Anthony wrote:
Jon Elson wrote in
:

It is going to be really hard to meet the 35 MPG standard
without major changes in the drive train. Lightening just isn't
going to get much further. The last gasp was lock-up torque
converters. Now, they are going to have to get serious.
Combining start/stop technology with something like stratified
charge or some other scheme to get rid of the throttle and run
the engine at full cylinder pressure all the time (like Diesel)
is going to be required. C'mon, Detroit, we know you've had
stratified charge systems running since the 1970's.


It's out there already, DIG (Direct injection Gasoline), more are
coming, bet on it, and sooner than you think.
35 mpg is not unachieveable, some vehicles have been getting better
than that for years.
The TDI that Volkswagon AG has is an incredible engine, wish I could
afford one.
The small diesel market is going to expand in the next few years in
the US.
There are also alternatives out there to the otto cycle engine. The
mazda rotary is one that has been proven, and gets good fuel mileage.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Maybe the newer ones . In 1972 the mileage sucked .
Power was awesome though ...

--

Snag aka OSG #1
'90 Ultra , "Strider"
The road goes on forever ...
none to one to reply

"RAM³" wrote in message
0...
"Ivan Vegvary" wrote in news:yPUaj.12$ML6.5@trndny04:

which makes me wonder, why
we use heavy gear oils for similar applications when not unitized with
an automatic tranny?

The '62 MG Midget that I once had used 30-wt. motor oil in its 4-speed
manual transmission.

For what it's worth, the late 40's Chrysler electro/vacuum shifted
transmission used 10 weight motor oil to lubricate conventional gears.

Don Young

On 2007-12-22, Wes wrote:
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

[ ... ]

Or are you saying that electrical power steering is (or can be
made) more energy efficient than the hydraulic power steering found on
most cars these days?

I don't know how the current technology works for sure so I'm assuming we
have a constant volume pump dumping flow over a relief valve. If so, then
electrics might make sense. At highway speeds with normal inputs to stay in
one's lane power assisted steering isn't needed with most vehicles. I'm
pretty sure your old enough to have operated a vehicle without power
steering.

Absolutely. As a matter of fact, almost all of my vehicles have
been without power steering -- with my favorite being the MGA which was
one of my first cars.

Of course, you can get a pretty light steering from even a
rather heavy vehicle with the proper amount of caster. Bot that is not
much help when a heavy vehicle with wide tires is stationary -- that is
when the power steering is a benefit.

With an electric system a torque sensor on the steering input shaft would
turn on the hydraulics for a few moments during low speed steering
operations or a need to make rapid wheel angle changes at speed.

O.K. That makes sense.

I wonder if a variable displacement pump would be equally effective?

Probably a bit more friction loss when not being actively used.
And the friction loss in the extra pulley, too.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote in message
...
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:45:33 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 12:39:01 +0000, with neither quill nor qualm,
David Billington quickly quoth:

AFAIK the MGF roadster, not available in the US, introduced electrical
power assisted steering in 1995. I don't know whether other car
companies have moved to such system much yet. In the MGF case it's
basically a servo motor system, no hydraulics involved.

Is this produced by the fine and dependable Lucas Electric we've all
come to know and lov^H^H^Hfear? Scary thought, that.

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS

Seen on another bumper sticker: Why do the Brits drink warm beer? Because
they have Lucas refrigerators.

They drink their beer at room temperature. Anyone who's lived in
Britain knows that's not warm.
The reason?
Lucas central heating???????

Ha-ha! Maybe. The Lucas battery in my MG Midget wouldn't start the car at
temperatures below 10 deg. F when it was new. Maybe they build their central
heating the same way.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
clare at snyder.on.ca wrote in message
...

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:45:33 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 12:39:01 +0000, with neither quill nor qualm,
David Billington quickly quoth:


AFAIK the MGF roadster, not available in the US, introduced electrical
power assisted steering in 1995. I don't know whether other car
companies have moved to such system much yet. In the MGF case it's
basically a servo motor system, no hydraulics involved.

