This reminds me of the conversation that I had with the business associate. When I told him I was considering building a hybrid, but didn't like the idea of the batteries, his suggestion was to run the electric motor off a second alternator that was hooked to the wheels. I don't have a PHD and can't quote laws of physics but, even speaking in laymen's terms, I couldn't get him to understand.

I get it though. After a few posts I saw instantly what was wrong with my idea, and that I had bought the whole bottle of Elixir from the GM rep. I guess I was just fixated on the pot of gold, and didn't even consider the fact that I was asking my dream team combination to take a wee bit of power from an already inefficient IC engine and magnify it! I let myself believe that GM had developed a "magic" generator.

Taking all this into account, the Volt with fully drained batteries, running on the ICE-powered generator, would have to be an absolute DOG to drive in normal traffic. My car would still have functioned somewhat normally because I planned to retain the entire conventional drivetrain. I just would have been sorely disappointed when I planted my foot and the generator started using more power than could be realized through the next two conversions of that energy.

Layman's Language - you can't get somehing for nothing.

Edit = I own page two, but haven't yet figured out whether the cost of acquiring it was more than it is worth to me

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 12-31-2008).]

Can think of it kinda like a surge protector / votage regulator / reservoir, for when more power is needed than can but put out by all 4 alternators.

quote Originally posted by 88_Fiero_2M4: No man will ever bring togeather mechinical devices and make a machine that will be capable to fly.. That was said a few years before the Wright Brothers proved them wrong.

Heh. There's a big difference. You're proposing breaking physical laws of the universe, the Wright Brothers only proposed breaking the surly bonds of Earth. I leave you with a quote.

quote Originally written by Robert A. Heinlein: We defined thinking as integrating data and arriving at correct answers. Look around you. Most people do that stunt just well enough to get to the corner store and back without breaking a leg. If the average man thinks at all, he does silly things like generalizing from a single datum. He uses one-valued logics. If he is exceptionally bright, he may use two-valued, 'either-or' logic to arrive at his wrong anwers. If he is hungry, hurt, or personaly interested in the answer, he can't use any sort of logic and will discard an observed fact as blithely as he will stake his life on a piece of wishful thinking. He uses the technical miracles created by superior men without wonder nor surprise, as a kitten accepts a bowl of milk. Far from aspiring to higher reasoning, he is not even aware that higher reasoning exists. He classes his own mental process as being of the same sort as the genius of an Einstein. Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal. For explanations of a universe that confuses him, he seizes onto numerology, astrology, hysterical religions, and other fancy ways to go crazy. Having accepted such glorified nonsense, facts make no impression on him, even if at the cost of his own life. Joe, one of the hardest things to believe is the abysmal depth of human stupidity.

Say we have this:
- batteries
- electric motor
- generator
Say we have 74kwh worth of batteries.
If we just power the electric motor, we put down 7.4kw to the wheels (10hp).
The generator can make 3kw. Since nothing is 100% efficient, it requires more than 3kw to power the generator. Say 3.7kw (5hp).
So now we can do one of the following:
- run just the electric motor, at a net 10hp, for 10 hours.
- run just the electric motor at half power, at a net 5hp, for 20 hours.
- run the electric motor plus generator, at a net 5hp, for approx 16 hours.
(74kw/7.4 = 10 hours, *3 = 30kwh, /7.4=4 hours,*3=12kwh,/7.4=1.6hours,*3=4.8kwh/7.4=approx half an hour).
Now the question becomes, how much power is that?
just running the electric motor = 10*10 (or 5*20) = 100 horsepower-hours
motor + generator = 5*16 = 80 horsepower-hours

All a generator does in this case is to suck up power. You'd get the same performance as the motor-generator setup, but longer range and time, if you only ran the motor at 5hp instead of 10hp. Now if the generator was attached to a regenerative braking system instead, that would be a net positive increase to the system because you're taking energy out of the motion of the wheels to do something desirable (slow down).

