HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Blogs
Electronics News

Secrets for a 1,500-MPG Car Revealed

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Threaded|Newest First|Oldest First
NGVguy
User Rank
Iron
More info
NGVguy   8/22/2016 8:43:24 AM
NO RATINGS

A little additional information on this feat. The fuel used was ethanol, which having approximately half the energy of gasoline makes this even more impressive. The average speed was only 15 mph, but does give an indication of what could be achieved in an inner urban environment.

Jerry dycus
User Rank
Gold
Re: Pending Review
Jerry dycus   8/22/2016 9:06:11 AM
NO RATINGS
Calling this a car especially how they drove it isn't being honest. At best 500mpg is all they could hope for in something that could be used on the road as an actual car. And I say that as someone who has actually made 500mpge road cars.

John_Reed
User Rank
Gold
Re: Pending Review
John_Reed   8/22/2016 9:40:31 AM
NO RATINGS
1500 mpg for a super light car with solid or high pressure tires on a flat course? Maybe one light weight occupant? Seems roughly in line with railway freight hauling efficiency. What's the maximum grade this car can climb? Can it reach a safe highway speed? I once rode down I-75 through Atlanta in a diesel Rabbit about 20 mph slower than the other traffic, an experience I swore never to repeat.Fuel efficiency doesn't mean much on a trip if you finish via Lifestar herlicopter.

If I build a piece of electronic equipment and perform standard EMI testing I can make performance claims that mean something.  There ought to be a standard course for performance tests on super efficient cars.

 

megadesign@windstream.net
User Rank
Silver
Re: More info
megadesign@windstream.net   8/22/2016 11:27:36 AM
NO RATINGS
I didn't realize that they were going 15MPH but it is still very interesting.  If the speed was 60MPH then I might expect 1500/4 or 375 MPH and that is still good.  It is also in line with the way President Jimmy Carter thought when he reduced the highway speed to reduce oil useage.  I would also hope that the higher speed would not reduce the MPH by so much.

ttemple
User Rank
Platinum
Re: More info
ttemple   8/22/2016 1:17:34 PM
NO RATINGS
The power required to propel an object through the air is a function of the cube of the velocity.  This means if the speed doubles the power consumed is 8 times as much (2 * 2 * 2).  So, to go from 15 mph to 60 mph the speed increases by a factor of 4.  the cube of 4 is 64, so the power required at 60mph is 64 times the power required to go 15.  This is all neglecting friction.  It is reasonable to assume that consuming 64 times the power would decrease the mileage by more than a factor of 4.

Here is an example of a calculator that will show this relationship:

https: // www.gribble.org / cycling / power_v_speed.html

megadesign@windstream.net
User Rank
Silver
the cube of things
megadesign@windstream.net   8/22/2016 1:30:10 PM
NO RATINGS
I played with mileage and ran experiments and those were not my actual results.  I took VW engines and moved them to vehicles with 4 times the weight and only lost a little less than 1/2 the gas mileage.  I have driven slow and have decreased mileage.  My friend experimented with engines for an engine company and they discovered that engines had their best efficiency at a given speed.  Any slower or fast the engine went the efficiency droped off.  It led me to believe that a variable transmission would be most effective.

SiliconGraybeard
User Rank
Gold
Impressive But Is It Remotely Practical?
SiliconGraybeard   8/22/2016 9:08:07 AM
NO RATINGS
That's the big question.  More details would help: is it a full time EV, but uses the 50CC engine to run a charger?  It doesn't seem likely to be a purely internal combustion vehicle.  A quck look at the Shell EcoMarathon Europe site shows vehicles that look like they might be essentially faired motorbikes, which only hold one rider; which I don't think will never be practical for daily life. 

Rigby5
User Rank
Gold
Re: Impressive But Is It Remotely Practical?
Rigby5   8/22/2016 12:18:14 PM
NO RATINGS
No, an EV could never get such good mileage because of the weight of the batteries.  

Sure this is just a flared motorbike, but that IS practical for the vast majority of communters.

