[ryan2006]

is constant and variable may show some promise.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by ryan2006

Wind pores included in the outer body which are made out of a nanosheath may have some benefit. Including in the chemical construction of materials needed to achieve this may include titanium. Including pores on a vehicle open the mechanism to water which like you say could be used to cooling the engine unless you were going to use the waste heat to produce more power. Friction of air to materials could be reduced by allowing air to be used by these pores to not only cool but to generate power as it then would exit the back of the vehicle.

Coils around the axel. The axel made of earth metal magnets you say would create more weight than necessary? How?

Using the movement of air to generate power will cause more friction that it would just to use it to cool, the weight of the magnets is secondary to the friction created by generating electricity with the magnets. Your best bet is to use a small engine to generate electricity on demand and use electric motors at the wheels. That way you can eliminate the loss due to friction in gears and transmissions and run the motor at it's most efficient speed a when it is needed. an aerodynamic body will also help with efficiency. the thing to remember is that you can't get something for nothing, any attempt to gain energy is always offset by friction or waste heat. eliminating friction by eliminating gears and u-joints and other power transferring elements of the drive train are the best way to go. Regenerative braking is the only practical way to generate energy directly from motion and you are recovering energy lost to brake friction.

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

Alex- That means there is no gears in the middle either, which simplifies the assembly, decreases amount of parts, increases efficiency, decreases heat produced, etc.

But with an efficient gearbox a smaller motor can accelerate and maintain speed more efficiently. A 100cc and a 1000cc motorbike can both do 60Mph but the 100cc can do it far more efficiently 120+Mpg vs. 50 to 75. (My 1970Yamaha LS2 vs the average locally advertised fuel economy for bikes in excess of one litre displacement)

As far as heat production from my experience the less load an electric motor sees during operation the cooler they run...thus by reducing startup and operational load with proper gearing you increase efficiency by reducing heat production in the motor... of course the best gearing for getting moving will not be the best for cruising at highway speeds so more than one ratio is necessary...But there is an upside more gears allows for more RPM's during deceleration...more RPM equals more power produced and better engine braking. The ideal design would probably be based on the variable belt drive systems found on scooters, quads and snowmobiles..with the main difference being that the belt is never alowed to disengage from the motor pulley or from the pulley that drives the wheels (never allowed to free-wheel)...matched properly to the weight of the vehicle and the output characteristics of the motor this would likely lend the best economy of motion.

[alexander]

ok, my second retype into this:

But with an efficient gearbox a smaller motor can accelerate and maintain speed more efficiently.

No it can not, there is no way you can have 85-90% efficiency of that motor assembly. And you won't propell 4 people in a car that weighs say 1500lb with a 100 cc motor and a small gear box. You can however do that with a brushless motor at a very high efficiency... There is a reason why trains went Electric, they are some of the most efficient vehicles.

here is a comparison i came up with in my previous version, prior to retype:
You have 2 gear boxes that operate in the same way, sync the same and weigh the same (i know this is not possible, but lets suggest it here). one has 5 gears that tops out at 100mph, and another one that has 10 gears and tops out at 100 mph, with the given criteria, which one is more efficient?

Now consider that with direct drive electric motor, there is close to infinite amount of gears, and computer sustem can adjust to within 1/1000ds of a horse power and 1/1000ds of a lb/ft of torque, how much power and torque your engine is putting out, how fast it spins, etc, its almost like having an infinite amount of gears... that's why most modern electric motor driven vehicles, use a direct drive motor

A 100cc and a 1000cc motorbike can both do 60Mph but the 100cc can do it far more efficiently 120+Mpg vs. 50 to 75.

True, but you are talking about apples and lettuce here. You can't compare a 100cc bike that wights 70lb only goes 60 mph, with a 1000 cc that has 3 more cylinders, computerized systems, weighs in excess of 350lb and most of all is designed to go 200mph.

For sure, smaller engine has smaller cylinders, that consume less gas, and thus for what they are, are fairly efficient.

This is not to say that small engines dont have their applications, you will need a small engine, optimized as much as it can be, to run the generator to generate the power for the engine. You will need high performance batteries. You will want to use 3 layer paint on top of silver to create solar power from the body of the car. You would want to have a plug to plug the car in, while not using. And if you can make this into a 12-1500lb vehicle, one that is light, rigid and aerodynamic, thinner tires that produce less drag, break regeneration, composites everywhere you look, you can effectively get 150-200mpg at a comfortable ride that you can live with...

