Engineer Gets 110mpg

http://www.wbaltv.com/automotive/16768626/detail.html

 

Impressive! That's where I think the biggest advantage is - just making the engine closer to its peak mechanical efficiency.

 

I wish I could find out how he did it.

 

He said he did it so that it could be made available to the public. Who's running that Project X contest?

 

Got it!

http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/

 

But it doesn't give any details on how he did it.I tried reading through it but as usual it's all over my head.

 

They won't release anything until the contest is done and the commercial deals have been made. But I'm sure some press will come out with details.

 

I am very curious as well, certainly as he claims his car has 400hp and goes from 0-60 in 3 seconds!

 

Senri, maybe that what we should be discussing first. How do we get our current engines to be more efficient mechanically to make better use of the fuel we use in them?

I was surprised to see how bad his 1987 Mustang engine operated at, but its generally accepted that they operate at 40 to 50% of design efficiency.

What would improve the efficiency?

Roller bearings on cams and crankshafts?
Larger or smaller valves?
More or less compression?
More or less air intake?
More or less exhaust?

I guess we'd have to start by finding what an efficient 100% engine looks like (Internal Combustion Engine - ICE) and consider the design of the one we have in our cars, and the optional parts we could buy or have made to improve them to something closer to peak efficiency.

 

Norman, I agree with you, but there are some things that I like to comment. I like to put some numbers and small calculations down, just to get a feel for it. It will also show some problems with all the claims of enormous fuel savings.

As we are talking about our cars as well, all the numbers are for a normal car with a normal engine. So no special tricks with injecting other fuels, hybrid drive or other energy inputs.

The efficiency that is talked about is the thermal energy, which is the heat you put in (or the heat that that can be generated by the fuel) and the work that the engine is doing.
The efficiency is actually only dependend on the combustion temperature and the enviroment temperature (second law of thermodynamics). Maximum efficiency for a combustion engine is about 73%. And this is a theoretical value. Because of friction and the irreversal proces of the combustion and some other factors, efficiency in real life is often not more then 25%. Energy plants with highly optimised big engines can go up to 45%, but still are far from the theoretical 73%. If I remember right, gas turbines, which are often more efficient as they are optimised for one rpm, get close to 38%.

There are a view possibilities to increase efficiency of which one is increasing the working temperature of the engine. This has been a tendency the past years. One can see that the operating temp of a modern engine is higher then old engines, partly made possible by the use of modern materials like ceramics.
Another way would be to lower friction, so good oils and bearings. You can understand that improving efficiency with 50% in the engine alone, so from 25% to say 38% is very very difficult!! And so I have my scepsis about these claims. Modern engines are actually not that bad considering the process and the circumstances they have to work in, and this is evident from for instance the exhaust. There is not much unburned fuel or excess oxygen in it.

Of course, up till now, we have only discussed the engine, but if you want to improve mpg or efficiency we should consider the whole car. And then we start with things like the friction of the rest, so driveline and gears. Weight of the parts, like axles etc. But maybe even more important the weight of the whole car, the aerodynamics (at higher speeds, let's say above 60km/h) and the rolling friction of the tires.

Let's make an example. Let's assume a car running at a constant speed of 60mph. Let's say that this car is using 30mpg. That means that it uses 2 gallon an hour. Gas has an energetic value of 31Mj/L, so 2 gallon of fuel contains 240Mj energie. This means in 1 hour 66kW. With an engine running at 30% efficiency, it means that the engine is producing 22kW. This is actually close the the estimated 15-20 kW that is sometimes mentioned. . Now think about the guy who has optimised his engine and claims to get 110mpg. Even if he would optimise his engine to run at 50% efficiency (which you will understand is nearly impossible), he still has a power output of only 10kW. Logically it would follow that he has to optimise his car as well. Scientifically there seems to be no other option. We see these things in cars like the Audi A2 3L, which is using only 3L/100km or 80mpg. The car is made completely of aluminium weighing only 750kg. It has special small tires, no airco or power steering and a highly optimised, low output 1.2 liter Turbo Diesel engine.

I want to stress that the above figures and examples are my own. I won't claim they are accurate, but they are to my best ability. If anybody sees errors or otherwise in it, please say so. This is merely a piece for discussion.
I also want to say that I by no means will try to say that nothing seems to be possible. I really hope so, but within the bounderies of our combustion engine and vehicle construction, there is not so much of a playing field. Without major changes I think we can only increase efficiency a few percent here and a few percent there.

 

Senri, sorry for leaving it, but I've had to concentrate on using these nice days on the car. I end each day at 9:30 PM, starting at 6:00 AM, taking the odd break when I can. My wife gets really ticked when I don't even stop to eat. I sunburn pretty easy, so I have to organize my work (no garage) to avoid too much Sun.

Anyway, I want to carry on this discussion maybe on Sunday morning (Raining until noon). Thanks.

 

No problem, of course. You first have to have your car on the road, before we can even start to think about fuel efficiency!
Take it easy, and I am looking forward to your new update! I know detailing and finishing touches are actually the most time consuming jobs.

 

I am highly suspicious of the claims made about that Mustang. I can understand some secrecy due to the X contest, but those figures seem waaaay out of this world. I've also noted from information I saw on other forums, that the claimed 110 (?)mpg is actually 110MPG 'e' - meaning it is using a E85 ethanol blend and it's MPG is 'equivalent' to 110 MPG with gas (probably somewhere around 80 - 85 mpg on E85.)

The guy talks about getting the technology from "his grandfather" (who was an inventor?) Well if this is actually technology from the 40's or 50's, wouldn't something have come along in the meantime that was far more efficient?.

I also noted in the peek under the hood on one of the videos that the car has carburetors!

 

I live a sheltered life! I didn't realize E85 had that much less fuel value. We've got E90 here in my Province, but some have E85. 20 to 30 % less is a sh!tload.:banghead3:

I suspect he's done some pricey engine mods to qualify against any major commercial contestants.

 

High gas prices always bring out the bullsh*tters and snake oil salesmen. Happens every time, money to be made, doncha know. With this claim, it's all in the semantics, to wit:

Claim:

From another board:

It's been further revealed (by several) on the Corral Mustang Forums that this guy is an alleged con man/ripoff artist, and has been involved in several lawsuits brought on by ripped off customers. They also said that he was banned from the Corral and on eBay. Probably some truth to it, given the outlandishness of his claims. A 5.0 will never get the same mileage as a moped, we car guys know that, but asshats like this don't market their snake oil to us, they push it off on the general public who is caught up in emotion over the high cost of gas, the economy, the Iranians, the Russkies, who the next president might be, etc. Con men know just when to strike.

-MP