Skip to comments.
Jay Leno's EcoJet: Soaring on a freeway near you? [Biodiesel fueled jet turbine automobile]
Yahoo! Autos / Road & Track Magazine ^
| August 1, 2009
| John Lamm
Posted on 08/01/2009 2:13:09 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
What were they paying him?
To: 2ndDivisionVet
2
posted on
08/01/2009 2:15:42 PM PDT
by
al baby
(Hi Mom ;))
To: 2ndDivisionVet
3
posted on
08/01/2009 2:17:46 PM PDT
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Same Jim Hall who ran the Pennzoil ‘Sucker Car” at Indy?
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Naturally it sounds like a taxiing jet even at idle, great coils of heat roiling out of exhaust vents behind the engine.
Notwithstanding the name, I betcha it doesn't get very good mileage. Jay probably has to baby that thing a bit or he'll wreck his power-train (unless he beefed that up too).
6
posted on
08/01/2009 2:23:42 PM PDT
by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics.)
To: al baby
Hey! That looks just like YOUR car!!!!!!!
7
posted on
08/01/2009 2:30:34 PM PDT
by
Brad’s Gramma
(BG x 2 (and a heartbeat was heard today....))
To: Brad's Gramma
In my dreams baby How are you today ?
8
posted on
08/01/2009 2:31:33 PM PDT
by
al baby
(Hi Mom ;))
To: al baby
I am fine, thank you! And yourself?
9
posted on
08/01/2009 2:32:15 PM PDT
by
Brad’s Gramma
(BG x 2 (and a heartbeat was heard today....))
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Tail Fins!! Cool. Haven’t seen those in, what? 48 years or so?
Jet engines (Brayton cycle) have notoriously poor efficiency for the duty cycle required in ground transportation — hence, the “great coils of heat” coming out of the exhaust.
To: Dr. Sivana
Rated not in miles per gallon but lbs. per hour. Eco friendly my a$$. LOL
11
posted on
08/01/2009 2:35:49 PM PDT
by
tommyboy
To: tommyboy
“Rated not in miles per gallon but lbs. per hour. Eco friendly my a$$.”
Sounds eligible for zero’s ‘Cash For Clunkers’.
12
posted on
08/01/2009 2:44:43 PM PDT
by
duckman
(Jesus I trust in You. Mary take over)
To: Brad's Gramma
13
posted on
08/01/2009 2:48:06 PM PDT
by
al baby
(Hi Mom ;))
To: 2ndDivisionVet
14
posted on
08/01/2009 2:58:25 PM PDT
by
Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I wonder if it smells like french fries.
15
posted on
08/01/2009 3:26:58 PM PDT
by
Minn
(Here is a realistic picture of the prophet: ----> ([: {()
To: tommyboy; Dr. Sivana
They no doubt picked the name "EcoJet" to distract attention from the heat (and carbon!) pouring out the exhaust and from the rapidly dropping fuel gauge.
"Fill 'er up with JP4. And don't touch the red button marked AFTERBURNER."
16
posted on
08/01/2009 3:29:42 PM PDT
by
Sender
(It's never too late to be who you could have been.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I have long wondered why turbines aren’t used in trains, automobiles, and other motor vehicles. Turbines burn fuel constantly, and are therefore always producing power; in reciprocating engines, fuel burning starts and stops with each power cycle, making for increased complexity (fuel injection timing, linera-to-rotary power conversion, et al). Turbines also have only one moving part (the rotor) and one friction surface (the bearing), whereas reciprocating engines have plenty of opportunities for power to be lost (piston friction, incomplete combustion, mismatched detonation timing, increased number of moving surfaces in contact, etc.). A diesel-fueled turbine driving an electric generator would seem to me to be an ideal compact powerplant for vehicle applications.
17
posted on
08/01/2009 3:37:39 PM PDT
by
B-Chan
(Catholic. Texan. Monarchist. Any questions?)
To: al baby
.....so welcome to MY world....
:(
You’re feeling OK, though, right? As in, not ill???
18
posted on
08/01/2009 3:38:27 PM PDT
by
Brad’s Gramma
(BG x 2 (and a heartbeat was heard today....))
To: B-Chan
--
I have long wondered why turbines aren't used in trains, automobiles, and other motor vehicles. Turbines burn fuel constantly, and are therefore always producing power ... --
Turbines ARE used in the larger fuel consumers. Some "steam"ships, power generation, for example. My guess is that recips (and their drivetrains) are cheaper to produce, and the lost efficiency and consequent lost dollars over the lifetime fuel consumption don't make up for the increased initial outlay cost.
The difference in efficiency isn't huge - the largest "steam"ships use diesel recips.
Shorter version, "follow the money."
19
posted on
08/01/2009 3:45:04 PM PDT
by
Cboldt
To: Brad's Gramma
20
posted on
08/01/2009 3:46:14 PM PDT
by
al baby
(Hi Mom ;))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson