Adventurer Hybrid on the road

Tom said:

Don't have any numbers, and I'm not up on current (no pun) technology, but regenerative braking has been around for many years and is essentially "free" energy that would otherwise be wasted.

Click to expand...

Driving habits make up for a huge difference in energy used.  For example, I can get roughly the same MPG out of a 5-speed, 8-cyl Mustang at 330 HP that I got out of a 170HP Volkswagen 4 cyl.  You'll notice I say 5-speed.  That plays a big part. As opposed to braking all the time as I would probably find it more necessary to do in an automatic transmission vehicle, I downshift well before known slowdown/turning points.  Feather the throttle a bit, no brakes needed.  My car is rated factory at 300HP and 22 MPG highway.  With a cold air kit and an engine computer reflash tune at a cost of around $600 I have it running at 330HP ans 29MPG highway.  The only difference is I have to run 93 octane vs. 87-89.  Costs about $2.50 more at fillup.

I've seen some articles about a guy that tuned one to the point that he was getting about 500HP and 75 MPG running on gas.  It is in the engine tuning.  But most people won't want to accept the expense of keeping the engine in tune to that level.

Brakes in use just mean that you use the brakes to bleed off excess energy built up under throttle to slow/stop the car (or RV).  With a manual transmission, an informed driver can improve on the performance of the vehicle so long as they practice the necessary skills all the time.

But, if I could take the wasted energy from braking heat (wasted energy)  to another means to power the vehicle I'd go for it.  I just don't know if the additional weight (for batteries) and carbon footprint (from manufacturing the batteries, recycling them, etc.) would be worth the tradeoff.  I figure I'd come out about even to what I get with a good tune and maintenance.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Understood Mike, but ...

As opposed to braking all the time as I would probably find it more necessary to do in an automatic transmission vehicle, I downshift well before known slowdown/turning points.  Feather the throttle a bit, no brakes needed.

Click to expand...

You're still wasting energy to slow down, and that could be captured and stored.

Mike and Sherrie in VA said:

Driving habits make up for a huge difference in energy used. 

Click to expand...

You bet...the weight of the right foot and the ultimate speed maintained will dictate more efficiency differences that anything else...plus or minus 30-40% at least depending on the driver. 

Mike and Sherrie in VA said:

I've seen some articles about a guy that tuned one to the point that he was getting about 500HP and 75 MPG running on gas.  It is in the engine tuning.  But most people won't want to accept the expense of keeping the engine in tune to that level.

Brakes in use just mean that you use the brakes to bleed off excess energy built up under throttle to slow/stop the car (or RV).  With a manual transmission, an informed driver can improve on the performance of the vehicle so long as they practice the necessary skills all the time.

Click to expand...

Since fuel mileage has so much to do with weight and speed, I cannot refute the article you mention, but generally speaking you cannot "tune" a modern engine to enhance efficiency.  The control systems on any car built in the last ten years is constantly monitoring the fuel air mixture, throttle position, MAF data, temperature, etc, and is making adjustments to maximize efficiency and reduce wasted fuel (also for emissions purposes).  You can reprogram the computer to add more or less fuel under certain circumstances, but generally speaking, the factory setting is generally close to peak efficiency for any given condition.  500 HP and 75 MPG in an actual road legal car = thermodynamically impossible (unless the car was dropped out of a plane ;D).

Downshifting your engine vs. braking...doesn't matter, it's the exact same effect.  Friction slows the vehicle, which is turned into heat, which is expelled to the atmosphere.

 

This is not the original story I referenced, about 500HP @ 75MPG, but the same guy and the reference below is a different article.  OK, it wasn't simply a tune.  Point being this guy claims it can be done and intends to prove it.  This has been in the Ford community news for yers, I just can't immediately locate the specific reference from my earlier post.  Hovever, it is interesting (to me anyway):

The high MPG and high HP Ford guy

One more question on the hybrid RV. Does anyone know what the operating DC voltage would be for the drive motors on the RV?

  I recall reading that the little Golf carts run on 48 or 36 volts. Surely that wouldn't be enough to propel a 10 ton RV. Probably more like around 120 VDC or more  That's a lot of batteries.