quote Originally posted by AntiKev: Originally written by Robert A. Heinlein: We defined thinking as integrating data and arriving at correct answers. Look around you. Most people do that stunt just well enough to get to the corner store and back without breaking a leg. If the average man thinks at all, he does silly things like generalizing from a single datum. He uses one-valued logics. If he is exceptionally bright, he may use two-valued, 'either-or' logic to arrive at his wrong answers. If he is hungry, hurt, or personaly interested in the answer, he can't use any sort of logic and will discard an observed fact as blithely as he will stake his life on a piece of wishful thinking. He uses the technical miracles created by superior men without wonder nor surprise, as a kitten accepts a bowl of milk. Far from aspiring to higher reasoning, he is not even aware that higher reasoning exists. He classes his own mental process as being of the same sort as the genius of an Einstein. Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal. For explanations of a universe that confuses him, he seizes onto numerology, astrology, hysterical religions, and other fancy ways to go crazy. Having accepted such glorified nonsense, facts make no impression on him, even if at the cost of his own life. Joe, one of the hardest things to believe is the abysmal depth of human stupidity.

That is one of my favorite quotes


I just skimmed through the thread, but I would like to emphasize the point made about the fact that an engine that runs at one speed will be much more efficient then a variable speed one. So if you do end up going with a setup that does not connect the engine to the wheels, use an industrial/commercial steady-speed diesel engine.


One thing I am curious about is if it is possible to have a hybrid that could act normal for normal driving (Engine/Motor blend), but then have a controller apply a huge amount of wattage to the motor for one blast of high acceleration, while quickly draining the battery (or capacitor), and then just use Engine power to recharge the Cap/Batt?

Speaking of capacitors, would it be a better idea (or even possible) to use them in this case instead of a battery? Lighter weight?

[This message has been edited by 4-mulaGT (edited 12-31-2008).]

Thats what I meant by reservoir! I forgot they were called Capacitors.

quote Originally posted by 88_Fiero_2M4: I am not talking of tying the system togeather like that anway. An air motor runs a crank shaft that runs a flywheel. You would tie the wheels to the fly wheel and drive the car off that. but I am saying that you could also drive compressor off it as well and recharge the tank. maby not to fill it but at least to extend its range. Same could be said and done on an electric car.

quote Originally posted by 4-mulaGT: That is one of my favorite quotes...

Mine too now...

quote Originally posted by 4-mulaGT: ...but I would like to emphasize the point made about the fact that an engine that runs at one speed will be much more efficient then a variable speed one. So if you do end up going with a setup that does not connect the engine to the wheels, use an industrial/commercial steady-speed diesel engine...

I'm pretty much done with the idea, unless something REAL-ly significant comes along to change my mind. Actually, I am back to where I was before I watched that dumb interview. I would rather just buy more gas. Maybe one of the alternative fuels for an ICE will pan out in the long run and I can get a "green fix" that way. I was admittedly looking for a marketing gimmick to make my car more appealing. Hybrid is hot right now, so just having the label would increase my marketing opportunities. IF the system actually worked it would have been even more effective marketing tool, with performance numbers to back the hype.

quote Originally posted by 4-mulaGT: ...One thing I am curious about is if it is possible to have a hybrid that could act normal for normal driving (Engine/Motor blend), but then have a controller apply a huge amount of wattage to the motor for one blast of high acceleration...

That's sort of where I wanted to go. That, I believe, is the basic approach of the EV drag racers. I was just aiming for a ramp-up delivery, similar to a turbo, as opposed to a sudden surge of juice. I refuse to load my car down with a massive pack of heavy batteries to get it though.

quote Originally posted by 4-mulaGT: ...Speaking of capacitors, would it be a better idea (or even possible) to use them in this case instead of a battery? Lighter weight?

I wondered that myself, but figured there must be a reason no one is doing it. I am more interested in incorporating existing, available (to me), technologies, and definitely don't want to start researching from (or anywhere near) scratch - too much $$$ and time (I'm almost 45 now )

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 12-31-2008).]

quote Originally posted by kwagner: This isn't the first time MDI has been brought up on the forum, and every time the story is the same.