Is this produced by the fine and dependable Lucas Electric we've all
come to know and lov^H^H^Hfear? Scary thought, that.

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS

Seen on another bumper sticker: Why do the Brits drink warm beer? Because
they have Lucas refrigerators.

They drink their beer at room temperature. Anyone who's lived in
Britain knows that's not warm.
The reason?
Lucas central heating???????


Ha-ha! Maybe. The Lucas battery in my MG Midget wouldn't start the car at
temperatures below 10 deg. F when it was new. Maybe they build their central
heating the same way.

--
Ed Huntress


I suppose it a matter of priorities: Weak batteries, strong beer, whereas
in the US...:-)

Tom

Don Young wrote:
"RAM³" wrote in message
0...

"Ivan Vegvary" wrote in news:yPUaj.12$ML6.5@trndny04:


which makes me wonder, why
we use heavy gear oils for similar applications when not unitized with
an automatic tranny?

The '62 MG Midget that I once had used 30-wt. motor oil in its 4-speed
manual transmission.


For what it's worth, the late 40's Chrysler electro/vacuum shifted
transmission used 10 weight motor oil to lubricate conventional gears.

Don Young



This busines of 35mpg is quite simple to acieve.

The technology is there,
It needs a tax? incentive for the car MFG's
to change their design references.
So lets look at these.

1.
a steady state speed on a straight level road,
take any one it doesnt matter.
the energy needed to keep the car at this speed is equal to the drag.
this is from several areas.
rolling resistance,
engine/transmission friction losses,
engine efficiency
aerodynamic drag.
Each one can be optimised with current technology.

Next,
2.
accelerating from one speed to another, this could be from 0mph to
30mph or whatever.
This requires the engine to accelerate the total mass of the car.
the enegy needed to do this is primarily dependent on the the time you
want to do this in and the weight, in addition to 1. above

The former is in the control of the driver and the second is again in
the hands of the maker..

So if you want to optimise your car for maximum miles per gallon it will
need to be

very light,
all aluminium , composite construction
very aerodynamic
very low rolling resistance, no soft sqiggy tyres
ie throw away your fancy wide fashion
statment tyres
and run on the old design michelin"X" as made in the 1960's
super effient turbocharged common rail pulsed fuel injection diesel
aka VW polo or Smart car
all aluminium engine transmission castings,
lightweight glass in windows,

made in 2 seat tandem configuration ,
as well as 4 seat and larger.

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg on US
gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.

Any takers?
Ted Frater
Dorset UK.

Ed,

For any automobile gears, you need a high-pressure lubricant. I don't know
how they got away with ATF for that job. For hypoid and spiral-bevel gears,
as in a rear-axle diff, you also need a lubricant with high shear strength.
That's what heavy rear-end oil is supposed to have.

If by shear strength, you mean viscosity, then ATF might be quite
viscous in low temperatures mentioned elsewhere in the thread. Or, are
you thinking of shear thinning or other non-Newtonian/viscoelastic
phenomena?

Bill

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 08:26:52 GMT, Ted Frater
wrote:

Don Young wrote:
"RAM³" wrote in message
0...

"Ivan Vegvary" wrote in news:yPUaj.12$ML6.5@trndny04:


which makes me wonder, why
we use heavy gear oils for similar applications when not unitized with
an automatic tranny?

The '62 MG Midget that I once had used 30-wt. motor oil in its 4-speed
manual transmission.


For what it's worth, the late 40's Chrysler electro/vacuum shifted
transmission used 10 weight motor oil to lubricate conventional gears.

Don Young



This busines of 35mpg is quite simple to acieve.

The technology is there,
It needs a tax? incentive for the car MFG's
to change their design references.
So lets look at these.

1.
a steady state speed on a straight level road,
take any one it doesnt matter.
the energy needed to keep the car at this speed is equal to the drag.
this is from several areas.
rolling resistance,
engine/transmission friction losses,
engine efficiency
aerodynamic drag.
Each one can be optimised with current technology.

