Brexit, for once some facts.

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

But is it all down to Brexit. Maybe some of these changes were already in the pipeline. Brexit is a convenient scapegoat

really... you want to bury your head in the sand so much as to think that a 20% devaluation of our currency hasn't effected the cost of things in the shops? Yes things have, and would have been creeping up anyway, that is the nature of things.. but a 20% rise for no other reason than a vote, isn't something that any supply chain can suck up.

Its slowly, as was predicted working its way onto the shelf prices of most things, Sonos announced a 25% rise today.

http://news.sky.com/story/brexit-pound-plunge-pumps-up-sonos-speaker-prices-10766907

 

[Zlatan]

Could it have been a gas turbine? Rover did produce such a engine in a car as a test bed. I remember seeing pictures of it

Graham Hill raced a gas turbined engines Lotus, he used to wear brakes out on it...he,d leave turbine powered up but use brakes to slow it, release brakes to accelerate...kept the turbine spooled up...I think it completed Le,Mans...afterwhich they were banned...
The car Rover built was registered in Rotherham. Jet 1.. ( Rotherham reg code is ET)
I believe an American manufacturer actually put a gas turbined car into production...??

 

[Danidl]

Thinkk that may have been the Sterling ( or is it Stirlng). There are a few ICE engines in development making big claims.

Hybrid
Imagine scenario of driving through Europe at 85 mph in any hybrid...( or 130 kmh)
Both systems would need to be in operation..infact totally negating the whole point of hybrid.

Cant see point of dragging a battery / electric motor when you are actually totally dependant on having an ICE to do work. It does not make any sense from any physics point of view. Yes short journeys , commencing with charged battery and hybrid simply extends range but in real world ( ie long journeys) you are simply carrying a battery/ motor around for nothing.
A car must be able to operate at a steady state. BMW and government ate conning us about Hybrids. It can not be as efficient at steady state, its simply introducing an other inefficiency ( albeit high one)

Take two cars on a 1000 mile drive. One a hybrid using small motor running all time to keep battery charged for inclines etc and another with just an efficient ICE the latter will always be more efficient.

How does introducing more weight, a charging system, a large electric motor into a car possibly make it more efficient. Simple fact is, it does not.

A car consumes so much energy pushing it through air and climbing hills. That energy in long journeys must be supplied by the ICE ( even on hybrid) . The Hybrid part simply introduces more weight, expense, inefficiency and expense. Thinking otherwise not taking account of the physics involved.

The only question is at what point do journeys become long? If you are always doing short journeys, perhaps Hybrid might compete..Read Clarkson, I know he,s a pain but he talks sense on this matter.

We are only at the start of the hybrid car evolution. The shape of current cars is driven by the "form following function " of a central motor driving a gearbox and then more gears in the form of differentials driving wheels. Adding a battery pack to this and yet another gearbox and a single motor makes a pretty complicated mechanical structure.
Consider instead a small buffer battery, a high speed ICE motor .. possibly a turbine, directly driving a lightweight generator and electric motors fitted into the wheels. The IC engine will be running at its optimum speed, for greater efficiency and minimised pollution, electric generators work better at high revs, and the removal of multiple gearboxes is a weight loss and efficiency gain. 4 wheel drive can be accommodated without diffs etc.

 

[flecc]

Could it have been a gas turbine? Rover did produce such a engine in a car as a test bed. I remember seeing pictures of it

No, it wasn't gas turbine or ramjet as also guessed at. Both of those had already been shown to be dead ends. Its closed in appearance ruled out all that kind of possibilities. In the event it was obviously a nonsense claim with not even input-output checks permitted. Another one like the promises of cold fusion.
.

 

[flecc]

The car Rover built was registered in Rotherham. Jet 1.. ( Rotherham reg code is ET)
I believe an American manufacturer actually put a gas turbined car into production...??

i believe the American one was only ever a prototype.

The Rover was extensively developed but the Achilles heel of jet turbines for road usage was their fuel greed. Even in the most ideal conditions they couldn't get remotely close to piston engined ICE economy even back then.

Wankel is also rather greedy, similar intake imprecision as two stroke designs. As crude as they appear to be, valves have taken some beating.
.

