Is it possible.....
Kept that question in mind as you read the post.
So I picked up a copy of popular mechanics....
Article here....
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/automotive ... drcrd.html
Quote:
...automakers have responded with a fleet of cars that averages 21 miles per gallon, about four miles per gallon worse than the Model T.
Quote:
Several small companies are developing new engine technologies and advanced automotive designs that promise to deliver 100 miles from a single gallon of gas. The proposals run from the simple—reduce weight, improve aerodynamics—to the incredible (one company wants to borrow a few tricks from jet engines).
The race should heat up further when the X Prize Foundation—the group that kick-started the space-tourism industry with its $10-million competition to produce a reusable private spacecraft—announces in the next few months a competition for the first car to break 100 miles per gallon and sell a yet-to-be-decided number of units. The prize money hadn’t been finalized at press time, but X Prize officials are discussing figures in the $25-million range as an appropriate incentive. They hope the prize will urge people to completely reconsider what a car should look like and how it should function. “We need a paradigm shift,” says Mark Goodstein, the executive director for the automotive X Prize. “We need to change the way people think about automobiles.”
Quote:
By far the most obvious approach to achieving ultra-high mileage is to dramatically cut weight and wind resistance, the chief enemies of highway mileage.
So my question to the community is can it be done with locost TECH?
Yes the chassis would need to be redesighned..... But lets look at the
CDQuote:
# 5.10 - 1999 Honda Insight
# 5.71 - 1990 Honda CR-X Si
# 5.76 - 1968 Toyota 2000GT
# 5.88 - 1990 Nissan 240SX
# 5.92 - 1994 Porsche 911 Speedster
# 6.27 - 1986 Porsche 911 Carrera
# 6.27 - 1992 Chevy Corvette
# 6.54 - 1991 Saturn Sports Coupe
# 6.57 - 1985 Chevy Corvette
# 6.77 - 1995 BMW M3
# 6.79 - 1993 Toyota Corolla DX
# 6.81 - 1991 Subaru Legacy
# 6.90 - 1993 Saturn Wagon
# 6.96 - 1988 Porsche 944 S
# 6.96 - 1995 Chevy Lumina LS
# 7.02 - 1992 BMW 325I
# 7.04 - 1991 Honda Civic EX
# 7.10 - 1995 Saab 900
# 7.14 - 1995 Subaru Legacy L
# 7.34 - 2001 Honda Civic
# 7.39 - 1994 Honda Accord EX
# 7.48 - 1993 Camaro Z28
# 7.57 - 1992 Toyota Camry
# 7.69 - 1994 Chrysler LHS
# 7.72 - 1993 Subaru Impreza
# 8.70 - 1990 Volvo 740 Turbo
# 8.71 - 1991 Buick LeSabre Limited
# 9.54 - 1992 Chevy Caprice Wagon
# 10.7 - 1992 Chevy Blazer
# 16.8 - 2006 Hummer H3
# 26.3 - Hummer H2 (like driving 3 cars at once)
Quote:
Some notable examples:
* 2.1 - a smooth brick
* 0.9 - a typical bicycle plus cyclist
* 0.7 to 1.1 - typical values for a Formula 1 car (wing settings change for each circuit)
* 0.7 - Caterham Seven
* at least 0.6 - a typical truck
* 0.57 - Hummer H2, 2003
* 0.51 - Citroën 2CV
* over 0.5 - Dodge Viper
* 0.44 - Toyota Truck, 1990-1995
* 0.42 - Lamborghini Countach, 1974
* 0.42 - Triumph Spitfire Mk IV, 1971-1980
* 0.42 - Plymouth Duster, 1994
* 0.39 - Dodge Durango, 2004
* 0.39 - Triumph Spitfire, 1964-1970
* 0.38 - Volkswagen Beetle
* 0.38 - Mazda Miata, 1989
* 0.374 - Ford Capri Mk III, 1978-1986
* 0.372 - Ferrari F50, 1996
* 0.36 - Eagle Talon, mid-1990s
* 0.36 - Citroën DS, 1955
* 0.36 - Ferrari Testarossa, 1986
* 0.36 - Opel GT, 1969
* 0.36 - Honda Civic, 2001
* 0.36 - Citroën CX, 1974 (the car was named after the term for drag coefficient)
* 0.355 - NSU Ro 80, 1967
* 0.34 - Ford Sierra, 1982
* 0.34 - Ferrari F40, 1987
* 0.34 - Chevrolet Caprice, 1994-1996
* 0.34 - Chevrolet Corvette Z06, 2006
* 0.338 - Chevrolet Camaro, 1995
* 0.33 - Dodge Charger, 2006
* 0.33 - Audi A3, 2006
* 0.33 - Subaru Impreza WRX STi, 2004
* 0.33 - Mazda RX-7 FC3C, 1987-91
* 0.33 - Citroen SM, 1970
* 0.32064 - Volkswagen GTI Mk V, 2006 (0.3216 with ground effects)
* 0.32 - Toyota Celica,1995-2005
* 0.31 - Citroën GS, 1970
* 0.31 - Renault 25, 1984
* 0.31 - Citroën AX, 1986
* 0.31 - Mazda RX-7 FC3S, 1986-91
* 0.31 - Eagle Vision
* 0.30 - Saab 92, 1947
* 0.30 - Audi 100, 1983
* 0.30 - Porsche 996, 1997
* 0.30 - BMW E90, 2006
* 0.29 - Dodge Charger Daytona, 1969
* 0.29 - Honda CRX HF 1988
* 0.29 - Subaru XT, 1985
* 0.29 - BMW 8-Series, 1989
* 0.29 - Porsche Boxster, 2005
* 0.29 - Chevrolet Corvette, 2005