Next,
2.
accelerating from one speed to another, this could be from 0mph to
30mph or whatever.
This requires the engine to accelerate the total mass of the car.
the enegy needed to do this is primarily dependent on the the time you
want to do this in and the weight, in addition to 1. above

The former is in the control of the driver and the second is again in
the hands of the maker..

So if you want to optimise your car for maximum miles per gallon it will
need to be

very light,
all aluminium , composite construction
very aerodynamic
very low rolling resistance, no soft sqiggy tyres
ie throw away your fancy wide fashion
statment tyres
and run on the old design michelin"X" as made in the 1960's
super effient turbocharged common rail pulsed fuel injection diesel
aka VW polo or Smart car
all aluminium engine transmission castings,
lightweight glass in windows,

made in 2 seat tandem configuration ,
as well as 4 seat and larger.

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg on US
gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.

Any takers?
Ted Frater
Dorset UK.





Now the next question, will the occupants survive a collision with
anything larger than an opossum?

Gunner

Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote:
Wes: We are driving a 2003 car that if it ever gets below 40mpg at 80mph,
I'm going to start checking it over. Recent trip to Oklahoma and return was
done with the speedo showing 80 in all the 75mph zones even in head winds.
The worst we got was 47mpg. However you can't buy a new one of these in
California. The VW Jetta TDI would have to be degraded to get down to
35mpg.

I don't get it: it sounds like you are exceeding that now?? Just
curious how silly they are getting.


We have a few J*ck*asses in California.

No offense to you, I keep hoping that they will finally cause a local
economic meltdown and _maybe_ the rest of the country will wake the hell
up before it's too late (if it's not already).


Bill

Wes,

I don't know how the current technology works for sure so I'm assuming we
have a constant volume pump dumping flow over a relief valve.

That's a depressing thought, efficiency wise



If so, then
electrics might make sense. At highway speeds with normal inputs to stay in
one's lane power assisted steering isn't needed with most vehicles. I'm
pretty sure your old enough to have operated a vehicle without power
steering.

Hey, watch it! My 90 Sentra does not have power steering, and its
fine. My 96 F150 has power steering. Returning home from work involves
getting the dog out of the garage and then putting the car into it. The
driveway slopes, and I quickly realized that I did not need to crank the
car for the trip. I once tried something similar with the truck, and
found all the power stuff to be almost essential to "put it where I
wanted it." Granted, that was not at highway speed, but whatever would
replace it would have to be more friendly should the assist fail.


With an electric system a torque sensor on the steering input shaft would
turn on the hydraulics for a few moments during low speed steering
operations or a need to make rapid wheel angle changes at speed.

I wonder if a variable displacement pump would be equally effective?

I have no idea. The electric idea seems reasonable, provided it is a
fail-safe assist and not "crash by wire."

Bill

Gunner wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 08:26:52 GMT, Ted Frater
wrote:


Don Young wrote:

"RAM³" wrote in message
0.60...


"Ivan Vegvary" wrote in news:yPUaj.12$ML6.5@trndny04:



which makes me wonder, why
we use heavy gear oils for similar applications when not unitized with
an automatic tranny?

The '62 MG Midget that I once had used 30-wt. motor oil in its 4-speed
manual transmission.


For what it's worth, the late 40's Chrysler electro/vacuum shifted
transmission used 10 weight motor oil to lubricate conventional gears.

Don Young



This busines of 35mpg is quite simple to acieve.

The technology is there,
It needs a tax? incentive for the car MFG's
to change their design references.
So lets look at these.

1.
a steady state speed on a straight level road,
take any one it doesnt matter.
the energy needed to keep the car at this speed is equal to the drag.
this is from several areas.
rolling resistance,
engine/transmission friction losses,
engine efficiency
aerodynamic drag.
Each one can be optimised with current technology.