Just curious.  carson FL

The prius uses a 500V system.  Large Diesels locomotives can use up to 3,600V AC in the newer units I believe.

Christian,

Large Diesels locomotives can use up to 3,600V AC

Click to expand...

Is that AC or DC used. I thought the Prius ran on batteries, charged by a small gas engine.

Fill me in.

carson

I am not a locomotive expert but I understand that the newer engines use AC drive motors instead of DC for improved efficiency and longevity since an AC motor requires no commuter or brushes.

The prius is 500V DC.

Christian, as you can tell, I am no expert either.

  I still don't understand where the efficiency comes in. To use a diesel engine to drive an A/c generator and then feed A/c to the drive train motor has losses in each process. Why is that done?

  One thing I do know, one cannot amplify power. If we knew how to do that our energy problems would be over.  Maybe Fusion energy someday....I won't be around then. Energy or matter cannot be created nor destroyed..it only changes from one form to another. Maybe someone can explain that in more detail. Even harnessing water (hydro dams), solar etc are not free. The capital costs are tremendous and must be considered in the equation.

Re Prius: Where does the 500 VDC come from and how is it stored? Remember there is no such thing as free energy (lunch).

Just more curiosity.

carson FL

For a locomotive, the efficiency comes from being able to design and operate an engine at its peak efficiency instead of having to compromise efficiency by designing an engine to perform across a broad RPM range.  Since the generator only has to operate at one RPM, that particular point can be optimized. 

The second area of efficiency is not having a transmission. The drive motors are electric and have no gearing, they have a perfectly flat torque curve across a broad RPM range so there is no transmission necessary.  There are losses in generating the electricity but it is much less than a transmission.  Usually electric motors exceed 95% efficient in converting electric energy to mechanical energy.

Now, I should say that I have no data that says a locomotive type power-train would in-fact be more efficient in an over the road vehicle, but it seems that if it works for locomotives, it would work for large vehicles.  Again, I cannot support that with any factual data.

The Hybrid is simpler.  Its efficiency comes from having a smaller motor that runs closer to it's peak efficiency more often, and from capturing braking energy and reusing it via the electric motors.  The hybrid stores the electric energy in a battery bank...usually NiMh batteries for use during acceleration.  If you consider that the amount of energy required to stop a car is roughly equivalent to that required to accelerate it, you can start to realize just how much energy is wasted in converting kinetic energy into heat during the braking process.  There is little or no efficiency gain for a hybrid on the highway...it's just a small efficient engine running at it's peak...a non-hybrid of the same displacement and engine design would be just as efficient under those conditions.

I for one am glad to here so much talk on this subject. To me it means we will find a way. From not being able to fly in 1903 to standing on the moon in 66 years! Yes we will have to try out some hair brain things before we get a replacement to oil. I hope it is in a breakthrough in better battery storage. I spend the Winter months in South Texas & the potential for electricity from wind driven generators is  sure there. What a windy place!  Art

Hydro power is not too reliable in the drought stricken areas or the peak summer days. Wind turbines do not spin on hot humid lazy summer days. What does one do with the batteries from a hybrid after the life cycle  of said batteries has expired and what is the replacement cost? I still believe clean coal technology is very doable if we want to put as much research dollars into it as we do "green" technology. Nuclear is good as long as you don't consider what to do with the spent fuel rods, maby a one way trip to the sun with them would take care of it. ;D. I think I'm getting too old to worry bout this stuff.....Ill let my son, the engineer, figure it all out and meanwhile ill be out in the RV enjoying my supposed golden years.

codgerbill, I like your post.

  A few points..  We won't run of oil for the next 500 years, maybe never. Remember 20 years ago they said the wells are going dry? No one ever proved it or disproved it.

  The modern trend.. solar, wind, hydro, atomic electricity is not going to keep commerce going. How do you power anything, if it is dependent on battery power, all that is temporary storage. To date the only thing keeping things moving on the hi-ways, rails etc. is an expendable power source..that is oil.