You'd have to investigate diesel vs gas, because you can get a cleaner burning diesel, in a smaller package with virtually no cooling, or perhaps better efficiency of a small gas (tuned to run on e-fuel). you may have to play with one vs 3 cylinders, efi systems, oil, etc, much stuff to look at, but you can make a 200mpg car, it will just take lots of sleepless knights, sweaty balls, and broken pencils, thats never mind the monetary investment... but we can make one.... problem is you need to get it highway worthy, safe and reliable, so, um, let's do it? like a detailed outline of components, ways to save weight, systems, etc.... work that gray muscle

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

You can't compare a 100cc bike that wights 70lb only goes 60 mph

Where are you getting your data?!?
Y-a-m-a-h-a L-S-2...100cc inline twin, 5 gears, fastest I've ever pushed it 100Mph@25,000 on the tach (no that ain't a typo 25,000 RPM.), and 120+ lbs of genuine motorcycle not a scooter, not a minibike, a standard motorcycle.

And you won't propell 4 people in a car that weighs say 1500lb with a 100 cc motor and a small gear box.

Ahem..koff.koff...

Peel P50 and Peel Trident microcars

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

Also you failto note that ALL motors consume the most power when accelerating...and the greater the additional load at startup the greater the consumtion between stopped and cruising. You could put a 7litre diesel in a beetle and never need more than one gear + reverse but it would never be as efficient as a 1.8 litre turbo diesel with a few gears between the engine and the wheels...

Yes... you could for example fit a 200Hp electric motor and appropriate generator and direct drive a vehicle...but you could also use a 60HP electric with apropriate generator driving the wheels via a variable ratio driveline and move the same weight at highway speeds...(I reserve the right to finish this at a later date as it's bed time)

Now more (whatever) to the subject the general idea of a internal combustion electric driveline...example A GE Evo series locomotive makes 4400HP at the wheels
to make that power a massive 4800HP V12 Cat turbodiesel works VERY hard and gulps down masive amounts of fuel to get things moving...but once moving is quite efficient.

[alexander]

Ok, first of all, your 100cc bike is a 2 stroke, and we need to clearly state that, where as i was talking about a much more clean-burning 4 stroke, that will do only about 60, yes, a 2 stroke will go much faster because it makes twice the power of a 4 stroke for the same size engine.

Peel P50 and Peel Trident microcars

You didn't read much into it, did you? i said a car that weighs 1500lb, not 130lb, 1500, feel the difference, 4 digits, 3...? and i said 4 people, not one, also feel the difference? 4 people, one person? (and i mean to say this jokingly ofcourse, don't take this as an insult or anything you know if i lived in your neighborhood, we'd be drinking beer and riding like all the time )

And yes, you will get 75 miles to a galon in the Peel, but its a 2 stroke scooter motor that smokes like a mother... well you know what, it's not very environmentally friendly, if you know what i mean

4800HP V12 Cat turbodiesel

there you go, we fit that in our car to power the generator, to power a 10000 hp electric motor.... simple...

I think we may have to go with a 3 phase AC motor with an inverter to simplify the build and complexity of the design. use the same motor that X1 uses...

Originally Posted by Wrightspeed Inc.

We chose the AC Propulsion (AC Propulsion - Home) 3-phase AC induction motor and inverter – the highest power/weight ratio system available
....
It meets its design specs of 0-60 in 3 seconds, 170 mpg equivalent; and at 1536 lbs
...
No clutch, no shifting, precise and immediate control of torque in drive and braking, perfect traction control…first gear takes you to 112mph…

[alexander]

Oh when i say direct drive, i do not discount the possibility of having a gear there, it's still direct motor drive with no transmission though...

as an example the X1 runs a 8.25:1 gear ratio from their 236HP at 182lb of torque (oh here is something you dont get in fuel-propelled engines, it makes 182lb of torque from 0 to 6000rpm, throughout the whole range! so at one rpm it makes 182Lb of torque, try that with a gas guzzler :P)

[ryan2006]

Are you guys actually saying that my concept of using motion to generate power for a vehicle actually could work because if you are then I'll be riding too.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by ryan2006

Are you guys actually saying that my concept of using motion to generate power for a vehicle actually could work because if you are then I'll be riding too.

No I don't think anyone has said your ideas will work but your ideas have sparked some good discussion.