Yup, a perfectly flat torque curve is ideal for autocross. But electric power,
when you include the batteries, still doesn't have the power to weight ratio
of gasoline. This is especially noticeable in R/C airplanes, where you can get
1 hp glow fuel (nitromethane) engines that weigh about 8 ounces (normally
aspirated). Lesse, that's 2 hp per pound, and I think even the S2000 engine
weighs more than 120 lbs. AFAIK, electricity can't beat that -- can it?
-----Original Message-----
From: James Creasy [mailto:black94pgt@pacbell.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 10:03
To: mrclem@telocity.com; Nandaholz@aol.com; ba-autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Cheap Gas?
i think you could make a pretty cool hybrid car with super performance.
have a gasoline motor for cruising and charging the battery pack, reclaim
power under braking rather than wasting it as heat.
you could have a pretty small battery for light weight and a very powerful
electric motor(s) to assist the gas motor. electric motors are great for
launches because they produce maximum torque at 0 RPM.
of course you might have only a few 0-60 in 2.5 seconds launches before the
battery runs down and you need to cruise a bit to charge it back up, but by
then the corvette will have given up. maybe turn down the power for a few
autocross runs. talk about torque on demand!!
in fact, i see that our local honda hybrid (NOT a sports car) on street
tires is a tiny tick behind a 127hp civic on R-tires in SFR!
-james
PS down with social engineering!
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael R. Clements <mrclem@telocity.com>
To: <Nandaholz@aol.com>; <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 9:37 AM
Subject: RE: Cheap Gas?
> Sure, yeah, let's tax the heck out of gas (and diesel) like other
countries
> do. Since just about everything is transported by vehicles that burn gas
or
> diesel, we can make everything cost more. This would be great for the
economy!
> And it would have another salient benefit: we could carry things on our
backs
> instead of transporting them with vehicles that use fossil fuels. Not only
> would this give us cleaner air, it would create thousands of jobs
overnight!
>
> But why stop there? We could also adopt the socialist economies of other
> countries, so we can enjoy right here at home the benefits of double digit
> inflation and unemployment, without having to travel to Europe!
>
> Seriously, consider that gas powered vehicles so far outnumber
"alternative"
> transportation, that making new gas powered vehicles even 1% more
efficient
> would lower overall pollution far more than a fleet of electric cars ever
> would. When you consider that the millions / billions of dollars spent so
far
> on electric cars and other "alternative" technologies, in the absence of
> government subsidies, would have been spent on current gas technology, we
> might have cleaner air today if these programs had never been enacted.
>
> In short, as Kevin says, social engineering sucks. Not only does it rarely
> (never?) achieve its intended objective, it usually exacerbates the very
> problems it was intended to solve, leaving a morass for future generations
to
> fix.
>
> just my $0.02. P.S. my sarcasm is directed at the idea, not at any person.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net
> [mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Nandaholz@aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 09:06
> To: ba-autox@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Cheap Gas?
>
>
> I really think we need to increase gas prices....say up to $5 per gallon
like
> in other markets around the world. This would have a serious impact on the
> amount of single occupancy cars and FUV's on the road, and would promote
> alternative transportation like motorcycles and smaller hybrid vehicles.
Maybe
> more attention would be devoted to telecommuting, shifted work schedules
etc.
>
> .. just my $0.02
> ~Nanda
|