  There will never be a day when a huge semi moves down the highway using a wind propeller, a corn husk, a solar panel or perpetual motion.

  Until we, the people, invent a new power source, nothing significant will change. The internal combustion engine, running on oil, has been in existence since the late 1800's. We are now in the 2000's and not much has changed. A few mod's here and there but no one has come up with a better idea.

  Seems to me that we need to let time go by and wait for a revolutionary development to come up with an answer. Just fiddling with the old system is not going to produce anything.

  Some day... I don't know when... someone will dream up something that will solve the problem. I am not holding my breath..  maybe in a hundred years from now. I won't be here, but something will happen. In the meantime, let's use the oil we we have (coal, gas, crude etc) until we, the people, figure it out.

  I have run out of things to say to empty my mind..

carson FL

 

codgerbill said:

I still believe clean coal technology is very doable if we want to put as much research dollars into it as we do "green" technology

Click to expand...

"Clean coal" is an oxymoron. And even if you build "cleaner" (ie, less dirty) coal plants, you still have the dirtier ones in place. Take a look at the skies around the Four Corners area, skies get dirtier every time they build a new "clean" coal plant so that folks in Phoenix and Albuquerque can have more electricity.

And as for there never being a day "when a huge semi moves down the highway using a wind propeller, a corn husk, a solar panel or perpetual motion," why not? My great grandmother lived to 105 and she saw us go from horses to cars, she saw crazy people invent airplanes, and she see saw a man land on the moon. I bet she thought those were all crazy things when she was a kid. It might not be any of the things you list but for sure there's a solution out there and a lot of "crazy" people looking for that solution.....and one of them is going to find it.

Wendy

Interesting perspective Carson. Back in the 60's I worked for a while in an electrical repair shop, where they re-wound motors and generators of all sizes. I questioned an "old guy" I worked with (he was around 40, and seemed ancient to me at that time) why he was going back to school at night. His response: "One of these days someone is going to invent something to replace a rotary electric motor, and I'll be out of a job".

Linear motors came on the scene, but require expensive in-ground magnets (or electro-magnets), and haven't found much application outside of railroads and California Adventure (sister park adjacent to Disneyland).

OTOH we could copy the design of Ned's new sailboat. Works well as long as the wind is blowing in the right direction.

Good stuff, Tom

  I know that there is no way anyone can change a tree-huggers mind, but science is what rules the world. Without science we would still be hugging trees and no place to enjoy our Rv travels.

  All I am saying is that a major break-through in science is required. With our current crop of engineers graduating from government-schools there seems to be not much hope.

I am talking about the future brains that may have differing ideas. Maybe one in a million may step forward, certainly many have, but have faced obstacles with our current political system.

  It is time for someone to make a real point and publish it. But who...I am too old..

  Every one push for new ideas, don't let them get buried because of ideology. Only science can save us, not ideology. Remember that politicians do not worry about tomorrow, just their next election.

  Let's have a bit more discussion.

carson

Sail powered trucks would definitely require an overhaul of the interstate system to eliminate all the overpasses.

Easy - just convert the overpasses to draw bridges.

LOL, have to do a lot of tacking getting onto an off-ramp. I suppose a quick sail change/drop is required to come to a quick stop.  All computerized,  of course. No problem..

Keep thinking,guys//

  Nice try.. carson FL

Well now.....
Clean coal technology is doable. Existing powerplants could be retrofitted. Precipatators and scrubbers (for stack gas emissions) are continually evolving.and if we spent just a fraction on the technology as we do the green stuff I am sure we could solve the remainder of the problems.  I worked for an electrical utility for most of my life ( A utility that has a subsidiary developing clean coal technology) and I had work with large Industrial customers as well as many startup companies.  One was a company working to develop fusion, until the funds from the US Government dried up. Another developed an external combustion (Sterling) engine that was a prime mover for generators. It would run on any kind of fuel and even off of external heat sources. The company produced 25 KW units and was beginning to get into bigger units....until the funds dried up. We have lots of money for solar and wind but very little for other solutions which shows that the PC solution has overwhelmed us and given us a mental block toward other more viable solutions.