Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
914World.com _ 914World Garage _ turbine engine setup for 5k
Posted by: thelogo Oct 6 2014, 02:53 PM
http://m.ebay.com/itm/301333942262
Somebody post the photo from this link if they know how
............
I always thought I would see someone's car with this setup here
Before I saw it anywhere else.
I know dodge experimented with this in the 60 s right
But how viable is this power plant
And how much would be involved in , money wise $$$
To do this installation.. I'm thinkin a lot.
Posted by: SirAndy Oct 6 2014, 03:02 PM
Posted by: Sleepin Oct 6 2014, 03:19 PM
Limo powerplant.
Posted by: fixer34 Oct 6 2014, 03:41 PM
I put this in the 'Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do it...' category.
Posted by: rgalla9146 Oct 6 2014, 04:03 PM
I put this in the 'Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do it...' category.
That tank looking thing will need to be upholstered.
It'll be next to your hip and under your elbow.
For 160 HP why bother ?
Posted by: SLITS Oct 6 2014, 04:10 PM
STP Racing pulled it off at the Brickyard.
Posted by: busmech Oct 6 2014, 05:36 PM
There is one problem, the exhaust is going forward as built.
http://www.jetpower.co.uk/gtp70_gallery.htm
I remember having a Car and Driver with a Vette powered by P&W PT6. Built by Granitelle. It idled at 60MPH and at the 1/4 mile left 2 black streeks for 1,200 feet. You can run them on about anything, but this one would not work for a 914 maybe a VW but you would burn the paint off the car behind you.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 6 2014, 06:28 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2A5ijU3Ivs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4itFz7EVGqA
http://www.granatellimotorsports.com/
http://jalopnik.com/5979348/forgotten-cars-hey-rover-made-turbine-cars-too
More research needed,lot of BS spouted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STP-Paxton_Turbocar
http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2014/06/27/turbine-powered-shelby-built-indy-car-heads-to-auction/
Posted by: Elliot Cannon Oct 6 2014, 06:38 PM
Chrysler tried it back in the early sixties. They leased them to a few families around the country to try it out. There was one close to my house. And, of course, Leno has one. 
Attached image(s)
Posted by: FourBlades Oct 6 2014, 07:10 PM
Everyone knows you can't turbine a 914!
John
Posted by: Mike Bellis Oct 6 2014, 07:15 PM
I see my next donor motor... 
I bet it's loud! 
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 6 2014, 08:35 PM
Roads?
Where we're going,we don't need Roads
Gas Turbine generator charges batteries runs electric motors.
Intrinsic losses mount.
Way Neato tho.
Anyone interested in an attempt to do better what Rover and Chrysler did?
Deep pocket develops hole.
New materials available today may make feasible a more efficient turbine and drive.
Posted by: Mark Henry Oct 6 2014, 08:58 PM
A lot easier to do in a front engine car...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIFaxA3dj3Y
Posted by: mapguy Oct 7 2014, 12:05 AM
One word: Sandrail. I bet you'd be the only guy at the dunes with one. At least until you sucked sand into the blades.
I wouldn't want to be around for that.
Posted by: maf914 Oct 7 2014, 05:35 AM
Two words: M1 Abram.
From Wikipedia: The M1 Abrams' powertrain comprises a 1,500 shaft horsepower (1,100 kW) Honeywell AGT 1500 (originally made by Lycoming) multi-fuel gas turbine, and a six speed (four forward, two reverse) Allison X-1100-3B Hydro-Kinetic automatic transmission, giving it a governed top speed of 45 mph (72 km/h) on paved roads, and 30 mph (48 km/h) cross-country. With the engine governor removed, speeds of around 60 mph (97 km/h) are possible on an improved surface; however, damage to the drivetrain (especially to the tracks) and an increased risk of injuries to the crew can occur at speeds above 45 mph (72 km/h). The tank was built around this engine[59] and it is multifuel capable; meaning that it can be powered with diesel, kerosene, any grade of motor gasoline, and jet fuel (such as JP-4 or JP-8). For logistical reasons, JP-8 is the US military's universal fuel powering both aircraft and vehicle fleets. On the other hand, Australian M1A1 AIM SA burn diesel fuel, since the use of JP-8 is less common in the Australian Army.
