Motorhead Messiah [60 MPG HUMMER!]

www.fastcompany.com ^ | December 19, 2007 | By Clive Thompson

[Cobra64]

Turbine engine? Ask Parnelli Jones how it worked out for him 41 years ago at the Indy 500.

[ltc8k6]

http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_6970_200354269_200354269

There you go...

[fella]

Didn't they hang Andy Granatelli out to dry over gas-turbine engines?

[Red Badger]

Old days, old tech...............

[AZLiberty]

As I recall, he gets 60 miles per gallon of gasoline, but he uses a second fuel source — hydrogen — which he doesn’t account for. If he used hydrogen for 99% of the power, he might be able to claim 1,000 miles per gallon of gasoline. But then people would question his results.

[norwaypinesavage]

"There’s a reason why the US Military went with a gas turbine setup for the Abrams instead of a traditional diesel like it’s counterparts."

Sure, where else could you get 10,000 hp in a size to power the tank. Unfortunately, it gets horrible fuel economy.

[Rameumptom]

www.humvee.net/misc/phot.html

Personally i'm holding out for a tracked version.

[fella]

Yeah it was something about how “unfair” it was that his cars didn’t have to stop to refuel and could maintain speed in the corner because of lower centers of gravity and on and on.

[AZLiberty]

Oops, diesel, not gasoline. Here's the pertinent paragraph:

One of Kruger's systems induces hydrogen into the air intake of a diesel engine, producing a cascade of emissions-reducing and mileage-boosting effects. The hydrogen, ignited by the diesel combustion, burns extremely clean, producing only water as a by-product. It also displaces up to 50% of the diesel needed to fuel the car, effectively doubling the diesel's mileage and cutting emissions by at least half. Better yet, the water produced from the hydrogen combustion cools down the engine, so the diesel combustion generates fewer particulates--and thus fewer nitrogen-oxide emissions.

[taildragger]

Abathar,

Yes their is promise, but these materials are a stinker to work with. Then again, we are talking a technology that is a cousin to a turbocharger, but no one has produced an engine in the numbers we are talking about here. There is a problem about govt money used for R & D for mil-spec items and them making it for a civilian application, uncle sugar doesn't like that.

[Red Badger]

Same “unfairness” argument used against the Cooper Mini Racers in the 60’s..............

[Dead Dog]

It wasn’t for gas mileage.

[Jack of all Trades]

The article sounds like a rehash of a popular mechanics article on Smokey Yunich's lean burn engine. A lot of anecdotal hype and extravagant claims without much empirical data. The part about "GM Engineers" asking "Is it running?" and saying "They said this wouldn't work." is especially laughable.

I'll say this though, IMHO, his long term plan is a good one: more diesels, diesel hybrids, and supplementary injection of a range of gaseous or liquid fuels. Ditch the battery electric clap trap and go hydro-pneumatic on the hybrid, and I give it two enthusiastic thumbs up.

[Battle Axe]

I was in a flower shop in Neosho, Missouri, in a large building, waiting for my order. I began reading the plaque on the wall.

It was the longest, tear jerking, diatribe about how this stuff will ruin life in America, on and on and on,....and what are we to do with all the mules????????????????

The building had been a wagon factory and this was written just as the Model T was emerging and the wagon factory was closing.

[thackney]

Those look like Mattracks. You can put them on a lot of things.

http://www.mattracks.com/index.htm

We had them on a van on the Alaskan North Slope.

[kingu]

60 miles per gallon of diesel, using /two/ secondary sources of energy - the battery packs as well as the hydrogen, both of which aren’t properly accounted for, and even then, it’s a ‘guesstimate’ that he gets anywhere near that fuel economy.

[Ron Jeremy]

There’s a reason why the US Military went with a gas turbine setup for the Abrams instead of a traditional diesel like it’s counterparts.

Yeah, and the reason is not fuel efficiency. The Abrams is a monster gas guzzler.

[lesser_satan]

Do you have your Lemmy action figure?

[70th Division]

I know how you feel my friend. I commute 86 miles each way. My disposable income is nill. I wish I had my 80s Lynx diesel.

[radioman]

Turbine engine? Ask Parnelli Jones how it worked out for him 41 years ago at the Indy 500.
Didn't work well for my uncle who was one of the fifty who were given Chrysler turbines back in 1963. You couldn't start them at high altitude and the engine would self destruct if you didn't do the start up routine exactly right even at sea level. They never got the high gas mileage that was promised. The best he ever got was 16 mpg.

All of that being said, it was still a fun car...sounded like a Kirby vacuum cleaner going down the road.