OT: how far we've come?, 35 years of non-progress Options

[lapuwali]

Hybrids are the buzzword now, and people marvel at how the latest Civic hybrid gets 50mpg.

Autoweek had a short article on the early Civics, which got 55mpg with a carb. 1.2L, 50hp, 1500lbs. Sure, they were slow, but they were described as still being fun to drive. The way most people drive modern Civics, I doubt they'd notice if they suddenly only had 50hp.

(yes, I know emissions are much better, it's quieter, it crashes better, yada, yada...)

[lapuwali]

QUOTE (newto914s @ Mar 8 2006, 03:35 PM)

When you think about it, the basic design of the internal combustion engine hasn't really changed in 100 years. I would think if car manufacteres were to try one or both of these ideas they easily could make a 100mpg car. http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/050302.html http://www.coatesengine.com/engine_of_the_future.html

The reciprocating piston Otto engine has lasted 100 years because it works. There have been scads of ideas during that time to replace it, but the only one that made it to production was the Wankel. Most of the other ideas had other serious problems the inventors overlooked or ignored. Most new designs take many years of serious effort to develop to the point where they'll really work in a mass-production environment, and last for decades of use. The Wankel took a LOT of work before it was really useful, and it still has some pretty significant shortcomings.

The only other IC engine produced in serious numbers is the gas turbine, which isn't well suited to directly driving a car. It IS well suited to driving a generator, and has proven itself very useful in aircraft. A small turbine driving a generator to charge batteries to make electric motors push a car around is a valid idea, and it's been pursued, to some extent. Great thermal efficiency, smooth-running, instant flex fuel capability.