Yeah I guess you are right they are just blowing smoke up the worlds collective butt they will never produce anything. Ok enough sarcasm, it this kind of attitude and thought process that keeps people from investing or exploring different ideas from the publicly approved ones. I guess the large car manufactures have never pushed back the production dates on any of their product right? Seriously why do people want to only spend time and money on electric vehicles when there are several different alternative energy engines out there that could be just a good if not better.

quote Originally posted by FieroJam: ...Seriously why do people want to only spend time and money on electric vehicles when there are several different alternative energy engines out there that could be just a good if not better.

For me it has everything to do with what is readily available. I am not going into the "green" business, and I have a very limited amount of time and money I can invest into it. There are companies that have EV parts and systems available NOW. They may not be perfect, but they are ready for use. That means I can quickly incorporate them into my plans, with relatively minor changes, without taking on the task of trying to develop something new.

If there are companies that sell the compressors, the tanks, the motors, etc., right now for comparable prices to the EV stuff, and there is a proven track record of reasonably positive results, I can consider something else. I suspect that a lot, not all, of the people who would be interested are in the same boat.

As I said, I don't really like the current EV technology because it depends on heavy and/or expensive battery packs being stuffed into the vehicle. I have heard of, and forgotten about, some other seemingly promising ideas because they're just not avaialble. A company hoping to lease its technology to a manufacturer doesn't interest me because I have no "green" plans on that scale.

On second thought - if you're this passionate about that technology why don't you invest in it and help it become a viable option for guys like me?

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 01-01-2009).]

quote Originally posted by toddshotrods: *snip* Then I read about he new Chevy Volt. It will run for up to 40 miles on the battery pack, then the electric motor runs off a generator. My "light bulb" went off again! If the electric motor runs completely off an ICE-driven generator the battery pack would be unecessary, saving a lot of weight. True the generator-only system would not be as efficient, would not produce the fuel-savings of a battery system, and could not take advantage of things like regenerative braking, but the end goal is not 100mpg - it's a performance-oriented hydrid. A 21st-century hybrid hot rod, if you will. Economy car type mileage, with sporting type performance. *snip*

Same concept i'm working on, but instead of an piston based engine, i'm going to use a small on-board propane/steam powered Tesla turbine. Turbines are much better then traditional engines for 'power generation'. ( and conversely they suck for use where a traditional piston engine would go )

I will have some batteries, but will trade off the extra weight they bring by reducing the batteries and increasing the fuel tank.

Go Google "supercapacitor" and it will suggest Supercapacitor car before you complete typing. Caps will help significantly, and most current capacitor technology will supplement batteries very well.

Todd, it's nice to see you're still "Perk"ing along. Always interesting. I think you're correct in abandoning your double ended drive as a serious improvement. But as a marketing tool, it would add a lot. But you don't seem like a Marketing Tool. You want a correct answer. Volt type hybrids are a correct answer, GM was not just blowing smoke (or sparks, whatever). The previous point made about constant speed engines to drive a generator are correct. We all know we can have either a nice broard powerband, or a lot more in one peak. Build and tune a small engine to produce all its power at one RPM, don't ask it to operate outside this band, and its efficiency will improve significantly.

Take a 2500 lb, 92 HP Duke Fiero. Downsize the engine so it only produces enough to manintan the AVERAGE power required to make your daily drive. That's probably 15HP. But that will be slow even to Duke drivers. So we add a mixed bag of capacitors (for quick bursts of acceleration) and batteries (for longer constant loads like a Grapevine Hill) The 15HP motor runs flat-out into a generator, just to keep the batteries and caps topped up. Sometimes they'll be draining, sometimes charging. This power pack drives a small electric motor capable of putting out maybe 25 HP. But electric motors can be overloaded for short periods of time before they get too hot and melt their windings. Overloaded (think "at the redline") this motor could put out 100 hp for short bursts, and 50 for longer.

A mix of lithium batteries and caps would weigh a lot less than any other battery pack, and provide good electric range. The hard part is getting the mix of batteries, capacitors, gas engine and electric motor sizing correct.

