hybrid diesels in Europe have this now.I like the Honda idea of the home refueling station. Where you have your own high efficiency solar set up to produce hydrogen. Independent of the grid and you won't have to go to a gas station except for a Dr Pepper.


Even non-Hybrid, mid sized Diesels in Europe were there 10 years ago!
I well remember averaging almost 60 imp mpg over two weeks in a Accord sized car in France. With no concessions.
 
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: andrewg
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/the_search_for_the_100-mpg_car.html

Interesting article. I did not know for instance how electric vehicles could cause a grid collapse.


Interesting? Not really. Biased and inflammatory? Maybe. Political? Absolutely.

Isn't there a "no politics" rule on this board?

That said, an untrimmed tree can (and did) cause a massive grid collapse.

Life is basically intertwined with politics of some sort. If you don't like the post, ignore it. I didn't post it to cause offense.
 
Originally Posted By: expat
"54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 -- a mileage standard that not even a Harley-Davison motorcycle can achieve"

Now there is an icon of efficiency!

I recently had an imposed Vacation for inadvertently linking to a biased site.
Be careful, look in the sites background before you link.

I personally have no issues , I just read what you bring to our attention and ignor thre political garbage, but others obviously don't.

Bias? So. Life is full of bias and so are many articles I've seen posted on this board....one way or another. If I get 'banned' or other wise punished for posting this harmless article....I would actually prefer to spend my time on other less hyper-sensitive websites.
 
Having re-read the article, I find many statements so 'Full of Holes' or just political innuendo, I think it's an insult to any 'Thinking' person of any nationality.

Maybe we could make it a contest:
Who can spot the most inaccurate statements?
 
Originally Posted By: expat

Maybe we could make it a contest:
Who can spot the most inaccurate statements?


I vote for the 14% efficiency statement being way off. I remember basic engine efficiency ratios from back in the 60s being 25% power, 25% heat through the radiator, and 50% out the tailpipe. I'm sure that has been improved since then.....

I had a 1974 Honda CB360 that got 60MPG consistently, and some of the smaller 1960s era Hondas were advertised at getting 200MPG.
 
14% is the lower figure even in the article they link to.

They describe the Automotive X prize winners as Being basically Motorcycles, but the requirements state (among other things)

"Vehicles in both classes also must have features expected of a modern automobile including an enclosed cabin with windshield and windows, operating windshield wipers, washers, headlights, horn, indicators, brake lights, reflective devices, rear and side-view mirrors, and seat belts. They must have the usual automotive controls, including accelerator pedal, brake pedal, steering mechanism (not necessarily a wheel) and indicators. They must be "highway capable", which is defined as the ability to maintain 65 mph (105 km/h) on a four percent uphill grade and to accelerate from 40 mph (64 km/h) to 60 mph (97 km/h) in less than 9 seconds. They must be able to brake from 60 to 0 mph in less than 170 feet (52 m), meet existing noise standards and use tires that meet automotive or motorcycle (alternative class only and only if the vehicle is otherwise eligible to be classified as a motorcycle) standards. Both must meet the same set of static and dynamic stability requirements.
The mainstream vehicle must seat at least four adults with at least two side-by-side front seats, have at least 10 cubic feet (0.28 m3) of useful cargo space in one contiguous location not counting the passenger seats, accelerate from 0 to 60 mph (97 km/h) in 15 seconds or less, and be able to drive 200 miles (320 km) without refueling or recharging. The mainstream vehicle must have four or more wheels."
 
I didn't claim the article was a scientific thesis on the internal combustion engine. What I said was that it was interesting. Such as the EPA suppressing a report on a possible compromised power grid if 11 million electrical vehicles (as predicted) become a reality. And of course the info about the Stirling Cycle engine design, including the new Stirling Hybrid. Yes, you could call certain aspects of the article to be against the current dependence and trust of the feds as 'political'. My intent by posting the piece was not to offend anyone....nor was it expected by me that some of you would be rather rude in response.
Oh well.
 
apparently, there is some resistance about getting a vehicle with 100mpg. I posted something similar with backlash a few weeks ago. by 2025, the fuel economy standard is 54.5 mpg. let's see how that standard gets changed in the next few years.
 
Originally Posted By: Astro14
The conclusion that "the internal combustion engine has not undergone an improvement in efficiency" is fundamentally flawed. The author compares the Model T at 25 MPG to the modern Corolla at 25 MPG.

But he ignores the tremendous increase in weight and equipment, mostly safety and creature comforts. Strip the Corolla down to Model T safety standards (none) and comforts (nearly none) and you would easily get over 50 MPG, particularly if you reduced the Corolla engine size to keep the same power/weight ratio...

The internal combustion engine has improved tremendously since the days of the Model T....but that point is conveniently ignored for the sake of making a specious argument...


I didn't read the article but having read this post, I won't even bother. If the author made such an idiotic statement comparing the two cars, he needs to be shot. I won't even begin to discuss the differences between the engine in the model T and the Corolla.
33.gif
 
I don't doubt for a second that current production level technology could give us gasoline fueled cars that are good for 40 MPG city and 55 highway if it weren't for three problems:

1) It isn't a car many people would want.
2) Safety regulations.
3) Emissions requirements.

If the price of fuel were to double within a 5 year span, that could do a lot for #1. #2 could be dealt with, but only if other safety measures (this is nearly impossible for political reasons) were put into place. The usual progress in technology will probably help with #3, which is also probably the least of the three problems.

I have no numbers to back my opinion up, but does anyone disagree?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
Latest budget makes interest on American made cars fully deductible.
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
2K
Pew
A
Major power grid issues in Portugal, Spain and parts of France
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
2K
Shannow
y_p_w
At least 7 dead after a ferry landing dock gangway collapses at Sapelo Island, Georgia
2
Replies
26
Views
867
GMFan
OVERKILL
Ontario nuclear update - May 8th, 2025
Replies
7
Views
515
johnmyster
F
Progressive car insurance, found a way to lower rates
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
1K
dogememe
Back
Top Bottom