SiliconGraybeard
User Rank
Gold
Re: Impressive But Is It Remotely Practical?
SiliconGraybeard   8/22/2016 1:49:18 PM
NO RATINGS
Sure this is just a flared motorbike, but that IS practical for the vast majority of communters.  

I think that may be a matter of where one lives, but it should certainly be left up to the commuters involved.  For example, it's currently 91 with a heat index of 103 here, and that's typical for a third to half the year.  Without air flow from the outside, and a powered fan, both of which inevitably increase drag and reduce efficiency, I don't think it sells here beyond a percent or two.  If they're doing 1500 MPG and running an air conditioner, that's quite an accomplishment!

I also question the practicality of single driver commuter cars, which seems to  necessitate a working family having three cars instead of two.  How much is a family supposed to spend for this? 

Rigby5
User Rank
Gold
Re: Impressive But Is It Remotely Practical?
Rigby5   8/23/2016 1:52:09 AM
NO RATINGS
Vehicles in most climates would be much better off with a swamp cooler rather than AC.  They work fine in an RV for example, and could easily be adapted for small commuter cars.

Vents don't have to increase drag at all.  For example, a scoop under the car actually smooths airflow and increases traction.

In places with mass transit, no car is needed at all.  But large weekend vehicles can more easily be rented and save maintenance costs.  One commuter vehicle is often enough for any family, as the person working furthest away drops off the other worker first.

onederer
User Rank
Iron
Now for the big cars.
onederer   8/22/2016 9:11:54 AM
NO RATINGS
This winner for the 1K+ fuel milage car is great, and a commendable achievement. However, in everyday life, using an anemic engine is not very practical for everyday usesage.

Even though a larger common vehicle would never be able to achieve such great gas mileage, imagine that by using this technology, how much of an improvement in fuel ecomomy could be achieved in common every day life.

It could be done soon, if by overcoming the protests of the oil cartel, and the politics. And of course, the close-minded auto manufacturers would have to loosen up their mindset, and open up to the technology. After all, they are not the ones who have come up with that technology. Do you think that the student's achievement may have hurt the big boys' ego?  

Perhaps having to do away or scaling down the anti-pollution devices that weigh down a vehicle, would also help? It could eficiently be controlled electronically, the same manner as the experimental vehicle has been designed.

Battar
User Rank
Platinum
Actual miles
Battar   8/22/2016 9:32:55 AM
NO RATINGS
1500 mpg fuel efficiency is not the same as covering a distance of 1500 miles while burning no more than 1 gallon of fuel.

William K.
User Rank
Platinum
Totally separeate from any real world situation.
William K.   8/22/2016 11:53:34 AM
This post is about an expensive vehicle that probably did not meet any of the safety standards anywhere and did not hold a speed that would be acceptable any place except a school zone. On top of that it is a one passenger vhicle that probably does not even have space for the driver's lunch.

BUT publicising this achievement will convince our lawmakers that it is simple, cheap, and easy to produce a super-high milage vehicle. So aside from being a really interesting senior project what benefit has it delivered, except to NI as a advertising item.

If it were not for all of the pollution control equipment and all of the safety systems designed to protect negligent and unskilled drivers, most cars could get far better milage. Just consider the VW deisel fiasco, where bypassing the excessively tight emissions controls produced far better miage and better performance as well.

Rigby5
User Rank
Gold
Re: Totally separeate from any real world situation.
Rigby5   8/22/2016 12:24:34 PM
NO RATINGS
You miss the point.  If you can get fantastic mileage, you do not NEED pollution abatement system.  Even if the parts per million of exhaust were off the charts, it would still produce only a tiny fraction of the total emission of a car getting worse mpg.

That is the same confused mentality that is forcing VW to modify all their diesels to stop getting 56 mpg, and instead only get 33 mpg.  Obviously the EPA is not trying to reduce pollution, but to prevent competition to luxury US made cars that are more profitable.

As for safety, if 80% of the cars on the road were little composit fiber commuters, then the death and injury rate from accidents would plummet.  The larger and heavier the car, the more destructive energy there is.  There is no way around that.

stevejahr
User Rank
Silver
Dreamland and hyperbole
stevejahr   8/22/2016 2:55:28 PM
NO RATINGS
So many of the comments here are quite disconnected from reality...