Next,
2.
accelerating from one speed to another, this could be from 0mph to
30mph or whatever.
This requires the engine to accelerate the total mass of the car.
the enegy needed to do this is primarily dependent on the the time you
want to do this in and the weight, in addition to 1. above

The former is in the control of the driver and the second is again in
the hands of the maker..

So if you want to optimise your car for maximum miles per gallon it will
need to be

very light,
all aluminium , composite construction
very aerodynamic
very low rolling resistance, no soft sqiggy tyres
ie throw away your fancy wide fashion
statment tyres
and run on the old design michelin"X" as made in the 1960's
super effient turbocharged common rail pulsed fuel injection diesel
aka VW polo or Smart car
all aluminium engine transmission castings,
lightweight glass in windows,

made in 2 seat tandem configuration ,
as well as 4 seat and larger.

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg on US
gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.

Any takers?
Ted Frater
Dorset UK.






Now the next question, will the occupants survive a collision with
anything larger than an opossum?

Gunner


point taken,
lets go back a bit,
I was lucky to get my engineering training in aviation aircraft
structures,
So im aware of the bird strike risks as well as the automotive collision
risks.

We have a serious deer problem here in the UK,
the overall nos have trippled over the past 30 yrs and deer strikes are
a weekly occourence here in this part of the UK
makes quite a mess of the front of the car as Ive had it happen to me!!!!.
modern design techniques and constructions will give the energy
absorbing reqirements of the statutory crash tests.
So it can be done.
It depends on whar risk assessment has been made, and what are the
statistics?

Compliments of the season anyway,

Ted

Might cost quite a bit tho.
Ted

On Dec 23, 8:26 am, Ted Frater wrote:

This busines of 35mpg is quite simple to acieve.

The technology is there,
It needs a tax? incentive for the car MFG's
to change their design references.

Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.

Any takers?
Ted Frater
Dorset UK.

Would have been great when I was commuting to work. But now I need
something that will carry stuff. Not a great deal of stuff, but at
least a 500 kilos.

What I think is needed is driver insurance, instead of car insurance.
If I could buy driver insurance, I would have a small coupe in
addition to the truck. Can't drive but one at a time, but the
insurance is per vehicle, not per user.


Dan

Ted Frater wrote:
Gunner wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 08:26:52 GMT, Ted Frater
wrote:


Don Young wrote:

"RAM³" wrote in message
0...


"Ivan Vegvary" wrote in
news:yPUaj.12$ML6.5@trndny04:



which makes me wonder, why
we use heavy gear oils for similar applications when not unitized
with
an automatic tranny?

The '62 MG Midget that I once had used 30-wt. motor oil in its
4-speed
manual transmission.


For what it's worth, the late 40's Chrysler electro/vacuum shifted
transmission used 10 weight motor oil to lubricate conventional gears.

Don Young



This busines of 35mpg is quite simple to acieve.

The technology is there,
It needs a tax? incentive for the car MFG's
to change their design references.
So lets look at these.

1.
a steady state speed on a straight level road,
take any one it doesnt matter.
the energy needed to keep the car at this speed is equal to the drag.
this is from several areas.
rolling resistance,
engine/transmission friction losses,
engine efficiency
aerodynamic drag.
Each one can be optimised with current technology.

Next,
2.
accelerating from one speed to another, this could be from 0mph to
30mph or whatever.
This requires the engine to accelerate the total mass of the car.
the enegy needed to do this is primarily dependent on the the time
you want to do this in and the weight, in addition to 1. above

The former is in the control of the driver and the second is again
in the hands of the maker..

So if you want to optimise your car for maximum miles per gallon it
will need to be

very light,
all aluminium , composite construction
very aerodynamic
very low rolling resistance, no soft sqiggy tyres
ie throw away your fancy wide fashion
statment tyres
and run on the old design michelin"X" as made in the 1960's
super effient turbocharged common rail pulsed fuel injection
diesel aka VW polo or Smart car
all aluminium engine transmission castings,
lightweight glass in windows,

made in 2 seat tandem configuration ,
as well as 4 seat and larger.