If I've said anyting dumb, I'm sure you guys will straighten it out.

quote Originally posted by FieroJam: Yeah I guess you are right they are just blowing smoke up the worlds collective butt they will never produce anything.

You finally got it!

quote Ok enough sarcasm,

sigh

quote it this kind of attitude and thought process that keeps people from investing or exploring different ideas from the publicly approved ones.

That's funny. I guess you missed earlier where I did my own experiments with compressed air engines. Even ignoring that, I've spent the past few years off and on researching every kind of engine I could find, from stirling to gas turbines. But you didn't know that, you just wanted to put me in a group of "ignorant public" as a way of cancelling out my statements.

quote I guess the large car manufactures have never pushed back the production dates on any of their product right?

Sure they have. They also are very large corporations with multiple products being done at a time. If you're a company that has one product, and you can't go from "fully working prototype" to "production model" in a decade, how are you staying in business?

quote Seriously why do people want to only spend time and money on electric vehicles when there are several different alternative energy engines out there that could be just a good if not better.

I've not only spent time drawing up plans and trying different things, but also money to see if the concepts worked at some level (some did, some didn't). I think the key to your undying loyalty is this: "could be just as good if not better." It's real appealing when someone promises something like that. You'll see a lot of the word "could" in articles about MDI. There's also the phrase "if it's too good to be true, it probably is." This is not to say "nothing anyone promises will ever happen, ever," but rather "take a step back and look at it objectively." What's the holdup? Is it safety regulations? Infrastructure? Performance levels? How will these things be addressed? Are they being addressed? Can they be addressed?

Here's a link on youtube you might find interesting. It's from an engineering project at Dalhousie University this past year, powering a go kart on compressed air through a single rotor wankel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e7bJHt7o40

quote Originally posted by Zeb: ...Todd, it's nice to see you're still "Perk"ing along. Always interesting. I think you're correct in abandoning your double ended drive as a serious improvement. But as a marketing tool, it would add a lot. But you don't seem like a Marketing Tool...

ROTL - that's a funny play on words Thanks for your thoughts, you've re-ignited my interest. Well, all of you guys, collectively, have - I can't stop checking to see who said what next

I'm going to dare to let myself Google supercapacitor. Who sells lithium batteries to the general public (or really small business), all I ever found was lead-acid.

quote Originally posted by Zeb: Go Google "supercapacitor" and it will suggest Supercapacitor car before you complete typing. Caps will help significantly, and most current capacitor technology will supplement batteries very well.

As they are, supercaps can barely run a small drill, and are nowhere near being able to do anything for an EV.

But your idea is very close to what the Honda Insight does. Its a conventional gas engine built as small as possible, with an electric motor and a small battery bank to help make it more drivable. But the gas engine is conventionally coupled to a flywheel and transmission. Its only a 144v 6A batterypack.

Electric motors are advertized at thier "rated" load. A 15 HP motor will run continuously at 15 HP, they often have 60 minute, 30 minute 5 minute and 60 second ratings as well. Im running a 3.3HP motor at 48v&90A for about 30 minute spurts without issues so far. Thats about 6HP


fixed the amp typo, shoulda been HP.

[This message has been edited by 86GT3.4DOHC (edited 01-01-2009).]

Thanks, 86GT3.4DOHC. You pointed out my errors in the other hybrid thread, and I'm glad you're not going to let me run amok here either. I respect your judgement, but supercaps aren't best alone. Just to provide fill-in for acceleration, and better energy capture on regen braking. Maybe I put too much stock in the manufacturer's claims, but I think they can be an important addition to any electric motored vehicle.

And thanks for defining the electric motor time vs. power ratings that I was trying to get at. I'm more of a mechanical guy, so I'm on thin ice here. Occasionally, I here cracking....

Topdd: Glad you took it the right way!

quote Originally posted by Zeb: ...Topdd: Glad you took it the right way!

Yup, but who's Topdd?