 

[Zlatan]

We are only at the start of the hybrid car evolution. The shape of current cars is driven by the "form following function " of a central motor driving a gearbox and then more gears in the form of differentials driving wheels. Adding a battery pack to this and yet another gearbox and a single motor makes a pretty complicated mechanical structure.
Consider instead a small buffer battery, a high speed ICE motor .. possibly a turbine, directly driving a lightweight generator and electric motors fitted into the wheels. The IC engine will be running at its optimum speed, for greater efficiency and minimised pollution, electric generators work better at high revs, and the removal of multiple gearboxes is a weight loss and efficiency gain. 4 wheel drive can be accommodated without diffs etc.

We could just build a Citroen 2cv with a 300cc modern efficient engine for about 20% of price , half the resources and no doubt more reliable.
The motor industry want to sell you all this advanced technology, when a good motorised wheel barrow would do job...but that would not make ford , bmw etc any money and it wouldn't look so good on drive.
The Hybrid is just another red herring, its a dead end really, but it will make loads of folk lots of money and make buyers feel good saving planet, when really they are not..

 

[flecc]

Consider instead a small buffer battery, a high speed ICE motor .. possibly a turbine, directly driving a lightweight generator and electric motors fitted into the wheels. The IC engine will be running at its optimum speed, for greater efficiency and minimised pollution, electric generators work better at high revs, and the removal of multiple gearboxes is a weight loss and efficiency gain.

With the exception of the wheel motors, the best current hybrids from GM are already like this, always electric drive including electric only operation for the first up to 80 miles. Then hybrid operation by charging the battery at fixed revs high efficiency ICE, so the battery is a buffer.

I don't think we will see wheel motors for two reasons. Complications of two or four motors and unsprung weight issues. A single motor driving two wheels is very simple and low enough profile not to restrict the car design and space. Tesla electric cars already have luggage boots front and rear.
.
.

 

[Zlatan]

i believe the American one was only ever a prototype.

Th Rover was extensively developed but the Achilles heel of jet turbines for road usage was their fuel greed. Even in the most ideal conditions they couldn't get remotely close to piston engined ICE economy even back then.

Wankel is also rather greedy, similar intake imprecision as two stroke designs. As crude as they appear to be, valves have taken some beating.
.

There are more issues with turbine..it does not produce torque from Zero so would always need a clutch , its ideal rpm is extremely high consequently it needs considerable gearing and under load it takes time to accelerate..its why when racing it fuel was pumped in continually even when braking.( as they do with turbo chargers in racing, to keep speed up)...( In planes turbine spools up fairly quickly, its only load us shifting air through it, in a vehicle it has to accelerate air and the vehicle itself, ie its under extra load, they found cars to be nych slower accelerating than anticipated, hence Hills use of vrakes)
Power to weight for turbines is incredible, power to weight of fuel used a diesel engine is better. Power to weight is not that important in road vehicles.

The Hybrid
...only really starts to make sense for extreme high performance as in Porsche 918..where battery can give incredible torque for relatively short periods and the engine can be relatively small ( its still a V8) to give low steady state economy and emissions ...Hybrid is future for high performance, its not for utility...

 

[gray198]

You cannot know that before seeing the program, and maybe not even after!

Your "But is it" and "Maybe" are just the biased pessimistic pre-judgement of a "leaver" in an attempt to discredit.
.

I agree that I have not seen the programme, but all reports from both sides are to be taken with a large pinch of salt. There have been some positive outcomes from devaluation, but of course the remain camp will choose to overlook or dismiss them as being short term only and sooner or later the sky will fall in. I am not pessimistic. You have to look to others on here for that viewpoint..

 

[flecc]

We could just build a Citroen 2cv with a 300cc modern efficient engine for about 20% of price , half the resources and no doubt more reliable.
The motor industry want to sell you all this advanced technology, when a good motorised wheel barrow would do job...but that would not make ford , bmw etc any money and it wouldn't look so good on drive.
The Hybrid is just another red herring, its a dead end really, but it will make loads of folk lots of money and make buyers feel good saving planet, when really they are not..

