It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ford Re-Invents the Hybrid (400% more efficiency)

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Big deal.

These fuel cells are a joke. They will still be expensive. They will still have to be refilled(recharged). They will still run on gasoline.

In other words they are using this as cover to make them look like they are doing something. They are stiffling better ideas.




posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
These fuel cells are a joke. They will still be expensive. They will still have to be refilled(recharged). They will still run on gasoline.

In other words they are using this as cover to make them look like they are doing something. They are stiffling better ideas.

Whos they???

You apparently didn't read a thing...its not about fuel cells, its about better efficiency using hydrualics. It wont help much for long trips...But the vast majority of vehicles do more stop N go type driving then anything else. Not to mention everyday work trucks, like F-150's or cubicle trucks, which do tons of in town driving...this would save then a lot in gas money.

BTW, the (possible) future fuel, which is hydrogen fuel cells...run on hydrogen, and use oxygen in the air, hence why water comes out of the tail pipe (H2O).



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
These fuel cells are a joke. They will still be expensive. They will still have to be refilled(recharged). They will still run on gasoline.

In other words they are using this as cover to make them look like they are doing something. They are stiffling better ideas.

Whos they???

You apparently didn't read a thing...its not about fuel cells, its about better efficiency using hydrualics. It wont help much for long trips...But the vast majority of vehicles do more stop N go type driving then anything else. Not to mention everyday work trucks, like F-150's or cubicle trucks, which do tons of in town driving...this would save then a lot in gas money.

BTW, the (possible) future fuel, which is hydrogen fuel cells...run on hydrogen, and use oxygen in the air, hence why water comes out of the tail pipe (H2O).


Who is they? Oil companies and the Automobile makers.

How do I know they are stiffling better ideas? Your post sums it all up. You said and I will quote

"the (possible) future fuel, which is hydrogen fuel cells...run on hydrogen, and use oxygen in the air, hence why water comes out of the tail pipe (H2O)."
.

Why are they exhausting water out of the tail pipe? Basic science says that 2 Hydrogen + 1 Oxygen = H2O + Energy. ALL YOU NEED TO RUN YOUR CAR FOREVER IS A GALLON OF WATER. You seperate Hydrogen from Oxygen with electrolysis, feed the hydrogen and oxygen into a combustion chamber, the chemical reaction powers the pistons, in the exhaust cycle of the combustion chamber the exhaust (water) is removed and reused to repeat the cycle. The h2o doesnt run out of energy, hydrogen and oxygen is not lost, why are they exhausting it? Why are they using fuel cells when they can just use hydrogen and oxygen as a fuel?

Don't you see the conspiracy? They don't want your car to run on water forever. They want to use hydrogen fuel cells (which is innefficient by design). This way you still buy gasoline and electricity.

Your knowledge of how capitalism and the government works is weak.

To me, it doesnt matter what we do. I'm not having children. I don't beleive in capitalism, and the ways of the world would lead me on a quest of murder before I ever consciously brough a child into this world. I'm a dying breed so I could care less about what happens. I just ask you don't be so blind.

[edit on 5-3-2006 by ImplementOfWar]



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Can we please keep this thread on topic. This isn't about Fuel Cells, Capitalistic Technological Suppression, or Government Conspiracies.

This is about Hybrids and related technologies.



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 10:03 AM
link   
The hydraulic energy storage system is charged during deceleration.
Whether from slowing down for an in-city stop or coming off a hill during cross-country travel.

I'm pretty sure the hydraulic system will be modulated in the output phase of operation and it's not an all or nothing deal.

To that end, the hydraulic system would give back minimal energy over a period of time on a long uphill climb which would help to increase the fuel mileage numbers.

Most cross-country trips involve a hill or two, so it looks to me like highway mileage would gain as well.


Not to get too far off, but just for general information, the lead-acid batteries you turn in for cores when you buy a new one get recycled into new batteries.

Looking from here, the hydraulic system is going to get us over the next few years until we have some other form of energy device in our cars and trucks or - the more likely scenario - a clean and efficient fuel.