Attached image(s)
Posted by: ripper911 Oct 7 2014, 05:59 AM
It should fit in a 914.
Posted by: rgalla9146 Oct 7 2014, 06:08 AM
Two words: M1 Abram.
From Wikipedia: The M1 Abrams' powertrain comprises a 1,500 shaft horsepower (1,100 kW) Honeywell AGT 1500 (originally made by Lycoming) multi-fuel gas turbine, and a six speed (four forward, two reverse) Allison X-1100-3B Hydro-Kinetic automatic transmission, giving it a governed top speed of 45 mph (72 km/h) on paved roads, and 30 mph (48 km/h) cross-country. With the engine governor removed, speeds of around 60 mph (97 km/h) are possible on an improved surface; however, damage to the drivetrain (especially to the tracks) and an increased risk of injuries to the crew can occur at speeds above 45 mph (72 km/h). The tank was built around this engine[59] and it is multifuel capable; meaning that it can be powered with diesel, kerosene, any grade of motor gasoline, and jet fuel (such as JP-4 or JP-8). For logistical reasons, JP-8 is the US military's universal fuel powering both aircraft and vehicle fleets. On the other hand, Australian M1A1 AIM SA burn diesel fuel, since the use of JP-8 is less common in the Australian Army.
It will require a muffler the size of the car.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 7 2014, 07:05 AM
http://www.avonaero.com/garrett70.htm
Two would fit nicely in a helicopter.
A miniature turbine EV has got to be more efficient than a piston engine EV.
Posted by: mbseto Oct 7 2014, 07:17 AM
...until you factor in maintenance costs.
Posted by: CptTripps Oct 7 2014, 08:22 AM
I'd go Electric before I'd go Turbine...
...and I'd likely blow a hobo in a truck-stop bathroom before either.
Posted by: Dave_Darling Oct 7 2014, 08:54 AM
Traditionally, turbine engines have been great with overall power, but horrible with transient response. (And you thought "turbo lag" was bad, "turbine lag" is even worse!) They're also ear-bleeding loud, and produce incredible amounts of heat. Not to mention going through fuel like scotch at an AA meeting.
The up-sides don't seem to be enough to warrant the $$$ investment required to mitigate those down-sides. It'd be cool to be proven wrong on this, though!
--DD
Posted by: timothy_nd28 Oct 7 2014, 09:00 AM
That excess heat could be used as a cool snow melt feature
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 7 2014, 09:08 AM
I'd go Electric before I'd go Turbine...
...and I'd likely blow a hobo in a truck-stop bathroom before either.
Turbines both suck and blow,your spare time recreation is of only cursory interest.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 7 2014, 09:29 AM
Traditionally, turbine engines have been great with overall power, but horrible with transient response. (And you thought "turbo lag" was bad, "turbine lag" is even worse!) They're also ear-bleeding loud, and produce incredible amounts of heat. Not to mention going through fuel like scotch at an AA meeting.
The up-sides don't seem to be enough to warrant the $$$ investment required to mitigate those down-sides. It'd be cool to be proven wrong on this, though!
--DD
Research into a lighter more fuel efficient gas turbine is a continuing endeavor,everyone is doing it.A small turbine genset in an EV will come about soon enough,simply because of the weight penalty of piston engines.A 40hp turbine would be sufficient to backup a battery pack for long range use.
http://www.nedra.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t8ble57r24
mute
Posted by: mapguy Oct 7 2014, 10:52 AM
Another fringe benefit for our four season friends:
With proper ducting you could have a very effective defroster.
Posted by: BeatNavy Oct 7 2014, 11:01 AM
Traditionally, turbine engines have been great with overall power, but horrible with transient response. (And you thought "turbo lag" was bad, "turbine lag" is even worse!) They're also ear-bleeding loud, and produce incredible amounts of heat. Not to mention going through fuel like scotch at an AA meeting.
The up-sides don't seem to be enough to warrant the $$$ investment required to mitigate those down-sides. It'd be cool to be proven wrong on this, though!
--DD
Dave's right. In the Army I had the opportunity (misfortune?) to stand near the back of more than one M1. The heat coming out the exhaust is amazing. They also have to "rev up." The sound they make starting up was pretty bad-ass, though, especially when a whole company of tanks starts firing up.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 7 2014, 11:16 AM
Another fringe benefit for our four season friends:
With proper ducting you could have a very effective defroster.