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg
on US gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.

Any takers?
Ted Frater
Dorset UK.






Now the next question, will the occupants survive a collision with
anything larger than an opossum?

Gunner


point taken,
lets go back a bit,
I was lucky to get my engineering training in aviation aircraft
structures,
So im aware of the bird strike risks as well as the automotive
collision risks.

We have a serious deer problem here in the UK,
the overall nos have trippled over the past 30 yrs and deer strikes
are a weekly occourence here in this part of the UK
makes quite a mess of the front of the car as Ive had it happen to
me!!!!.
modern design techniques and constructions will give the energy
absorbing reqirements of the statutory crash tests.
So it can be done.
It depends on whar risk assessment has been made, and what are the
statistics?

Compliments of the season anyway,

Ted

Might cost quite a bit tho.
Ted

They have something of a deer problem in the US as well. My mother had a
Chevy Impala written off by a collision with a dear in the late 1970s,
IIRC that was a good sized car.

Nobody yet has mentioned the various tests showing that occupants of
large 4x4 or vehicles with chsssis often end up with more severe
injuries than the occupants of the passenger vehicles they collide with
due to the higher decceleration rates resulting from the lack of
significant energy absorbing structures in the 4x4, pickup etc. While
the passenger car might be a write off and the larger vehicle not
damaged much the larger vehicle occupants may suffer far more severe
injuries than those in the passenger car.

"Bill Schwab" wrote in message
...
Ed,

For any automobile gears, you need a high-pressure lubricant. I don't
know how they got away with ATF for that job. For hypoid and spiral-bevel
gears, as in a rear-axle diff, you also need a lubricant with high shear
strength. That's what heavy rear-end oil is supposed to have.

If by shear strength, you mean viscosity, then ATF might be quite viscous
in low temperatures mentioned elsewhere in the thread. Or, are you
thinking of shear thinning or other non-Newtonian/viscoelastic phenomena?

Bill

I don't think ATF is viscous at any reasonable temperatures, Bill. Somebody
mentioned that it forms a chemical film and that rings a bell with me.

I'm not a tribology expert but when I was studying gears the lubricant
properties differentiated high-pressure capability and shear strength. Shear
strength apparently is a property by which oil can take sliding loads, as in
a hypoid gear, without the film breaking down. I've always thought that
high-pressure lubricants can take a high static pressure but not,
necessarily, high shear loads.

But, like many other things having to do with engineering, I studied that a
very long time ago.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 11:40:41 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Dec 23, 8:26 am, Ted Frater wrote:

This busines of 35mpg is quite simple to acieve.

The technology is there,
It needs a tax? incentive for the car MFG's
to change their design references.

Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.

Any takers?
Ted Frater
Dorset UK.

Would have been great when I was commuting to work. But now I need
something that will carry stuff. Not a great deal of stuff, but at
least a 500 kilos.

What I think is needed is driver insurance, instead of car insurance.
If I could buy driver insurance, I would have a small coupe in
addition to the truck. Can't drive but one at a time, but the
insurance is per vehicle, not per user.


What you want is insurance built into the cost of fuel. Everyone is
insured, and if you don't drive much it doesn't cost much.

Ted Frater wrote in news:gZobj.28468$jy3.13195
@newsfe7-win.ntli.net:

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg on US
gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.


The Loremo is scheduled to be on the market in 2009, getting over 100 MPG
(US), and seat 4.

http://www.loremo.com

In article , "RAM³" wrote:
Ted Frater wrote in news:gZobj.28468$jy3.13195
:

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg on US
gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.


The Loremo is scheduled to be on the market in 2009, getting over 100 MPG
(US), and seat 4.

At what price?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:56:25 GMT, Ted Frater
wrote:


Now the next question, will the occupants survive a collision with
anything larger than an opossum?