My money is on hydrogen.
It'll be a go as long as we give the oil companies the rights to distribute it.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   
My thought is that I dont see how it can store up a large amount of energy for use. No doubt it is more efficient but how much energy can it store for its size/weight ratio compared to batteries? Especially for long distance drives where there are long downhill slopes and long uphill slopes. Hydraulic accumulators are used to balance the pressure in a system where large amounts of hydraulic pressure is exerted faster than the hydraulic pump can keep up. This allows the pump to run at a steady rate refilling the accumulator before it is needed again. While they can store a release allot of power all at once for their weight/size to power ratio they dont keep up a sustained amount of power for extended use like an electric system. I would think that the hydraulic system would get charged up rather quick going down a long hill or mountain forcing the vehicle to use regular friction breaking for the rest of the way. Then going up the next long hill use up all of the hydraulic pressure and resort to using the gas engines power to finish the climb. It would be nice if we could find out the volume and pressure that can be stored in this system!



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 11:24 AM
link   
I understand the hydraulic pressure will be 5000#.

(Compare that with the high pressure oxygen in your oxy-acetylene welding rigs, those run 2000-3000#.)

Since the tanks are going in the larger vehicles, the dually size pickups (F-350) and the next size up trucks, flatbeds, vans etc. there should be considerable room available.
There's quite a bit of room directly under a pickup bed and with a little re-arranging of other components one big tank between driveshaft and frame rails that fits up as high as it can should make for a fairly big tank.

Keep in mind hydraulic pressures will be modulated, you can't have an all or nothing situation in city traffic as pertains to accelleration rates.

Easy to see that Taurus sized cars will be able to use a smaller pump, smaller hydraulic motor and carry smaller tanks so the hydraulic assist - or launch - system looks to easily done on these cars a little further along.

The hydraulic motor is a separate entity from the internal combustion motor under the hood - or bonnet.

Ford is saying 60mpg on the big diesel F-350 pickup and that could be very true since they already have a couple years experience running this system on the larger trucks - van and flatbed types, not the big tractor trailer rigs we see on the highways.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 11:37 AM
link   
No thanks, Ford. After reading the posts about folks who have lost their vehicles, homes, etc. to the cruise control switch issue present in Ford vehicles, I, for one, will be staying away from Ford's 5000PSI hybrid solution. I imagine those tanks working as ejectors when they fail and launching folks right out of the passenger compartment.

Knowing Ford, 1000's of folks would have to be ejected/injured by tank failure before a recall is deemed feasible.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by chaosrain
No thanks, Ford. After reading the posts about folks who have lost their vehicles, homes, etc. to the cruise control switch issue present in Ford vehicles, I, for one, will be staying away from Ford's 5000PSI hybrid solution. I imagine those tanks working as ejectors when they fail and launching folks right out of the passenger compartment.

Knowing Ford, 1000's of folks would have to be ejected/injured by tank failure before a recall is deemed feasible.




Alll auto companies have had their trouble somewhere along the line.

What makes you think GM and Chrysler aren't working on a similar system.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Desert Dawg

Alll auto companies have had their trouble somewhere along the line.

What makes you think GM and Chrysler aren't working on a similar system.


I apologize if my thread was read as vilifying Ford specifically. My confidence in the engineering prowess of the other American manufacturers is similarly weak.

Frankly, I think the only reason Toyota cross-licensed GM their existing hybrid technology was twofold:

1) Allow US manufacturers to enter the market space quickly, thereby avoiding economic levelers imposed by congress like tarriffs and trade restrictions.

2) They've got something better (and likely better than hydraulic energy storage) up their sleeves and essentially giving GM their "current" technology will not stifle the competetive advantage they will gain upon release of next generation hybrid technologies.

If we really wanted to fix the fuel economy trade gap, we'd just tack on an additional gasoline tax and funnel the proceeds back to the automotive industry in the form of R&D grants. Far be it from US lawmakers to cut into oil companies' record profits, though. Gotta ride that horse till it's wheezing and weak before looking to another to overtake it.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Gee what took so long? Guess it took the Rockefellers to tell the auto companies that the oil scam was coming to an end. Especially when you consider that the very first autos made were in fact electric.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:17 PM
link   
I think we all understand that the pressure release is regulated and not a all at once all or nothing . But from what I can gather it is far more useful for initial acceleration and stopping than for long cruising. www.epa.gov...




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join