The automotive business is a large competitive market with a lot of players.  There is no conspiracy nor limited thinking involved here.  They all try to meet what buyers want better than the next company.  For example if consumers would buy a single seat car some company would make and sell one.  We don't have one because there is so little demand as to make it infeasible to develop and deliver at break even let alone profit. (I would note there are some few niche single seat cars but these are not mainstream market at all)

And oil company conspiracy?  Give me a break.  Yes they do make a lot of profit (because we consumers use so much) but if there was a conspiracy gas would be a lot more expensive than it is.

For highway speeds the weight is much less of an issue than the aerodynamic drag.  So light weight is not a key except maybe in urban stop and go driving.  This is also why reducing speed can in some cases make a big difference.  I used to get 25 MPG doing 70 MPH in a V8 Mustang, but drop to 55 MPH and I could break 30 MPG.

The truth is that we have cars that are a compromise between requirements and constraints just like any other engineered product.  The constraints of govt regulations for safety and environental and requirements of the consumer.  It is probably easier to change the regulations than the consumer.  Consumers like big mission capable vehicles with lots of creature comforts and that is not going away anytime soon.

Finally, editors, why do we have to have a headline like this?  There was NO secret revealed here and no facts to backup the headline.  In fact when some of the parameters have been brought forth this becomes nothing more than a very limited science experiment.  Heck I can ride a bike at 15 MPH and get even better MPG.  I would expect better from media targeted at engineering folks: show us the data!

ttemple
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Dreamland and hyperbole
ttemple   8/22/2016 4:14:13 PM
NO RATINGS
stevejahr,

Sensible comments.  There seems to be a belief out there that there is an infinite amount of energy in a gallon of gas, and it is by conspiracy that we don't have cars getting 500 miles per gallon.  The fact of the matter is the energy in a gallon of gas is very finite, and the amount of energy required to push a box through the air at highway speeds is significant and increases dramatically with speed.

Your point about vehicle weight seems to be lost on most people.

Rigby5
User Rank
Gold
Re: Dreamland and hyperbole
Rigby5   8/23/2016 2:04:21 AM
NO RATINGS
No, making smaller cars is more difficult, and there are lower profit margins.  US car makers shape consumer trends with marketing and are not passively doing what the market wants.  The fact the rest of the world uses smaller cars than we do on average, is proof enough of that.

The current gasoline prices are low because of international politics with Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Syria.  But it will not last.

A lighter car would also save gas on hills, but a smaller car is automatically also more aerodynamic, all else being equal.

Consumers like big mission capable vehicles with lots of creature comforts when they are not made to pay for the harm they cause.  That is easily fixed with pollution taxes like Europe has.  Make the smaller communter cars well, and the customers will buy them.  They always have.  The VW bug from the 60s is still a classic example.  We just don't do them well, such as the Geo Metro.  It could easily have had a turbo diesel.

skilet17
User Rank
Iron
Re: Dreamland and hyperbole
skilet17   8/23/2016 1:30:54 PM
NO RATINGS
I am surprised that the Elio has not entered this discussion. It is a startup (that has about 60,000 reservations) and is about a year away from production. Their manufacturing facility is in Shreveport. While Elio is not claiming 1500 mpg, it is targeting 84 mpg at highway speeds and is a two-seater (tandem) with room for golf clubs. Elios' target market is those people that drive to work alone (I drive 60 mi/day alone), so it is a 3rd car, but at a target price of $7000. Check it out if you are looking for something practical – right now they are looking for about another 5000 people to reserve one (I went all-in for $1000 a couple of years ago when gas was $4) in order to qualify for the government program that loans money to job-producing, green efforts, even though they are only about a year away from production.