* 0.29 - Mazda RX-7 FC3S Aero Package, 1986-91
* 0.29 - Lancia Dedra, 1990-1998
* 0.29 - Honda Accord Hybrid, 2005
* 0.29 - Lotus Elite, 1958
* 0.29 - Mercedes-Benz W203 C-Class Coupe, 2001 - 2007
* 0.28 - Toyota Camry and sister model Lexus ES, 2005
* 0.28 - Porsche 997, 2004
* 0.28 - Renault 25 TS, 1984
* 0.28 - Saab 9-3, 2003
* 0.27 - Infiniti G35, 2002 (0.26 with "aero package")
* 0.27 - Mercedes-Benz W203 C-Class Sedan, 2001 - 2007
* 0.27 - Rumpler, 1921
* 0.27 - Toyota Camry Hybrid, 2007
* 0.26 - Alfa Romeo Disco Volante, 1952
* 0.26 - Hotchkiss Gregoire, 1951
* 0.26 - Mercedes-Benz W221 S-Class, 2006
* 0.26 - Toyota Prius, 2004
* 0.26 - Vauxhall Calibra, 1989
* 0.25 - Dymaxion, 1933
* 0.25 - Honda Insight, 1999
* 0.24 - Audi A2 1.2 TDI, 2001
* 0.212 - Tatra T77a, 1935
* 0.20 - Loremo Concept, 2006
* 0.20 - Opel Eco Speedster Concept, 2003
* 0.195 - General Motors EV1, 1996
* 0.19 - Alfa Romeo BAT Concept, 1953
* 0.19 - Dodge Intrepid ESX Concept , 1995
* 0.19 - Mercedes-Benz "Bionic Car" Concept, 2005 [1] (based on the boxfish)
* 0.16 - Daihatsu UFEIII Concept, 2005
* 0.16 - General Motors Precept Concept, 2000
* 0.14 - Fiat Turbina Concept, 1954
* 0.137 - Ford Probe V prototype, 1985
Both taken from....http://www.answers.com/topic/drag-coefficient-1With an areo-dynamic body and a fuel sipping motor....
Is it possible?(please keep that idea in mind)
One of our own has already stated tha he is building a 1100 lb GT Swift
http://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=922His weights are well with in limits (good enought) for this dicussion.
With an areo body and light wight id it possible?The contenders
Quote:
The hydraulic-hybrid system, scheduled to begin testing in two UPS trucks this month, with another to follow next year, promises to return at least 70 percent of the braking energy back to the wheels, which would lead to a 60 to 70 percent jump in fuel economy and a 40 percent reduction in emissions. Perhaps that’s why Charles Gray, the director of the Advanced Technology Division and one of the developers of the hydraulic hybrid, can’t contain his excitement about its potential. “This is going to be the biggest revolution in automotive history,” he declares. “Bigger than the assembly line.”
That’s yet to be seen, of course, but the hydraulic hybrid is also smaller and cheaper than conventional hybrids. “I can hold a 500-horsepower hydraulic pump motor in my hand, and I’m not a big guy,” Gray says. Because the technology would eliminate the need for a transmission—the engine merely pressurizes the hydraulic system, while the hydraulic motors power the wheels—and several other parts, it could be installed in a small car for almost no additional cost. Ford, the U.S. Army and others are investigating the technology, yet UPS—with its fleet of vehicles that constantly suffer through stop-and-go driving—is its only committed customer so far.
http://www.acceleratedcomposites.com/Quote:
Based on data from compressor prototypes, Rabroker believes the StarRotor will convert between 45 and 65 percent of the chemical energy in its fuel to mechanical energy, irrespective of the engine’s operating speed or power. In contrast, a typical gasoline engine has a peak efficiency of about 30 percent at full throttle and operates at a much lower efficiency during typical driving conditions. “Double is a gimme,” Rabroker says of the StarRotor’s potential. “I think we can ultimately triple the fuel mileage.”
And their Website.....engines
http://www.starrotor.com/Engine.htmSo with a light weight areo-dynamice skin and a re-disighed body with a fuel sipping motor is it possible?
Remove Excess Weight
Avoid keeping unnecessary items in your vehicle, especially heavy ones. An extra 100 pounds in your vehicle could reduce your MPG by up to 2%. The reduction is based on the percentage of extra weight relative to the vehicle's weight and affects smaller vehicles more than larger ones.
Fuel Economy Benefit: 1-2%/100 lbs
Equivalent Gasoline Savings: $0.03-$0.06/gallon
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtmlLets look at weights.....Swift GTI was rated at 1741 lbs, MPG 39,4 or 51 MPG in desiel trim*
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?a ... owser=true*http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/08/another_fueleff.html
I will edit this tomorow....[/quote]