What is Digg?137 Comments
- Paktu, on 11/08/2007, -5/+47This has to be the most interesting thing I've read all month- thanks digg!
- RSchewe, on 11/05/2007, -3/+30Forget about the Lincoln. Look at what he is doing with the Hummer H3.
Turbine engine?
"5,000-pound vehicle that gets 60 miles to the gallon and does zero to 60 in five seconds"?
..and there is a whole bunch of mods he is doing. He even hacked the damn engine to bypass the anti-theft security to be able to drop a different engine in there.
If this is all accurate, it is pretty nuts. Efficiency, power, environmentally friendlier, helpful towards energy independence. Now of course, cheap zero emissions sustainable fuel is the ultimate goal, but what a monumental shift this would be. - bluesnowmonkey, on 11/05/2007, -3/+27The summary is wrong. It should be: "Johnathan Goodwin can get 100 mpg out of a Lincoln Continental, cut emissions by 80%, OR double the horsepower." The figures are from three different projects.
1. The Hummer doubled it's horsepower with a turbine. Turbines are extremely expensive.
2. His $5000 kit supposedly doubles mileage and cuts emissions on diesel engines. I'll believe it when I see it. The trucking industry would have been all over something like this if it were so easy.
3. The 100 mpg Lincoln is a goal, not something he has achieved. - inactive, on 11/05/2007, -6/+24motorhead messiah?
Chazz: Who'd win in a wrestling match, Lemmy or God?
Chris Moore: Lemmy.
[Rex imitates a game show buzzer]
Chris Moore: ... God?
Rex: Wrong, *****, trick question. Lemmy *IS* God. - ArmyOfFun, on 11/01/2007, -2/+18I'll bury the other one. This links to the actual article (and was submitted earlier).
- slashbot, on 10/31/2007, -3/+15Wow... I've got that deja vu feeling again....
- krets, on 11/05/2007, -0/+10The turbine engine doesn't power the Hummer though. It fires up whenever the battery powering the electric motor starts to drain. The turbine takes a couple of seconds to recharge two supercapacitor batteries.
- inactive, on 11/01/2007, -0/+9The turbine was military surplus therefore it was sold well below cost. To actually make such a turbine new costs $50,000 to $250,000. Secondly the energy used to make such a turbine is logarithmically greater than the energy it would save as compared to regular internal combustible motor. It would be illogical to move to a power-plant that has a greater total energy used and which cost 10 to 25 times more than the power-plant it is replacing. First rule of physics - there is no free lunch out there. Followed by the second rule of physics - if it sounds too good to be true it probably isn't.
- s14sh3r, on 11/05/2007, -2/+11"He drove it over to a local restaurant and mooched some discarded oil from its deep fryer, strained the oil through a pair of jeans"
Fast food gives me the *****, too. - allaboutdatiki, on 11/01/2007, -3/+12Pure Hot Rod GENIUS! We're not worthy!
- crackedplastic, on 10/31/2007, -2/+10Check the times on submissions - this one is older.
- crackedplastic, on 10/31/2007, -2/+10Some things to consider:
1) This article was submitted first (check the times)
2) This one links to the source, not blogspam/passthrough crap.
Bury the other one. - ngmcs8203, on 10/31/2007, -1/+8This one was submitted 2hrs before the other.
- inactive, on 10/31/2007, -3/+10Good stuff. But what does it cost? How much does it cost on a per mile basis?
- jkarpinski, on 10/31/2007, -1/+8Diggers are so gullible.
- blust8, on 11/01/2007, -5/+11I have some magic beans I need to sell you guys! Everybody looking for some magic fix. There ain't one. Physics is physics. The above story is gross exaggeration mixed with some BS. You want 100mpg? Buy a moped. You want 50mpg? Buy a Prius. High, on-demand horsepower will always exact a penalty on mpg. Drag will always increase as a square of velocity. Heavy things will always use more energy to speed up or to slow down. The net energy output of any chemical fuel is relatively fixed. And a mark is born more often than once a minute...
- wrenchone, on 11/01/2007, -0/+6Why is everyone singling out the American car makers on this? No European or Japanese manufacturers make cars like this. Does that make them lack-luster too? Heck Toyota views the Volt is an unrealistic and impractical car because it uses a different system than the Prius. How's that for forward thinking.