Four seasons in California happens too.
Sunny
Sunny Sunny
Sunny Sunny Sunny
Sunny Sunny Sunny Sunny
Burning Earth juice at 50% efficiency defrosts everywhere.
Save the Polar bears or the Seals will rule the Arctic
When the girls go out clubbing,
it's like,a totally different meaning.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 7 2014, 12:54 PM
Turbine 914?
Not that turbine.
It's going cheap because it's timed out and needs maintenance.
Now a 160hp 200lb turboshaft engine may be suitable for a vehicle such as this skimmer.
Looks like the perfect machine to get out to the icepack for the season of the killing.
Posted by: edwin Oct 8 2014, 03:50 AM
Front engine instead?
Attached image(s)
Posted by: scotty b Oct 8 2014, 06:33 AM
Towle bought it 
Posted by: Bartlett 914 Oct 8 2014, 07:12 AM
Chrysler tried it back in the early sixties. They leased them to a few families around the country to try it out. There was one close to my house. And, of course, Leno has one.
When I was a kid, I actually got to ride in one of them! It was so cool. Only sound I heard was the tires. Mechanics Illustrated magazine had run a contest that was really a way to locate potential test owners. Our neighbor was given one for a year. The car did have issues. He gave us a ride just before he had to return it.
Posted by: aircooledtechguy Oct 8 2014, 07:50 AM
Just looking at this photo, I would guess that the beginning of an exhaust would be at or near the base of the dash. . . Being a more "full figured guy", I guess there would not be room for me in there, or anyone larger than a garden gnome for that matter.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 8 2014, 08:28 AM
Buffalo
Nah.
Some snow don't blow,they're squeegees for miles of runway in the rainy seasons.
An Air France hydroplaned off the end of the 24L-06R runway into a ravine here in TO.
No casualties,Airbus burned during heavy thunderstorm.
Puddles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_358
Posted by: Jake Raby Oct 8 2014, 10:28 AM
Turbines are generally designed to operate at 100% Ng and have their loads altered by means of the drive system.
Because of that, the fuel control isn't sensitive to throttle changes.
The ultimate way to outfit one of these turbines would be through the use of a hydraulic drive system that can vary volume to alter the vehicle speed, so the engine can run at 100% Ng and stay happy.
I've been wanting to install a T58-GE-16 engine into a VW bus for a while now, and I know my way around them really well.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 8 2014, 12:36 PM
VW Jet
Art Arfons
Green Monster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Arfons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Monster_%28automobile%29
http://www.darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1995-04.html
The Chevy engine block in the ravine below the impact on the mesa wall.
Still a good story.
Posted by: chads74 Oct 8 2014, 12:54 PM
I am surprised no one mentioned Jay Leno and his turbine bike. Never embedded video sorry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9TPB5SzjLs
Posted by: rdauenhauer Oct 8 2014, 08:48 PM
STP Racing pulled it off at the Brickyard.
Speaking of that car.....
Team STP & the Brothers Dauenhauer pit crew.
Attached image(s)
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 8 2014, 11:55 PM
Turbine! not turban.
In those days the b+w tv showed the amazing STP car dominate the field.
A legacy of wrenching history of the family likely means you had an early start.
Thinking,designing,building a car/bike/boat/plane or rocket is the American way.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 9 2014, 06:52 PM
Massive Thrust
Posted by: Johny Blackstain Oct 9 2014, 07:36 PM
Massive Thrust
Hmmm... 6 Pratt & Whitney j58 turboramjet engines. Could it be the B70?
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 9 2014, 07:42 PM
Winner!!
What an aircraft.
Clint Eastwood made a flick about it.
Posted by: Johny Blackstain Oct 9 2014, 07:45 PM
Winner!!
What an aircraft.
Clint Eastwood made a flick about it.
Ya, but I was wrong about the engines... GE J93, not P&W J58. You're not thinking "Firefox" are you?
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 10 2014, 12:28 AM
Yah
that was it
names were changed to avoid hassles.
Ludicrous plotline,entertaining tho.
Posted by: veekry9 Oct 11 2014, 10:00 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IND3eAI3YZk
What a gas.
A turbojet for the salt.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)