Old style hybrids like the earlier Toyota Prius are a waste of time, I agree, but today's precharge hybrids most certainly are not

You seem to be ignoring the huge swathe of the car driving population who only do under 5000 miles a year, many very much less. Most of their mileage is very short distances, kids to school, various local shops, gym, evening classes, visiting local friends etc. One of the largest growths in car ownership has been amongst females, who mostly fit into the pattern I've just described. The greatly expanding numbers of older retired people also largely fit that profile.

All of those people save money on fuel with today's hybrids since nearly all their journeys fit within the precharged range using electricity at a fraction of petrol/diesel cost. Then add the saving on road tax. As long as they keep the hybrid for a number of years, which with low mileage they are more likely to do, they will save money overall. I don't suppose most of them are bothered about any saving the planet aspect.
.

 

[gray198]

really... you want to bury your head in the sand so much as to think that a 20% devaluation of our currency hasn't effected the cost of things in the shops? Yes things have, and would have been creeping up anyway, that is the nature of things.. but a 20% rise for no other reason than a vote, isn't something that any supply chain can suck up.

Its slowly, as was predicted working its way onto the shelf prices of most things, Sonos announced a 25% rise today.

http://news.sky.com/story/brexit-pound-plunge-pumps-up-sonos-speaker-prices-10766907

We will be survive. We have had high inflation in the EU club. I just managed to watch the Brexit programmed with Katya Adler and to me it looks like the EU is in a very precarious position

 

[flecc]

The Hybrid
...only really starts to make sense for extreme high performance as in Porsche 918..where battery can give incredible torque for relatively short periods and the engine can be relatively small ( its still a V8) to give low steady state economy and emissions ...Hybrid is future for high performance, its not for utility...

That's a very odd view which completely ignores the hybrid advantages for utility cars. I can only imagine you are thinking of direct hybrid, ignoring the precharged aspect and electric only use of todays hybrids and how so many people use their cars.

See this post to understand what I mean.
.

 

[Danidl]

Old style hybrids like the earlier Toyota Prius are a waste of time, I agree, but today's precharge hybrids most certainly are not

You seem to be ignoring the huge swathe of the car driving population who only do under 5000 miles a year, many very much less. Most of their mileage is very short distances, kids to school, various local shops, gym, evening classes, visiting local friends etc. One of the largest growths in car ownership has been amongst females, who mostly fit into the pattern I've just described. The greatly expanding numbers of older retired people also largely fit that profile.

All of those people save money on fuel with today's hybrids since nearly all their journeys fit within the precharged range using electricity at a fraction of petrol/diesel cost. Then add the saving on road tax. As long as they keep the hybrid for a number of years, which with low mileage they are more likely to do, they will save money overall. I don't suppose most of them are bothered about any saving the planet aspect.
.

.... I would agree with the above and pure electric cars e.g the leaf would meet the majority of these needs. The problem arises when one needs to take the occasional long journey eg London to Edinburgh . I think would improve uptake if a single car tax or insurance premium covered both an electric and a conventional car provided only one was in use at any time. ....

 

[Zlatan]

Old style hybrids like the earlier Toyota Prius are a waste of time, I agree, but today's precharge hybrids most certainly are not

You seem to be ignoring the huge swathe of the car driving population who only do under 5000 miles a year, many very much less. Most of their mileage is very short distances, kids to school, various local shops, gym, evening classes, visiting local friends etc. One of the largest growths in car ownership has been amongst females, who mostly fit into the pattern I've just described. The greatly expanding numbers of older retired people also largely fit that profile.

All of those people save money on fuel with today's hybrids since nearly all their journeys fit within the precharged range using electricity at a fraction of petrol/diesel cost. Then add the saving on road tax. As long as they keep the hybrid for a number of years, which with low mileage they are more likely to do, they will save money overall. I don't suppose most of them are bothered about any saving the planet aspect.
.