Gunner


point taken,
lets go back a bit,
I was lucky to get my engineering training in aviation aircraft
structures,
So im aware of the bird strike risks as well as the automotive collision
risks.

We have a serious deer problem here in the UK,
the overall nos have trippled over the past 30 yrs and deer strikes are
a weekly occourence here in this part of the UK
makes quite a mess of the front of the car as Ive had it happen to me!!!!.


One assumes, that along with fox hunting...they managed to ban deer
hunting as well?

Or do they remain the property of the King?

Gunner



"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:56:25 GMT, Ted Frater
wrote:


Now the next question, will the occupants survive a collision with
anything larger than an opossum?

Gunner


point taken,
lets go back a bit,
I was lucky to get my engineering training in aviation aircraft
structures,
So im aware of the bird strike risks as well as the automotive collision
risks.

We have a serious deer problem here in the UK,
the overall nos have trippled over the past 30 yrs and deer strikes are
a weekly occourence here in this part of the UK
makes quite a mess of the front of the car as Ive had it happen to me!!!!.



One assumes, that along with fox hunting...they managed to ban deer
hunting as well?

Or do they remain the property of the King?

Gunner



"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Our farm stead/home is isolated on the edge of a 6000 acre conifer
plantaion, which is owned by the Repstone estate trust.
The main trust beneficiary is the manor of Wareham, a local small town.
The hereditary owner of that is the local lord , not called as such.
the deer are his property, not the crown's as elsewhere.


we are only allowed to shoot then IF the become a nuisance on our land.
not in the surrounding woods and heath land.

The do come into the garden and eat my wife's rose bushes.
As such we prefer to let be and see them, rather than shoot them.
Our local South dorset Hunt still meet thoroughout the winter and chase
an imaginary fox.
These are becoming a serious pest because the former control is no
longer there.
they have moved into urban areas and specialise in tearing open refuse
sacks and scattering the contents everywhere.
We dont have refuse as such, only bottles and tins to dispose of.
There we take to our local recycling center in exchange we collect all
the thick chip board as fuel for our wood burners.
Its much better than wood from the forest as its verly low moisture
content, consistent, and free.
We cut it to size on a tractor driven 25hp saw bench.
How the poor live!!.
We dont have any main services from anyone, providing all our own.
Pays to be independent!!!.
Hope this answers your questions
Ted Dorset UK.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
news
In article , "RAM³"
wrote:
Ted Frater wrote in news:gZobj.28468$jy3.13195
:

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg on US
gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.


The Loremo is scheduled to be on the market in 2009, getting over 100 MPG
(US), and seat 4.

At what price?

That depends upon the model.

http://evolution.loremo.com/content/view/98/141/lang,en/ gives 2 prices
depending upon the model.

Since the prices are in Euros, there's no telling what the actual price will
be IF the car is allowed into the US.

"RAM³" wrote in message
...
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
news
In article , "RAM³"
wrote:
Ted Frater wrote in news:gZobj.28468$jy3.13195
:

With these specs I predict at a steady state speed of 70 mph a mpg on
US
gallon of over 70. with current technology,
Give me the authority and funding and ill have one ready for mass
priduction for you in 24 months.


The Loremo is scheduled to be on the market in 2009, getting over 100 MPG
(US), and seat 4.

At what price?

That depends upon the model.

http://evolution.loremo.com/content/view/98/141/lang,en/ gives 2 prices
depending upon the model.

Since the prices are in Euros, there's no telling what the actual price
will be IF the car is allowed into the US.

Also, the gas mileage has apparently gone down from earlier claims of 157
mpg and the weight has increased from 450 kg to "under 600" kg. This Loremo
AG startup sounds like it may be an investment scam to me, like the
all-plastic bicycle of the 1970's.

ATP* wrote:
Ted Frater wrote in news:gZobj.28468$jy3.13195
:
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
Since the prices are in Euros, there's no telling what the actual price
will be IF the car is allowed into the US.

