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.

 

Car gets almost 10,000 mpg...IN 1999!!!

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:35 AM
link   
More than 100 teams competed in the Shell Eco-Marathon in 1999. The winner was a vehicle driven by a ten year old, and built by a French school for the Microjoule team, when they turned in the amazing number of 9845 mpg. news.bbc.co.uk...

Let's take a walk down memory lane, shall we? According to Ford Motor, the Model T had fuel economy on the order of 13 to 21 mpg in 1908. en.wikipedia.org...

100 years later the Ford Explorer gets EPA-estimated mpg 14 city/20 hwy. www.fordvehicles.com... (Ford actually lost 1 mpg)

Consider for a moment all the technological advances we have seen in the last 100 years. From biology, agriculture, air travel, space travel, electronics, medicines, etc. We have seen the development of television, microwave ovens, computers, cell phones, internet, space shuttle, genetics, and game consoles. But in 100 years of making cars we lose fuel efficiency?

Here we have a vehicle proven to do the equivalent of nearly 10,00 mpg 10 years ago. What is our problem? I realize the oil companies keep a good tight squeeze on our fuzzy dice, but why can't we simply slap their hand away? How do we stay in such a complacent state? we see better ways of doing things in other areas and make improvements, yet refuse to demand better from our car makers? Could you imagine losing computer speed and storage space after 100 years of development? Hell no! In fact computer speed doubles nearly every year.

They keep adding crap to our cars like OnStar, GPS, power windows, cruise control, etc., but fuel efficiency gets worse. What do we need more; cars that have more speakers, warming seats, and a Tom-Tom, or NO GAS EXPENSE EVER AGAIN?!!!




posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12GaugePermissionSlip
Here we have a vehicle proven to do the equivalent of nearly 10,00 mpg 10 years ago. What is our problem?


Have a look at the car, it was driven by a 10 year old, have a look at its top speed and its size and your questions are answered



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Are you joking.
That is not a car but a electric bicycle.

It would never be allowed on a freeway and is likely illegal on any street.
It would never meet any crash test standards in the US.

In other words there can be no comparison made because it does in no way compared to any street legal car in usability.

You would have to compare it to a pedal bicycle and they use a lot more fuel(food for the peddler and how much fuel it takes to grow, harvest, process. and transport to market the food)

Also can it be driven 24/7/365 a year when needed.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:03 AM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


Yeah but there still seems to be a pretty valid point about the 100 years of technological advancements compared with the lack of real improvement in MPG. When you think about how much has been devoloped, improved, explored, discovered, whatever. 100 years is a long time and a lot has changed. Maybe that is just me though. I am not a car person.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


Is it impossible for you to see what the OP is actually talking about or do you really think they are saying that we should all be driving that car??

What they are saying is that how come we aren't all driving 100mpg cars with the technology there for 10,000 mpg 10 years ago and 21mpg 100 years ago.

DAAAAAAAAaaaaa



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dermo
What they are saying is that how come we aren't all driving 100mpg cars with the technology there for 10,000 mpg 10 years ago and 21mpg 100 years ago.


Because people want airbags, a CD player, air conditioning, they want a car with a 5 star safety rating, comfortable seats, comfortable suspension, plenty of luggage space etc etc. all which push up consumption.

I wonder what car the OP drives?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


And you are telling me that if Big Oil didn't have its way with the destruction of any electric or extremely efficient designs 20+ years ago.. we wouldn't have all those things now in 100mpg cars? Or even that US cars would be up to the European/Japanese standard?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Because people want airbags, a CD player, air conditioning, they want a car with a 5 star safety rating, comfortable seats, comfortable suspension, plenty of luggage space etc etc. all which push up consumption.


In the last few decades, these things have all gotten lighter. I do have a hard time believing that in the last 40 years the mpg has barely moved because of these things. My 5th ave from the 80's outweighed my current mini van. Why don't I get way better mileage 30 years later with a lighter vehicle?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:27 AM
link   
We've had the technology to drive normal cars with all the bells and whistles that could be getting 200 mpg for at least the past twenty years. I'm certain there are many reasons that they never were developed, but the biggest reason of all is greed by everyone involved with oil - including governments.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:29 AM
link   
Surely the technology used to gain this near 10k mpg vehichle, could have been adapted to fit the large scale market. Of course you can't drive that little thing, but an idea just needs a few tweaks before it's useable.

Of course, it'll never happen while we still have oil. It's worth too much money.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:31 AM
link   
okay lets do some math shall we?

the 1908 Ford Model T weighed 1,200 pounds and it was moved by a 2.9L (177 cubic inch) V4 that put-out 20.2 horsepower.

the 2010 model year Ford Explorer V8 Limited AWD (Maximum Possible Trim) Weighs 4,702 pounds empty and it is moved by a 4.6L V8 that puts out 292 horsepower while getting 14-19 MPG. so a engine only almost twice as big not only puts out more than 10x the horsepower, it also moves the much larger car that is nearly 4x as heavy with a 3MPG loss max. Lets not forget that this is a old engine and doesn't have all the snazzy features that newer engines have like direct fuel injection etc...

I would say that in the 100 years or so since the Model T was developed and put out on the road we have advanced considerably in almost every aspect of the car.

I think you owe the engineering staff of ford an apology.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:45 AM
link   
100 years of reasearch and development has been very successful, but all of the efficiency gains have been used to increase the power available rather than to reduce the size and fuel consumption of the engine.