- Jack9, on 11/01/2007, -3/+9Let's just avoid the whole "federal regulations and safety standards" which prohibit a turbine engine (which is why the article doesnt cover how shocked GM mechanics were to see that car...cause there's nothing shocking about modifying a car to the point it cant be sold by a manufacturer). Let's also avoid the fact that the grease that seems so widely available is only available because nobody currently wants it and ... oh yea it takes MORE ENERGY to make that than to pump and refine an equivalent amount of PREMIUM UNLEADED. Hydrogen seems like the solution across the board...except that it's horribly expensive to make and such a limited amount on earth (it's not produced in any appreciable amount ANYWHERE) that the government maintains stashes of it in tanks around the country for emergencies. So on to Natural Gas,. Natural Gas is a lot less safe in crashes (natural gas actually produces movie-like explosions) but gives us 10% in efficiency. Whoopty f'n doo. Dugg down for inaccuracy.
- inactive, on 11/01/2007, -0/+5You missed the part where he adds Hydrogen to the grease, then he figures out the MPG per gallon of grease excluding the hydrogen consumption.
- Chaoticfist, on 10/31/2007, -0/+5I know i said the same thing right above you. Its amazing you ask for proof and you get buried.....
- av4rice, on 10/31/2007, -0/+4_Printer_Friendly.html
- RedHerringHack, on 11/01/2007, -5/+9Lets see what the laws of thermodynamics have to say about this...
- OverkillTASF, on 11/03/2007, -3/+7How about durability? I don't want to take my insanely expensive diesel engine which should last 300,000 miles before an overhaul and get 80,000 out of it.
And, am I missing something... It looks like he's just running them on greasil... a frybrid. - jaysedai, on 11/01/2007, -1/+5I'm so sick of naysayers. You are right. Physics is physics. But that doesn't mean what he is claiming can't be done within the laws of physics. In fact it's well within them. Gasoline engines are in the sub 10% efficiency. So tripling that is still well within the laws of physics. If you RTFA you'd have read that the turbine only spins up for short periods of time to charge some ultracaps. Ultracaps are a groundbreaking development in next generation Hybrids. They hold powerful charges that can be released and recharged very quickly. Something standard batteries are not very good at. By combining ultracaps, next gen batteries and motors and innovative ideas like this, tomorrow's Plug In Hybrids are going to get around 200MPG (equivalent cost). http://www.hybridconsortium.org/
- ApokalypseNow, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4@MindStalker
That wouldn't make much sense then, as you're just losing efficiency every time you transfer power like that, so transferring more often would kill your MPG.
I'm thinking that the batteries need to be recharged maybe, I dunno, once every 20-30 min to make it feasible? And the turbine is probably used over a normal ICE due to the high RPMs involved - that could really turn a generator! I don't know about the fuel trade-off, but it is probably one of the faster ways to actually generate power.
Combine all this with a good energy recovery system for braking and damn, that's a mean, lean machine! - d4n13, on 11/01/2007, -0/+4Good idea. Here goes.
H3 is *CAPABLE* of 25 mpg. The gas engine's usually peak at about 25% thermal efficiency.
Gas turbines peak at about 60% thermal efficiency.
Bit of simple math here. If you move a mass at 25% thermal efficiency on the first run, then you move that same mass at 60% thermal efficiency on a second run will burn, than the second run will burn 58.3% LESS fuel than the first.
This guys math is sound. 25 MPG at 25% ER == 60 MPG at 60% ER. Sure he's making best case comparisons, but that's what the EPA did for 30 years till they got slapped by consumer reports. Now a normal moron driving this thing flooring it from stop light to stop light probably wouldn't get more than 40 MPG, but that's the moron's fault, not the designers fault.
References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_efficie ...
gas engine = 25% efficient
http://www.mtu.de/en/technologies/engineering_news ...
gas turbine = 60% efficient - VIrus9, on 10/31/2007, -0/+4It's the printer-friendly version of the article. You'd know that if you looked at the URL.
- rockrapdude, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4It would be easier for gm to hire this man. Looking out for the H4.
- norm78, on 10/31/2007, -0/+3http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/30/153528/46
this guy did a little digging - zeitgueist, on 10/31/2007, -0/+3Read the ***** time of submission Digg has the courtesy of showing you before mouthing off next time. Also, this article is the original, not blog spam. You fail.
