"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:30:19 +0000, Matt wrote:

On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:24:54 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:10:40 +0000, Matt wrote:

The 100bhp mark in a 1.6 was passed many moons ago, the 100bhp per
LITRE mark in production spec engines (both bike and car) was also
passed quite a while ago, hell you can even get a "washing machine"
Smart fortwo - 698cc that turns out 61 bhp (87bhp/litre)

But forget 200bhp, come up with a weedy "140bhp" power system using
battery storage, with a range even remotely comparable to say the
Passat 2 litre TDi and with similar performance (48.7 mpg combined
cycle, 749 mile range, 0-62 9.8 seconds, 130mph are the figures to aim
for)


Its been done already. Sadly I lost the link. I'll look for it an d post
it
if I get time.

Oooh I can hardly wait :-) It's just like Christmas, you wait 10
million years for a decent battery system and all of a sudden one
appears from nowhere.

300 miles range, 160mph top speed and 0-60 in sub 6 seconds.

Although I grant you the range on the passat is likley to be greater.

and the fact it has space for 4 or 5 adult size humans and a boot you
can fill with something more than a collapsible toothbrush.

Regardless of price you'd better arrange cryogenic storage for me
though as it will probably take you 500 years to get anywhere near -
unless on board nuclear reactors become the norm :-)

Rubbish. 3 years for some decent concept car, and ten for production.


I've done the sums. Unlike Drivel I AM an enginneer..fully qualified.

Ditto, but don't forget the 48.7mpg "battery" :-)

Well see my new thread - I am keeping drivel plonked. He is doing the
electric car a disservice by spouting nonsense.

How do you know if you have me plonked?

I repeat, read it and see what an electric car with lithium batteries is
already capable of, follow the calculations of what it could be capable
of,
and come back.

I have already told you that.