No ,I,m not at all Flecc.
The Hybrid is only ever as efficent as the ICE doing the charging ?
Once that fact is accepted why put in the cars drivetrain an electric motor, large battery, larger capacity alternator ( or charging motor system)
Lets say for example your perfect town Hybrid utilises a high efficiency 300 cc twin ( or what ever) why not merely use that for drive, no expensive batteries, no electric motors, much less resources to build , lighter etc...Its actually inertia engineering assuming hybrids are way forward. For cheap efficient, low resource use a simple , light , small car with diesel or petrol engine will beat any Hybrid..( We,ve actually gone away from solution. Car manufacturers just want to sell you a 1 tonne car with lithium batteries, regeneration, an ICE, etc etc when the real solution is staring us in face. ( Ford Ka, with 600cc Turbo motor..for example)

The package in a Hybrid is doing exactly what it purports not to...use up our resources.. Daihatsu Charade,Ford Ka, Citroen C1 etc with specific engineering for efficiency would beat Hybrid hands down. Look at weight a hybrid is...
And BTW the only truly clean electricity is hydro which we have a distinct shortage of in uk. Coal and oil fired is only on a par with modern car engines. ( look at emissions for 1.0 ecoboost from ford, that's the way forward..not hybrids..)

 

[flecc]

.... I would agree with the above and pure electric cars e.g the leaf would meet the majority of these needs. The problem arises when one needs to take the occasional long journey eg London to Edinburgh . I think would improve uptake if a single car tax or insurance premium covered both an electric and a conventional car provided only one was in use at any time. ....

And a single third party insurance cover element if both cars had one nominated driver. At present such drivers are being ripped off by paying double third party cover.

Another simple solution to a very occasional need for a long distance run is car hire of course, cheaper than having a second car with tax, insurance, servicing and MOT costs.
.

 

[Danidl]

With the exception of the wheel motors, the best current hybrids from GM are already like this, always electric drive including electric only operation for the first up to 80 miles. Then hybrid operation by charging the battery at fixed revs high efficiency ICE, so the battery is a buffer.

I don't think we will see wheel motors for two reasons. Complications of two or four motors and unsprung weight issues. A single motor driving two wheels is very simple and low enough profile not to restrict the car design and space. Tesla electric cars already have luggage boots front and rear.
.
.

... I don't understand the unsprung weight condition as a limitation , and I would appreciate being enlightened. ( Not a wind up) . The complications of multiple motors rotating at different speeds and torques could easily be handled by the electronics. I would have imagined that multiple motors would have provided better traction, redundancy and economies of scale, As well as giving ABS and stability control.

 

[flecc]

No ,I,m not at all Flecc.
The Hybrid is only ever as efficent as the ICE doing the charging ?
Once that fact is accepted why put in the cars drivetrain an electric motor, large battery, larger capacity alternator ( or charging motor system)
Lets say for example your perfect town Hybrid utilises a high efficiency 300 cc twin ( or what ever) why not merely use that for drive, no expensive batteries, no electric motors, much less resources to build , lighter etc...Its actually inertia engineering assuming hybrids are way forward. For cheap efficient, low resource use a simple , light , small car with diesel or petrol engine will beat any Hybrid..( We,ve actually gone away from solution. Car manufacturers just want to sell you a 1 tonne car with lithium batteries, regeneration, an ICE, etc etc when the real solution is staring us in face. ( Ford Ka, with 600cc Turbo motor..for example)

The package in a Hybrid is doing exactly what it purports not to...use up our resources.. Daihatsu Charade,Ford Ka, Citroen C1 etc with specific engineering for efficiency would beat Hybrid hands down. Look at weight a hybrid is...
And BTW the only truly clean electricity is hydro which we have a distinct shortage of in uk. Coal and oil fired is only on a par with modern car engines. ( look at emissions for 1.0 ecoboost from ford, that's the way forward..not hybrids..)

You are considering too many irrelevant issues and not considering the most important one, what the customer wants. They don't give a stuff about efficiency or saving the planet or an other such technicalities. They like their often big hybrids with loads of boot space and the protection they believe (often mistakenly) the chunky car gives their kids.

And they like the money they save since nearly all their mileage is done on electricity at fraction of petrol/diesel price. A trip to the pumps is on-the-spot painful, plugging in is painless, and most don't give a damn how the electricity is produced. The few who do just choose a green supplier to salve their conscience.

