Ok we give the big three money to retool. But what kind of car should they build? I love tech talk!
Everyone talks about giving money to the big three car makers. But what kind of car should they build?
Ford Fiesta ECOnetic Diesel
At the British International Motor Show, Ford has introduced the ECOnetic version of its Ford Fiesta. The engine is a 1.6-liter Duratorq TDCi (diesel) that has been tweaked for efficiency. Fuel economy for the ECOnetic Fiesta is 3.7 L/100km (
63.6 mpg US
) combined, or 3.2 L/100km (73.5 mpg US) on the highway! It’s not exactly a race car, with 0 to 60 mph in 12 seconds, but those who will buy it won’t care, the mileage will more than make up for it.
My bold 63.6 MPG! This is a start but what if we added Oskosh Trucks hybrid tech to it?
The ProPulse hybrid drive system helps the engine to operate at the optimum operating point for required energy demand, providing increased fuel economy, reduced emissions, lower life-cycle costs and lower interior and exterior noise profiles.
As designed for the refuse application, the ProPulse system combines a 300 hp diesel engine with a 225 kW generator and ultracapacitors (1.4 MJ) to drive two 140 hp traction motors. The modular hybrid system allows for electrification of ancillary systems and accessories.
We are extremely excited to introduce this remarkable technology to the refuse market. Our ProPulse hybrid drive system could significantly reduce fuel costs. During extensive customer field tests, it has shown improved fuel efficiency
of 20 to 50 percent over the typical refuse trucks.
So the Ford gets 60.6 MPG so 60.6*.20=12.2
add 12.2 to 60.6 = 72.8 mpg
Even the Chevy Volt uses an engine to charge its batteries Diesels get more mpg so ussing a Diesel in the Volt might be better we need to compare both ideas with a road test!
Converting from gas to Diesel will cost the gas companies but I think they have the money!
What other tech can we throw in? The Apera?
With the Plug-in Electric Hybrid version of the Aptera(typ-1h) the mileage of the vehicle is difficult to describe with one number. For example, the Typ-1h can drive 40 to 60 miles on electric power alone. Perhaps for such a trip, the engine may only be duty-cycled for a few seconds or minutes. This would produce a fantastic number, an incredible number that, though factually true, would have no useful context, i.e. it’s just a point on a graph.
An asymptotic decaying exponential is an accurate way to describe the fuel mileage of the Typ-1h. For example driving say, 50 miles, one might calculate a MPG number that’s 2 or 3 times higher, say, 1000 MPG. As battery energy is depleted, the frequency of the engine duty cycle is increased. More fuel is used at 75 miles, the MPG might be closer to 400 MPG. Again, we’re using battery energy mostly, but turning the engine on more and more. Just over 100 miles we’re just over 300 MPG, and just beyond 120 miles, we’re around 300 MPG.
So why pick a number at 120 miles? Well, it’s more than double of most available plug-in hybrid ranges that achieve over 100 MPG. It’s three times the distance of the typical American daily commute. It’s a meaningful distance that represents the driving needs of 99% of Americans on a daily basis. Sure, it’s asymptotic, after 350-400 miles it eventually plummets to around 130 MPG at highway speeds where it will stay all day until you plug it back in and charge it up.
We will need clean diesel and lots of it but it will take time to build these cars and time for everyone to buy them so I think the oil companies can do it.
Still imagine what kind of MPG an Aptera diesel hybrid with Oskosh tech could get?
The project began with RMR removing all the body panels and creating carbon fiber pieces to replace the front bumper, fenders, doors, side skirts and more. RMR wouldn’t divulge how much weight was trimmed from the Genesis Coupe, but figure a production door weighs 68 pounds and the carbon fiber unit comes in under nine pounds, there’s a lot of mass missing here compared to its stock counterpart.
My Bold Sorry I can’t seem to find anything about a carbon fiber car frame still 68 pounds stock car door 9 pounds for race car door which if anything do to the possibility of a crash must be strong.
They might have taken the glass out of the car door window though.
Still 5 car doors if its a hatchback 68*5 = 340 vs 9*5= 45 pounds
I’m leaving the weight of the roof, hood and side panels out as a safty factor to account for the weight of the glass and window raising mechanism.
340-45= 295 pound worth of savings on weight!
Carbon fiber reinforced polymer is used extensively in high end automobile racing. The high cost of carbon fiber is mitigated by the material’s unsurpassed strength-to-weight ratio, and low weight is essential for high-performance automobile racing. Racecar manufacturers have also developed methods to give carbon fiber pieces strength in a certain direction, making it strong in a load-bearing direction, but weak in directions where little or no load would be placed on the member. Conversely, manufacturers developed omnidirectional carbon fiber weaves that apply strength in all directions. This type of carbon fiber assembly is most widely used in the “safety cell” monocoque chassis assembly of high-performance racecars.
Several supercars over the past few decades have incorporated CFRP extensively in their manufacture, using it for their monocoque chassis as well as other components.
Until recently, the material has had limited use in mass-produced cars because of the expense involved in terms of materials, equipment, and the relatively limited pool of individuals with expertise in working with it. Recently, several mainstream vehicle manufacturers have started to use CFRP in everyday road cars.
Use of the material has been more readily adopted by low-volume manufacturers who used it primarily for creating body-panels for some of their high-end cars due to its increased strength and decreased weight compared with the glass-reinforced polymer they used for the majority of their products.
Often street racers or hobbyist tuners will purchase a carbon fiber reinforced polymer hood, spoiler or body panel as an aftermarket part for their vehicle. However, these parts are rarely made of full carbon fiber. They are often just a single layer of carbon fiber laminated onto fiberglass for the “look” of carbon fiber. It is common for these parts to remain unpainted to accentuate the look of the carbon fiber weave.
Lower weight means better mpg if we mass produce the stuff we can get costs down. We just need plans to up production.
Standardized Parts and a government allocated marketare how we save money making the cars.
Since we are giving the big three cash they need a plan to pay us back. Suppose instead of just how many different models of cars lets say the big three instead made only 4 different size cars, 4 truck models, 2 minivans, 2 vans.
But the parts would all be interchangeable that would save costs. The same engine in the car as the mini van, the same engine in the truck and van same air filter, spark plugs.
Parts makers would not have to shut down and convert the line to make Chevy or Ford parts. Time is money
Your Mechanic would not have to send out to the dealership for parts so often warehouse space all up and down the supply chain would increase.
With parts being interchangeable manufacturing the cars will not be stopped quite so often because parts are not available, more savings
Of all my ideas this is the cheapest to implement.
After the big three pay us back with interest they can choose to op out of the system but until then.