- toekneebullard, on 10/31/2007, -0/+3Yeah. Can we all afford to put jet engines in our cars? This article seems fairly fluffy to me.
- MxM111, on 11/01/2007, -2/+5I so doubt that it is true. For one, hammer is aerodynamically horrible. Making 60mpg may be possible at low speed (like at 40mph) but not at real highway speed - you move to much air.
Second. Did you guys ever hear the turbine engine working? It is LOUD. Unless something dramatic is done, I do not see it running quietly in our neighborhoods.
Finally, how big is that engine? And those "super-capacitors"? Do you loose your cargo space for them? - Jektal, on 10/31/2007, -0/+31. Turbines are EXPENSIVE, very very expensive.
2. Know how expensive turbines are? Their complexity makes that look like peanuts. Turbines are effective engines if you run through a long startup checklist and have time to let them 'warm up'. Even then, if the operator does everything correctly, bad things (tm) can and will eventually happen. And when they do, the damage is very very very bad.
3. BioDiesel is NOT the future! BioDiesel works fine, as long as the people using it are an extreme minority. McDonald's simply doesn't use up enough grease to supply any significant proportion of the population. And the moment that their grease is truly in demand, they'll start charging for it just like any other limited resource. - Grivako, on 11/01/2007, -1/+4oh cynicism, how we love to suckle from your teet....this is to all the negative commenters here of course
- Azuroth, on 10/31/2007, -0/+3Furthermore, this one is the print link, so I'd dig this one even if it was submitted later.
- etmori, on 11/01/2007, -0/+3didn't mythbusters put plain vegetable oil into a diesel car, and ran it, getting the same mileage as 'regular' diesel?
- MrWhite7, on 10/31/2007, -1/+4I'd get excited but
A) The claims are suspect and dubious from a thermodynamics standpoint
OR
B) He'll be bought and retained by the oil or auto industry just like every other legitimate non-gasoline advance in the past century. - wiggles, on 11/01/2007, -0/+3Therein lies the ultimate question -- do you digg down the left wing blogger, even though the posting is blatant blogspam, or do you digg down the dupe for posting the actual article?
- davewashere, on 10/31/2007, -0/+2Those of us in really cold climates know that diesel also gels during the really cold winter nights. Greasil will just gel a lot more often. Either way, you've got to make sure your fuel has a heater.
- TheGuin, on 10/31/2007, -1/+3This guy is going to become rich off this invention of his, just like all the other guys that have said that they can do the same thing to a car. So rich to the point of bankruptcy.
GM was right. - archimago42, on 10/31/2007, -0/+2Assuming these cars don't break down faster than the average car (which could be true I just don't see any direct evidence yet because there are so few of them) this is one of the most badass things I've read in a long time. How has GM not directly hired him to create a mixed fuel concept car yet?
- zeitgueist, on 11/01/2007, -0/+2How is it a dupe when the linked article is not as old, and copies text from this one?
- inactive, on 10/31/2007, -0/+21. make second account
2. Digg Article
3. ????
4. Profit - inactive, on 10/31/2007, -0/+2Yeah, damn that science and reasoning!
- zeitgueist, on 10/31/2007, -0/+2Media reports? This is an article in Fast Company. Contact him to buy one.
- mechmike0034, on 10/31/2007, -0/+2Yup - The question isn't "Can it be done?" The question is "Can it be done to meet FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) and emission regulations yet still be sold at a price where buyers can afford to purchase and maintain it?" This includes manufacturer's warranty expense and customer satisfaction in the calculation - the manufacturer has to be able to afford to offer a warranty as well.
This is the first series of questions that must be answered when considering any motor vehicle design that is to be sold in the US... - silentsprawl, on 10/31/2007, -0/+2Because pictures never lie?
- HappyScrappy, on 10/31/2007, -3/+5He's a charlatan.
This crap is far from uncommon, fakers are a dime a dozen. - zeitgueist, on 10/31/2007, -0/+2original
- inactive, on 10/31/2007, -1/+3The big 3 has been bought lock,stock and barrel by the oil industry...they wouldn't dare let anybody damage the nice notion that a car can give not more than 20mpg...Good to see geniuses and their work...but I am pretty sure this guy will be soon missing...oil folks don't like him.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 137 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is