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 01-01-2009).]

quote Originally posted by kwagner: That's funny. I guess you missed earlier where I did my own experiments with compressed air engines. Even ignoring that, I've spent the past few years off and on researching every kind of engine I could find, from stirling to gas turbines. But you didn't know that, you just wanted to put me in a group of "ignorant public" as a way of cancelling out my statements. Sure they have. They also are very large corporations with multiple products being done at a time. If you're a company that has one product, and you can't go from "fully working prototype" to "production model" in a decade, how are you staying in business? I've not only spent time drawing up plans and trying different things, but also money to see if the concepts worked at some level (some did, some didn't). I think the key to your undying loyalty is this: "could be just as good if not better." It's real appealing when someone promises something like that. You'll see a lot of the word "could" in articles about MDI. There's also the phrase "if it's too good to be true, it probably is." This is not to say "nothing anyone promises will ever happen, ever," but rather "take a step back and look at it objectively." What's the holdup? Is it safety regulations? Infrastructure? Performance levels? How will these things be addressed? Are they being addressed? Can they be addressed? Here's a link on youtube you might find interesting. It's from an engineering project at Dalhousie University this past year, powering a go kart on compressed air through a single rotor wankel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e7bJHt7o40

Oh so I see its one of those thing that since you were not able to make it work then no one can. So I guess you already had more than a decade's experience with designing engines before trying to experiment with these compressed air engines right? And you took another 10 years to work on the design of your own compressed air engine right? If not then your apparently definitive decision of it won't work is just completely ridiculous. This is rather evident when you compare MDI's idea to someone who wants to make a flying car. Who really needs a flying car?
It is more the hope of someone bringing something new to the automotive market than undying loyalty. I would like to see more choices available to people than the overpriced electric variation of the same cars from the same people as always. That is all I have to say about this.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: or something we haven't even imagined yet..

Antimatter.....

quote Originally posted by FieroJam: Oh so I see its one of those thing that since you were not able to make it work then no one can. So I guess you already had more than a decade's experience with designing engines before trying to experiment with these compressed air engines right? And you took another 10 years to work on the design of your own compressed air engine right? If not then your apparently definitive decision of it won't work is just completely ridiculous.

How did I know this would be your response? Stop being so sensationalist. I already said the air motor does work. That much is obvious. What I said is an air powered motor is not practical for a car. This is evidenced by the fact that everyone has little golf cart demos but no real production vehicle. Mine even worked. My personal experiments were in seeing if it was feasable to run such a device at normal pressures, and it's not. You need large tanks with massive pressures to hold any reasonable amount of energy. No matter how much any of us want them to, the laws of thermodynamics don't change.

quote This is rather evident when you compare MDI's idea to someone who wants to make a flying car. Who really needs a flying car?

No one needs it. It's a ridiculous, impractical idea. But there's a lot of people who wish it were possible. Dreamers continue to make excuses for his his continued need for investors with nothing new to show.

quote It is more the hope of someone bringing something new to the automotive market than undying loyalty. I would like to see more choices available to people than the overpriced electric variation of the same cars from the same people as always.

As would I.

quote That is all I have to say about this.

And this will be my last reply to you as well. If you haven't read what I've said yet, you're not going to.

and for the people who like numbers:

quote A standard 200 bar 5 liter steel bottle has a mass of 7.5 kg, a superior one, 5 kg. Bottles reinforced with, or built from, high-tensile fibers such as carbon-fiber or kevlar can be below 2 kg in this size, consistent with the legal safety codes. 1 m3 of air contained inside such a full bottle has a mass of 1.225 kg (at 0°C). Thus, theoretical energy densities are from roughly 70 kJ/kg at the motor shaft for a plain steel bottle to 180 kJ/kg at the motor shaft for an advanced fiber-wound one, whereas practical achievable energy densities for the same containers would be from 40 kJ/kg to 100 kJ/kg. Comparing to the data given for rechargeable batteries, this makes the advanced fiber-reinforced bottle example comparable to the lead-acid battery in terms of energy density and advanced battery systems are several times better. Batteries also provide nearly constant voltage over their entire charge level, whereas the pressure of compressed air storage varies greatly with charge level. It is technically challenging to design air engines to maintain high efficiency and sufficient power over such a wide range of pressures. Compressed air can transfer power at very high rates, which is a principal objective of transportation prime-movers, for acceleration and deceleration; particularly for hybrid vehicles.