EDIT: as fnord said it better first

[edit on 10/1/10 by pieman]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 06:50 AM
link   
I do 110 miles per day at high and low speeds and get 54 mpg from my 110 bhp 1.6 diesel HDI, Citroen C4. I think that's pretty good fuel economy for a car and prob equal if not better than some hybrids.

Fuel, economy has increased substantially over the years, but has been partially countered by the increased weight of cars due to the demand for safety and comfort.

In some countries (the US is often cited) there has been lesser connection with fuel economy due to the price of fuel being low and the cars have grown to van-size SUVs with bigger engines, although I am sure my American cousins can give a more informed judgement on that.

Regards



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 08:43 AM
link   
great post;
the new electric cars are getting 300mpg
like the aptera

Lets just hope it becomes widly available soon;

Im always trying to promote more fuel efficient cars like the hybrids such as the toyota prius and honda insight

And TPTB are always trying to brainwash the public with tv shows saying that hybrids are for nerds and nerds need to get beat up; or electric cars are for pussies and gas guzzling SUV's are better;

You could watch episodes of family guy or american dad or the simpsons if you want to see what im talking about;

Sometimes the brainwashing is even in movies;

What we can do is keep promoting fuel efficient cars as the better product (which it is); tell friends and family; tell everyone;



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
--A COMBUSTABLE ENGINE IS ONLY CONTROLED EXPLOSIONS INSIDE A CONTAINED ENGINE---IT HAS REACHED ITS MAX YEARS AGO----WE NEED NEW ENERGY not stone henge thinking--



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I know for a fact that the Nash Metropolitain gets 39 MPG and it was in production in the 1950s. (older cars BTW would run on almost 'anything' from moonshine to kerosene.)

Yes big oil and the car companies are supressing the fuel technology.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by fnord
I think you owe the engineering staff of ford an apology.



Does Ford have an engineering staff?

I thought they had kids design their cars...or at least that is how it seems by the way their cars run.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
dereks,
I drive a Chevy 4x4 truck, 8cyl, 350hp. I get around 13 mpg. My wife drives a Honda CRV 4cyl, she gets 20mpg. Together our gas expense is about $400 a month. That is nearly $5000 a year. Would my life be better, my family eat healthier, and could I afford a better home, if I didn't have such an expense? No doubt. Do I believe we should be peddling an electric bike? Of course not. I do feel we can find someplace in between.

fnord,
Fnord is the typographic representation of disinformation or irrelevant information intending to misdirect, with the implication of a worldwide conspiracy. en.wikipedia.org...
Wow! Impressive math, but you completely missed the point, or didn't care what the point was, as long as you could be arrogant and condescending. You and the engineers at Ford can kiss my (insert body part).

I believe if I would have made a post about the sky being blue, I would have seen some of you reply it was aqua-marine with white clouds. The attempts made to debunk a thread around here are really getting pathetic.

If you feel the need to argue with my thread, then you don't believe there is a conspiracy by the oil companies to suppress fuel efficient technologies.
fuel-efficient-vehicles.org...
befreetech.com...
www.businessweek.com...
www.scientificblogging.com...
www.businessweek.com...


And in place of today's 4.6-liter V-8 engine, the new SUVs will run on a dainty 2-liter, 4-cylinder design, producing a tire-burning 275 horsepower, vs. 210 hp for the larger model. "Detroit hasn't so much lacked innovation as it has lacked the resolve or mandate to apply it," says David Friedman, research director of clean vehicles at UCS and a co-author of the 2003 paper.
(emphasis added)



[edit on 10-1-2010 by 12GaugePermissionSlip]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12GaugePermissionSlip
I drive a Chevy 4x4 truck, 8cyl, 350hp. I get around 13 mpg.


drive a 4cyl and you will half your fuel bill - but no, you need a large V8 as you are a man, and men must drive a V8!!



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
For those in the know, things are just as the big oil and energy companies want them to be. Consuming fuel is the only thing the big oil companies want us to do. The more fuel we consume, the more profits they make. Very simple business model that promotes the consumption of fuel in order to make profits regardless of whether technology could improve what the public relies upon to fuel our automotive products.

As long as they can make billions in profits from getting us to consume more fuel and as long as they can manipulate the supply end to justify raising prices, nothing is going to change what truly benefits the public. This is the same old tired game that we have seen for decades. This type of pricing insanity and lack of any interest to improving mpg for the consumer is the sole reason for why we still depend on archaic technologies for fuel and have to pay outlandish prices just to get around. While it may not be efficient or save the public any money, it is extremely profitable for big oil and that is the only concern being pursued when it comes to pretending to increase mpg within the automotive industry.

Secret technologies which provide free energy is the last thing big oil and energy companies want the public to possess. As such, any technology that can benefit the public will be suppressed by those in big oil and when they bribe the politicians to vote their way regarding automotive mileage standards then it should be no surprise that we as a nation are still using archaic energy standards just to ensure that big oil makes billions from selling oil products which by all rights should have been replaced decades ago.

As usual, corruption and greed are the motivating reasons for big oil to be the way they are. We must begin holding criminal corporations accountable and demanding that those that represent us truly represent the will of the people. We must loudly demand changes from big oil and demand that what they act in the best interests of the nation not just big oil interests.




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join