As you rightly say, there are plenty of very efficient small turbo ICE models already on the market which would easily do the job for most people, but most still don't buy them as a glance at any supermarket car park shows.

That's the reality which we live with. You can kick and scream against it all you like, but it won't easily change.
.

 

[flecc]

... I don't understand the unsprung weight condition as a limitation , and I would appreciate being enlightened. ( Not a wind up) . The complications of multiple motors rotating at different speeds and torques could easily be handled by the electronics. I would have imagined that multiple motors would have provided better traction, redundancy and economies of scale, As well as giving ABS and stability control.

I agree the possible advantages of multiple motors but think a single motor is best in the market, since it does the job anyway with simplicity at much lower cost.

Unsprung weight should always be as low as possible as a ratio of sprung weight, since that enables the wheels to most closely follow the contours of the road surface and maintain maximum contact.

The effect of an unsprung wheel/brake/suspension mass thrown up by a road ripple is to try to throw the sprung mass of the car upwards too. The greater the unsprung mass in the ratio, the more it throws the car up which can momentarily allow the wheel to bounce slightly, reducing or losing road contact which has handling and safety implications. That upward car movement also has comfort consequences. Then the greater rebound reaction throws the weight of the vehicle downward at the unsprung wheel assembly which loses drive power as the tyre compresses more than necessary.

The best illustration of the effect of excess unsprung weight is to exaggerate it to make it clear. I'm sure you will have seen examples of Monster trucks being driven over obstructions such as cars.

Remember how as the wheels contact the car, the small truck body bounces much higher away from the wheels in a hugely exaggerated way? That's because the wheel weight is far too great for the light truck and that excess thrown weight in turn throws the truck body upwards on the springs.

In essence, the higher the unsprung weight to the sprung weight for a given spring rate, the more the vehicle bounces, with all the handling, safety and comfort disadvantages that brings.
.

 

[Croxden]

Thinkk that may have been the Sterling ( or is it Stirlng). There are a few ICE engines in development making big claims.

Hybrid
Imagine scenario of driving through Europe at 85 mph in any hybrid...( or 130 kmh)
Both systems would need to be in operation..infact totally negating the whole point of hybrid.

Cant see point of dragging a battery / electric motor when you are actually totally dependant on having an ICE to do work. It does not make any sense from any physics point of view. Yes short journeys , commencing with charged battery and hybrid simply extends range but in real world ( ie long journeys) you are simply carrying a battery/ motor around for nothing.
A car must be able to operate at a steady state. BMW and government ate conning us about Hybrids. It can not be as efficient at steady state, its simply introducing an other inefficiency ( albeit high one)

Take two cars on a 1000 mile drive. One a hybrid using small motor running all time to keep battery charged for inclines etc and another with just an efficient ICE the latter will always be more efficient.

How does introducing more weight, a charging system, a large electric motor into a car possibly make it more efficient. Simple fact is, it does not.

A car consumes so much energy pushing it through air and climbing hills. That energy in long journeys must be supplied by the ICE ( even on hybrid) . The Hybrid part simply introduces more weight, expense, inefficiency and expense. Thinking otherwise not taking account of the physics involved.

The only question is at what point do journeys become long? If you are always doing short journeys, perhaps Hybrid might compete..Read Clarkson, I know he,s a pain but he talks sense on this matter.

I've been running hybrids for the last ten years, you thoughts are as sensible as that educated idiot Clarkson. Only he can be funny.

As you are only here to oppose everything, it's pointless trying to get through to you.

 

[oldgroaner]

2017 the Year of Brexodus?
From Reuters (just a rumour of course)
"

Lloyds Banking Group (LLOY.L) is close to selecting Berlin as a European base to secure market access to the European Union when Britain leaves the bloc, sources told Reuters.

Britain's largest mortgage lender is examining steps to turn its branch in the German capital into a subsidiary and may apply for a licence to do so later this year, the sources said.

Lloyds, which declined to comment, is the only major British retail lender without a subsidiary in another EU country and it would be the first major lender to commit to Berlin as a hub to access the rest of the continent after Britain quits the EU. "

Is the correct reponse

1. Whatever
2. Whenever?