Even if you consider the fact that it is also technically challenging to design combustion engines to maintain high efficiency and sufficient power over a wide range of speeds, the energy density of hydrocarbon fuel is many hundreds of times higher to make such effort worth it.

Here is a list of common energy densitys:
Combustion:
Gasoline......9000 Wh/l 13,500 Wh/Kg
LNG............7216 Wh/l 12,100 Wh/Kg
Propane......6600 Wh/l 13,900 Wh/Kg
Ethanol.......6100 WH/l 7,850 Wh/Kg
Liquid H2.....2600 Wh/l 39,000* Wh/Kg
150 Bar H2..405 WH/l 39,000* Wh/Kg
Other:
Lithium.......250 Wh/l 350 Wh/Kg
Flywheel.....210 Wh/l 120 Wh/Kg
Liquid N2....65 Wh/l 55 Wh/Kg
Lead Acid...40 Wh/l 25 Wh/Kg
Compr Air...17 Wh/l 34 Wh/Kg
STP H2.......2.7 Wh/l 39,000* Wh/Kg

Wh = Watthours

(shamelessly pasted from here )

[This message has been edited by 4-mulaGT (edited 01-01-2009).]

I saw kerosene mentioned in one of the early replys. Anyone bought any lately? I saw a 5 gal can of K1 marked $37.50 just last week. Nearly $8/gal.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: I saw kerosene mentioned in one of the early replys. Anyone bought any lately? I saw a 5 gal can of K1 marked $37.50 just last week. Nearly $8/gal.

When i was a kid we used it for supplemental heat and its always been quite a bit more then car gas. Donno why as i think it takes less effort to refine? We should have used propane, cheaper and safer and fewer byproducts.

ive seen a few posts about different cars you want to build but i dont think ive seen any outcome(s) from them yet. did you ever do that rat rod idea or whatever it was?

quote Originally posted by InTheLead: ive seen a few posts about different cars you want to build but i dont think ive seen any outcome(s) from them yet. did you ever do that rat rod idea or whatever it was?

Life kind of threw me some curveballs. I posted about it in some other threads but, long story-short, I lost all of my immediate family, got divorced, closed my shop, sold all but two of my projects, and moved since then. I am in O/T now because I love this place, these people, and still love Fieros, but owning one just doesn't fit in my life right now. The two projects I kept were necessary for the survival of my business, the others were things I could do when I had my own shop.

I actually had two street rod projects, the mid-engine rat-ish one that I called a 27 Fiero, and a conventional F/R modern street rod. My heart was really in the mid-engine car but I had to choose the conventional rod. I sold some of the parts for the rat, and transferred some to the street rod. Hoping to have the street rod running in under-construction form (not rat rod) this year - it's getting close now.

The other project is the one this thread pertains to. It's my daily driver and is in the process of being transformed from a pedestrian Accord into a one-off concept car/marketing tool. Here's what it's supposed to look like some day:


...and an overlay I started playing with, using a rendering of the chassis I have been developing in 3D. You can see the mock-up electric motor in back...

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 01-01-2009).]

Curve ball? That sounds more like a Bean Ball! Sorry to hear that, it must have hurt. Glad you're recovering. Welcome back to the usual chaos.

quote Originally posted by Zeb: Curve ball? That sounds more like a Bean Ball! Sorry to hear that, it must have hurt. Glad you're recovering. Welcome back to the usual chaos.

Thanks Zeb Yes, it hurt beyond what words can describe. Nothing ever really threw me off course before, but that all had me lost in space for all of last year. I was basically in survival mode, functioning off instinct until the smoke started to clear. In some ways I am still a little exhausted from it all, but for the most part I am feeling really really good about life now. I am getting my bearings back and slowly making decisions and charting a new course forward.

quote Originally posted by toddshotrods: I am getting my bearings back and slowly making decisions and charting a new course forward.

