Jump to content


Photo

The harders you tries, the worsers it gets


  • Please log in to reply
376 replies to this topic

#351 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 29 February 2012 - 21:39

And meanwhile you may have an 800k range,, then a holiday to recharge the battery. That probably being in an tiny pram that you would never wish to drive 800k so it is an extended commuter car still. And not safe if it rains!


Guess what Lee, when there is a fuel shortage and we can expect some fairly soon, the petrol powered car goes nowhere.
I saw the results of this in the 70's, many have not.

Advertisement

#352 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 6,030 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 29 February 2012 - 21:40

You obviously didn't check out those output figures of the 8V92 TTA compared to those of the larger capacity Caterpillar 3408.

Monty Python would probably describe it like.


Detroit 8V92.

Chuck as much air in as the blower and turbocharger can manage quick before the piston starts going up the bore to compress it,ok that's enough now chuck some fuel in quick,BANG KABOOM,that's burning away quite nicely,splendid job,sending that piston down the bore to do it all over again as it comes back up.


CAT 3408.

Hold on guv nothing's happening yet the piston is just going up the bore busy blowing the last lot of smoke and flames out the exhaust.Hold on a bit longer,nothing yet,it's just going back down the bore again so quick chuck some air in with the turbocharger.Things are warming up nicely now it 's coming back up the bore compressing it.I'm getting bored can we chuck some fuel in yet.Ok now BANG KABOOM.That's it but what took it so long.Ok we've got time to go back down the pub now before it goes BANG again.

:rotfl:

2 strokes wether petrol or diesel are inneficient. BUT a1 litre engine makes the power of a 1.5 litre 4 stroke engine. Usually at the thirst of a 2 litre engine. V6 GMCs for their size are very powerfull, noisy and thirsty. But a bigger engine sometimes will not fit where the old 2 stroke fits, size and weight wise. Horses for courses
. Oh and the 2 stroke while powerfull is not nearly as smooth or as torquey. Ride a 350 2 stroke dirt bike, plent of mumbo but you have to rev it wheras a 4 stroke is far nicer to stooge around slowly. Though heavier.

#353 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,729 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 01 March 2012 - 07:46

Guess what Lee, when there is a fuel shortage and we can expect some fairly soon, the petrol powered car goes nowhere.
I saw the results of this in the 70's, many have not.

We have a couple of thousand years worth of coal left. We make petrol from that.

I might also have to look into gas producers, I have a couple of gum trees I need to get rid of.

#354 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 01 March 2012 - 09:00

We have a couple of thousand years worth of coal left. We make petrol from that.

I might also have to look into gas producers, I have a couple of gum trees I need to get rid of.


Hmmm, $50 a gallon and you say you have two trees, wow at least a block then.

#355 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,729 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 01 March 2012 - 10:54

Hmmm, $50 a gallon and you say you have two trees, wow at least a block then.

I think the equivalency factor was 1 telegraph pole = 1 tank of petrol. The hard bit is making a chainsaw run on charcoal gas.

#356 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 01 March 2012 - 13:09

I think the equivalency factor was 1 telegraph pole = 1 tank of petrol. The hard bit is making a chainsaw run on charcoal gas.


Why? I have run a tractor on straw.

#357 Vanishing Point

Vanishing Point
  • Member

  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 01 March 2012 - 18:47

Oh and the 2 stroke while powerfull is not nearly as smooth or as torquey. Ride a 350 2 stroke dirt bike, plent of mumbo but you have to rev it wheras a 4 stroke is far nicer to stooge around slowly. Though heavier.


There's a big difference between a big forced induction two stroke diesel compared to a 350 bike motor.Over 100 lbs/ft per litre at less than 1,500 rpm as things stood with 1970's technology.It's my bet that there's likely to be more room for development yet in the idea in the longer term future.It's probably in large part dependent on where they can go with the forced induction side of the equation to fill/scavenge the cylinders better and faster using much higher pressures than so far.

Maybe something along the lines of the electric hybrid electric power technology to drive electric blowers instead of turbocharging ?.

Edited by Vanishing Point, 01 March 2012 - 18:49.


#358 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 6,030 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 03 March 2012 - 06:19

Guess what Lee, when there is a fuel shortage and we can expect some fairly soon, the petrol powered car goes nowhere.
I saw the results of this in the 70's, many have not.

Hey, 40 years later and we are having the same myths.

#359 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 03 March 2012 - 10:00

Hey, 40 years later and we are having the same myths.