Rigby5
User Rank
Gold
Re: Dreamland and hyperbole
Rigby5   8/23/2016 7:07:12 PM
NO RATINGS
I love the Elio, and I think it is going to do great.  I think most people have been looking for a car like that for a very long time in this country.  I wanted to get one before, but they were only taking CA purchasers then,

stevejahr
User Rank
Silver
Re: Dreamland
stevejahr   8/23/2016 2:24:29 PM
NO RATINGS
Rigby5 I am not suggesting the US car makers (a bit of a misnomer these days with cars and parts being made all over the world by everybody) are passively doing what the market wants, I am suggesting they are aggressively doing what the market wants.  They market to convince consumers their vehicles have more of what buyers want.

I happen to like smaller cars and have owned several over the years including a few 2 seaters.  I am different in that I am willing to accept some limitations in the capabilities to optimize the main use of the car.  Most consumers want a car that can do anything they ask at minimum cost.  This has changed many cars that started out as small and light into something bigger and very different.  Take the Honda Civic as an example: today's Civic in the smallest coupe format is a very different ride than the '75 Civic CVCC I once owned.

As to harm, we all pay and adding any tax is just a matter of social engineering to support a particular view of good and evil.  The family that needs to carry kids and gear chose that SUV, and already paid a premium price, because it really does best meet their needs.  You may argue they are making the world an unpleasant place but their view is stuffing all that into a small vehicle is a very unpleasant experience right here and now and everyday.  Perhaps we should stop social engineering and the incentives given to electric and hybrid cars and charge them for the impact of manufacturing and disposing of their batteries?

The VW bug?  An example of "built well"?  Hah!  There's a laugh.

Rigby5
User Rank
Gold
Re: Dreamland
Rigby5   8/23/2016 7:19:47 PM
I believe car makers use emotional advertising to associate cars with things like power and sex, so sell larger, powerful, expensive, and wasteful cars.  Commercials create our social consciousness, and no one is doing commercials about how harmful larger cars are.

SUVs meet no one's actually needs.  They have 4WD but don't need it, and don't have the frame to actually do off road.  The extra differential and gear box cut mileage by 30%.

When cars use that much extra gas, they product much more extra pollution, and they should be paying for that.  The extra they pay for leather seats, climate control, backup cameras, video screens, etc., does not cover the harm they are doing to us.

The VW bug may be the best car ever built.  I could do a clutch in a half hour, and rebuilt the engine in 6 hours.  I just did a valve job on a Ford Focus with a dropped valse seat, and it took 5 days.  There is not a single car on the road now that is nearly as good as an air cooled VW.  The 2 liter Porsche engine used by VW vans from 72 on were particularly indestructable.

Tsugami
User Rank
Iron
Rigby5
Tsugami   8/24/2016 10:59:13 AM
NO RATINGS
You must not have kids or live were theres snow. Alot of people depend on those SUVs. I'll agree that theres people driving around vehicles that they probably dont need but this is America. Its your choice if you want to drive a vehicle that gets 10mpg. You'll just be paying for fuel alot more. What would you suggest someone drives that has 3 kids and lives in South Dakota? I would love to see one of these little cars go through about a foot of snow.

MYRONB
User Rank
Gold
Re: Pending Review
MYRONB   8/24/2016 11:35:14 PM
NO RATINGS
This is not a response to any comments, but I have some questions, please.   Can you tell us what the car's dimensions are, especially, all-up weight, frontal area, drag coefficient, tire sizes and speed ratings, type of drive train, gear ratios, top speed and optimum speed at best fuel mileage, frame/body materials?  What are the aerodynamic and physical handling capabilities (stability), or is this a strictly straight-line machine? 

Thank you,

Myron Boyajian

Partner Zone
More Blogs from Electronics News
Five years ago, optical heart rate tracking seemed like an obvious successor to the popular chest straps used by many fitness buffs, but the technology has faced myriad engineering challenges on its way to market acceptance.
Optical heart rate monitors, hailed as a promising new technology when they hit the market a few years ago, are starting to see some backlash.
Forget doping. Officials at this year’s Tour de France are looking for a very different form of cheating -- electric motors hidden inside the seat tubes of bicycles.
Design engineers need to prepare for a future in which their electronic products will use not just one or two, but possibly many user interfaces that involve touch, vision, gestures, and even eye movements.
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6 |  7 | 8 | 9 | 10


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2016 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service