You go Todd. Best of luck at ya.

Thanks, I just wish I could make some decisions with this freakin car! It's been hanging in limbo too long now. I have been tempted to throw the towel in more than a few times because the whole EV/Hybrid thing not being what I thought it was took a huge bite out of my enthusiasm. Without that it's just a crazy looking car. The crazy bodywork in back was supposed to hint at the fact that something extraordinary was going on under the skin. I had envsioned Ferrari style "windows" in the trunk floor displaying the electric powertrain, when the car was exhibited. There's no trunk lid so you would be looking backwards at it through suicide rear doors, and a lowered seat back (that's actually how I access the trunk now - the lid has already been shaved).

I've got a crazy engine idea for you: 4-rotor wankel with "active rotor management" How would it work? Well first of all, a four rotor wankel is incredibly powerful, especially for its size. 3 rotors are easier to do (and you can find them in production models, although you'd have to import one or get lucky), but 4 rotors are insane. Here's an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lf5_P040fU
Now the problem with doing a homebrew "displacement on demand" or "active fuel management" system is controlling the valves. You want the air in the cylinder trapped in there to act as a spring for the cylinder's cycles. A wankel has no valves to worry about. Use independent throttle bodies, and just cut the fuel to that rotor. Hook up a system like an EGR valve at each exhaust and reroute it to the intake (which is right above it). You may not even have to block off the exhaust or intake to get the air to "bounce back around" in that case, because the vacuum from the intake should suck the air right back in. This is just top-of-my-head, but if you're looking for a unique engine, that would be it.

Man that sounds awesome! I watched a couple other videos, including the red RX7(?) making a drag strip pass.

As cool as it would be, and as intoxicating as that sound is, it's not what I was looking for. Remember I was hoping to take advantage of currently available technology. The upside to the EV stuff is I can just go online or call and order everything I need. The motors, controllers, batteries, etc., have all been reasonably researched and developed. That would allow me to focus on building the whole concept car package. To make a single statement with a collection of ideas and skillful implementation. I've learned, the hard way, from experience what happens when I let myself get too fixated on one area.

I am still considering the conventional plug-in battery powered idea. The things I have to find out are how much lithium batteries cost and weigh, how much weight I can shave to compensate, and how much performance I can package (battery size and weight vs available "juice" for short bursts) in as small and light a package as possible. I have considered all the things you hear people talking up - solar paneled roof, extreme weight saving measures, etc., but I don't see the ROI with most of them - unless I ramp up the marketing value. That's a questionable practice too because it is usually done by companies trying to create a favorable balance where one doesn't exist - it never pays off. Since I don't have unlimited funding, through aggressive (read shady) investment schemes what I invest in must deliver.

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 01-04-2009).]

Good luck with your project

A week or two ago I watched a progran on the "Green Network' (yes, there is one) about a guy who has a shop that converts cars to electric power. You have to find the right clientele. He did an admittidly very nice 67 Camaro for some musician. Lead-acid batteries, but claimed it did not weigh that much more than stock. (Claimed). The guy did nice work, although I have no idea what range he wouuld get, the performance was good. The new owner was able to do a nice, but short, burnout with it.

You have to find the right customers for these cars, your usual hot-rodder channels won't work. But customers are there.

Forgive my linking ignorance, but read the white papers here:

http://www.maxwell.com/ultr...ort/white_papers.asp

These guys can help size the balance between caps & batts for the performance envelope you want.

Thanks for the link, I'm going to spend some time checking that out, and may even contact them if I like what I see. I know I am repeating myself, but just to reiterate the point, customers for future conversions are of no concern to me. I am just using the technology to make my car more attractive as a marketing tool. The point of that marketing tool is to help sell my design services.

That being said, you guys are helping me more than you know. The discussion here is helping me figure out a lot more than whether or not to put an EV motor in the back of my crazy Accord. Even if I bail out and go with another project, the knowledge gained from this thread will live on. Actually, the debate over the air motor is what got my attention and gave me a different perspective on this.

Thank you, and keep it coming.