100 miles per gallon Fox Body?
11-16-2008, 12:42 PM
#41
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 4,616
not to mention how much more dangerous storing hydrogen is. i thought the compressed air car looked pretty interesting. granted the car uses elecricity to fill the air tanks, and producing electricity isnt always the best for the environment. but there are lots of ways to produce electricity that are environment friendly
just like some tech geeks figured out a way to run a car for years on a nuclear battery, but cant figure out how to make it not usefull for crooks : ).
11-16-2008, 06:31 PM
#42
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3
Everyone on here seems to think this is a hoax. I don't know if it is or not, but I can tell you that I'm originally from Toledo, OH (the area where this guys is) and the local news station there has done multiple stories on this.
They actually took the vehicle for a ride. The filled it up with E-85, took it on a 100 mile trip, and then filled it up again to see how much gas was used. They figured they averaged 50 mpg.
As for not revealing how this is being done, the guy is entered in the automotive X-prize sponsored by Progressive (http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/). Many of you may be more familiar with the Space version of the X-prize that Google sponsors. They are the same, just different sponsors for different areas. Anyhow, the Auto X-prize winner gets $7 Million. If it was me, I wouldn't want to go advertising to my competitors what I was doing either. The secrecy makes a whole lot of sense. He will have to reveal his methods in order to win the X-prize, and they will undergo scrutiny. If it's a hoax I doubt he would be entered in a prestigious contest
Here are some links to the stories from NBC 24 (first link talks about their test drive):
http://www.nbc24.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=191393
http://www.nbc24.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=214185
http://www.nbc24.com/news/story.aspx?id=153939
http://www.mustangevolution.com/200810291337/
They actually took the vehicle for a ride. The filled it up with E-85, took it on a 100 mile trip, and then filled it up again to see how much gas was used. They figured they averaged 50 mpg.
As for not revealing how this is being done, the guy is entered in the automotive X-prize sponsored by Progressive (http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/). Many of you may be more familiar with the Space version of the X-prize that Google sponsors. They are the same, just different sponsors for different areas. Anyhow, the Auto X-prize winner gets $7 Million. If it was me, I wouldn't want to go advertising to my competitors what I was doing either. The secrecy makes a whole lot of sense. He will have to reveal his methods in order to win the X-prize, and they will undergo scrutiny. If it's a hoax I doubt he would be entered in a prestigious contest
Here are some links to the stories from NBC 24 (first link talks about their test drive):
http://www.nbc24.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=191393
http://www.nbc24.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=214185
http://www.nbc24.com/news/story.aspx?id=153939
http://www.mustangevolution.com/200810291337/
11-17-2008, 09:10 PM
#43
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 82
There is just no way. I run e85 and know lots of others that do in dsm's and its way less dense than gas. Im talking 20-30% more fuel flow needed to get a safe AFR compared to gas.
I dont see how he would do so well on such an unefficient fuel. I get 160-200 miles at most on a 14 gallon tank. Compared to 250 or more when I was on gas. But the 105 octane rating and its burning characteristics its worth it. Ive ran as lean as 17:1 AFR and had zero detonation (when I first swapped over). Thats at 30psi and 27* max timing advance.
I dont see how he would do so well on such an unefficient fuel. I get 160-200 miles at most on a 14 gallon tank. Compared to 250 or more when I was on gas. But the 105 octane rating and its burning characteristics its worth it. Ive ran as lean as 17:1 AFR and had zero detonation (when I first swapped over). Thats at 30psi and 27* max timing advance.
11-19-2008, 01:38 PM
#44
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 25,949
The only issue with hydrogen is that the process we use to obtain it creates both carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide anyway.
<nerd>
The process can be done through electrolysis:
C + H20 -> H2 + CO
CO + H20 -> CO2 + H2
Or the "STEAM-HYDROGEN REFORM PROCESS" (Duh duh duhhhhhh)
CH4 (methane) + H2O -> 3 H2 + CO
</nerd>
I'd rather produce my carbon dioxide with fossil fuels thank you haha
<nerd>
The process can be done through electrolysis:
C + H20 -> H2 + CO
CO + H20 -> CO2 + H2
Or the "STEAM-HYDROGEN REFORM PROCESS" (Duh duh duhhhhhh)
CH4 (methane) + H2O -> 3 H2 + CO
</nerd>
I'd rather produce my carbon dioxide with fossil fuels thank you haha
As far as danger is concerned, it only makes enough hydrogen to operate the car, so there is very little storage. Also, if hydrogen cells are used, they are as safe as a battery.
11-19-2008, 03:35 PM
#45
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 395
^Yeah I've heard of the "momentum of the vehicle creating power" concept somewhere before, can't put my finger on it though. I dunno I'm merely a first year engineer so I clearly I'm not an expert, but I assume the electrolysis for the "onboard" process doesn't involve Carbon? I mean the stuff I listed is what we do for the mass production/commercial demand for hydrogen. What is the other way? Link for info? This is quite interesting for me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tj@steeda
Steeda Autosports
0
10-01-2015 09:11 PM