Also, the gas mileage has apparently gone down from earlier claims of 157
mpg and the weight has increased from 450 kg to "under 600" kg. This Loremo
AG startup sounds like it may be an investment scam to me, like the
all-plastic bicycle of the 1970's.

Seasons Greetings to all from the frozen wasteland of the Canadian prairies!

I just want to say that I thoroughly enjoyed reading the opinions and
comments posted on this thread.

How sad the current state of affairs around the planet that most web logs and
forums seem to be an opportunity for dull minded and uneducated folks to
crawl upon an anonymous soap box to spew venom and vitriol... kind of like an
electronic version of the CB radio phenomenon of recent years past.

Thank you for restoring hope for our species.

l'll be visiting with you again soon.

Best wishes to all.

Michael

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2007-12-22, Jon Elson wrote:

[ ... ]


Electric steering is already coming in, saves a Hp on the
steering pump.


And where does that energy come from to power the steering? If
you say "the battery", then the next obvious question is "where does the
energy come from to charge the battery" -- and the answer there must be
"the engine" for the most part -- though I guess that you could put
alternators inside the wheels so braking would partially come from
energy being transferred to the battery.

Or are you saying that electrical power steering is (or can be
made) more energy efficient than the hydraulic power steering found on
most cars these days?

That's the concept. The usual, hydraulic power steering system
circulates fluid through a control valve that produces some
restriction even when not turning, and it takes something like
1/2 - 1 Hp to drive the pump. The electrical power steering
wastes far less power when not producing any steering effort,
and as the motor usually moves pretty slowly, it is all current
and very low voltage, so even when working the energy input is
very low. When actually turning with hydraulic power steering,
the energy waste is pretty large.

Next is something in the auto trans to reduce
the demand of the hydraulic pump. They may already have gone to
variable-displacement pumps instead of fixed-displacement and a
pressure regulator in many newer transmissions. I think the
start/stop systems may use an electrical pump so the engine
doesn't need to pump up hydraulic pressure before the
transmission can engage.

But, these are all small tweaks. The Otto cycle needs to go,
and something more efficient at mid-throttle needs to replace
it. Diesel, of course, has been there for decades.


O.K. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next
few years.
Yup, these mini-hybrid start/stop systems with the 42 V
electrical system are going to be interesting. But, I'd like to
see a REAL hybrid, with a tiny 12-Hp or so 2-cyl diesel and big
batteries that could allow you to drive tens of miles at up to
30 MPH say, on electric alone.

Jon

Wes wrote:
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:


Electric steering is already coming in, saves a Hp on the
steering pump.

And where does that energy come from to power the steering? If
you say "the battery", then the next obvious question is "where does the
energy come from to charge the battery" -- and the answer there must be
"the engine" for the most part -- though I guess that you could put
alternators inside the wheels so braking would partially come from
energy being transferred to the battery.

Or are you saying that electrical power steering is (or can be
made) more energy efficient than the hydraulic power steering found on
most cars these days?


I don't know how the current technology works for sure so I'm assuming we
have a constant volume pump dumping flow over a relief valve. If so, then
electrics might make sense. At highway speeds with normal inputs to stay in
one's lane power assisted steering isn't needed with most vehicles. I'm
pretty sure your old enough to have operated a vehicle without power
steering.

We used to have a Taurus that had variable-assist power
steering. The power assist would fade out until it was totally
manual at 45 MPH. The thing used to scare me because it
required a LOT of steering effort to change lanes, etc. on the
highway.

The control valve is mostly free-flow when not applying force to
the wheel, but the pump still circulates the fluid through the
whole circuit, and that burns some energy.
With an electric system a torque sensor on the steering input shaft would
turn on the hydraulics for a few moments during low speed steering
operations or a need to make rapid wheel angle changes at speed.

I wonder if a variable displacement pump would be equally effective?
Too complicated. The new systems are totally electric, with a
torque motor attached near the bottom of the steering column.
No pumps, no hoses, no valves.

Jon

Anthony wrote:

It's out there already, DIG (Direct injection Gasoline), more are coming,
bet on it, and sooner than you think.
What cars, or are these coming in the next couple years? I'd
like to know more, I've been following stratified charge
experimantal engines for decades, and always been mystified why
they never went commercial.
35 mpg is not unachieveable, some vehicles have been getting better than
that for years.
The TDI that Volkswagon AG has is an incredible engine, wish I could
afford one.
The small diesel market is going to expand in the next few years in the
US.
There are also alternatives out there to the otto cycle engine. The mazda
rotary is one that has been proven, and gets good fuel mileage.


Umm, maybe it was the gearing, but I had some friends that had
RX-7s of various vintages, they all complained of rotten milage.
(Well, my 86 MR2 also got poor milage, I know that was the
insane performance gearing.)

Jon

"ATP*" wrote in message
...

Also, the gas mileage has apparently gone down from earlier claims of 157
mpg and the weight has increased from 450 kg to "under 600" kg. This
Loremo AG startup sounds like it may be an investment scam to me, like the
all-plastic bicycle of the 1970's.


If it's a scam, it may well be more like the Tucker. grin

It'll be interesting to follow the "progress" of the Loremo...

"RAM³" wrote in message
.. .
"ATP*" wrote in message
...

Also, the gas mileage has apparently gone down from earlier claims of 157
mpg and the weight has increased from 450 kg to "under 600" kg. This
Loremo AG startup sounds like it may be an investment scam to me, like
the all-plastic bicycle of the 1970's.


If it's a scam, it may well be more like the Tucker. grin

It'll be interesting to follow the "progress" of the Loremo...

I hope it works, but at this point in my life, I need more than a 3D
rendering to believe....It seems unlikely that they can achieve such an
amazing increase over existing small, lightweight vehicles.

On Dec 25, 12:09*am, Jon Elson wrote:
What cars, or are these coming in the next couple years? *I'd
like to know more, I've been following stratified charge
experimantal engines for decades, and always been mystified why
they never went commercial....
Jon

Didn't you read my post? The Honda CVCC was a prechamber stratified
charge engine.

From the owner's manual of the 1980 Accord in my garage:

"The CVCC engine has two combustion chambers - the main chamber and
the auxiliary chamber. The main chamber burns an extremely lean
mixture which is ignited by the auxiliary. The auxiliary chamber burns
a rich mixture which is ignited by the spark plug. Because the volume
of the auxiliary chamber is smaller in comparison to the main chamber,
the overall air/fuel mixture is very lean."

My roomier, heavier all-wheel-drive CR-V can achieve nearly the same
MPG as the '80 and has twice the horsepower. CVCC Accords were
relatively feeble.

Jim Wilkins

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
On Dec 25, 12:09 am, Jon Elson wrote:
What cars, or are these coming in the next couple years? I'd
like to know more, I've been following stratified charge
experimantal engines for decades, and always been mystified why
they never went commercial....
Jon

Didn't you read my post? The Honda CVCC was a prechamber stratified
charge engine.

From the owner's manual of the 1980 Accord in my garage:

"The CVCC engine has two combustion chambers - the main chamber and
the auxiliary chamber. The main chamber burns an extremely lean
mixture which is ignited by the auxiliary. The auxiliary chamber burns
a rich mixture which is ignited by the spark plug. Because the volume
of the auxiliary chamber is smaller in comparison to the main chamber,
the overall air/fuel mixture is very lean."

My roomier, heavier all-wheel-drive CR-V can achieve nearly the same
MPG as the '80 and has twice the horsepower. CVCC Accords were
relatively feeble.

Jim Wilkins

Yes, feeble is the word. IIRC, stratified charge (and other lean-burn
technologies) took a dive when the NOx standards came in. They burn too hot,
producing a lot of the stuff.

Does that ring a bell with anyone, or was it just hype to promote something
newer?

--
Ed Huntress