It was not a myth in the 70s sweetheart, in fact two of my friends died so you could go vrrm vrrrm.
I would love to have a few of you naysayers in the armed forces fighting and dieing for your macho motor head blinkered mind set.
Most would not last the training.

Advertisement

#360 Vanishing Point

Vanishing Point
  • Member

  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 03 March 2012 - 21:05

It was not a myth in the 70s sweetheart, in fact two of my friends died so you could go vrrm vrrrm.
I would love to have a few of you naysayers in the armed forces fighting and dieing for your macho motor head blinkered mind set.
Most would not last the training.


I don't think that there's ever been anyone fighting and dying in the armed forces of Switzerland where contrary to all the environmentalist bull big V8 powered Mercs amongst others seem to still be in demand.

#361 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 03 March 2012 - 21:50

I don't think that there's ever been anyone fighting and dying in the armed forces of Switzerland where contrary to all the environmentalist bull big V8 powered Mercs amongst others seem to still be in demand.


bye

I met a guy there years ago by the name of Heir heitle, he seemed to know a lot about synthetic oil and banking.

Edited by 24gerrard, 03 March 2012 - 21:52.


#362 Vanishing Point

Vanishing Point
  • Member

  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 03 March 2012 - 22:02

bye

I met a guy there years ago by the name of Heir heitle, he seemed to know a lot about synthetic oil and banking.


Mein gott do you mean that all that Swiss petrol that I've been using in the Jag running down to Italy is actually all Swiss domestically produced synthetic petrol that no one had to be conscripted into the British army to take from the North Sea or OPEC by force of arms to get. :eek: :rotfl:


#363 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,373 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 04 March 2012 - 02:58

And meanwhile you may have an 800k range,, then a holiday to recharge the battery. That probably being in an tiny pram that you would never wish to drive 800k so it is an extended commuter car still. And not safe if it rains!

I think something like a Tesla Roadster is much better than that already and has something like a 200k range using current battery technology.

A Tesla with 1000k range and no loss of performance would be outstanding. Or you could halve the battery size and have a Tesla with 600k range and significantly higher performance than the current model.

If battery technology does make a leap of the magnitude suggested it will be a game breaker. Its fine to be skeptical about the true potential or feasibilty of a new technology, or the timeframe required for commercialisation but you must have your eyes closed and a gasolene bias to write that post.

EDIT. The article suggests an initial target of 5x the mileage of Li-ion technology, even though the theoretical energy density is 1000x.

5x would be a game breaker - 1000x suggests an astonishing future potential.

Edited by gruntguru, 04 March 2012 - 03:27.


#364 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,373 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 04 March 2012 - 03:18

Nothing pedantic about it. Terminology is sometimes based on the context and the subject of the matter. Ever worked in a shop? If I told you I measured a tenth, or ten millionths what do you get? .0001 and .00001 Now answer that to your highschool math teacher and see what she says. Ive never heard one ten thousandths or one one-hundred thousandths coming from anyones mouth in a shop. Same applies here, there is no half a power stroke.

If you follow the thread back you will find nobody actually used the words "half a power stroke". He actually said (i paraphrase here) "a two stroke has half as many power strokes per revolution as a four stroke". Which is no less valid than saying "a two stroke has half as many power strokes per cycle as a four stroke". Formula one engines have always been multi cylinder and even a 4cyl 4 stroke has two power strokes per revolution. Sorry, I should have said four power strokes per cycle.

#365 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 06 March 2012 - 19:50

I think something like a Tesla Roadster is much better than that already and has something like a 200k range using current battery technology.

A Tesla with 1000k range and no loss of performance would be outstanding. Or you could halve the battery size and have a Tesla with 600k range and significantly higher performance than the current model.

If battery technology does make a leap of the magnitude suggested it will be a game breaker. Its fine to be skeptical about the true potential or feasibilty of a new technology, or the timeframe required for commercialisation but you must have your eyes closed and a gasolene bias to write that post.

EDIT. The article suggests an initial target of 5x the mileage of Li-ion technology, even though the theoretical energy density is 1000x.


:lol: :lol:

http://jalopnik.com/...em?popular=true


#366 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,540 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 06 March 2012 - 21:16

I think on this on my sympathy is slightly on Tesla's side. There are multiple warnings about bricking the battery, and I'd have thunk RTFM was pretty much expected on a product like this.

Having said that they seem to have handled the PR side of things rather poorly.



#367 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 07 March 2012 - 03:38

Maybe there is room in this for proper enterpreneurship in that mess, if there was company that would allow disgrunted Tesla 'brick' owners to install some environmentally "ugh-ooh" technology (say 2 stroke, 500cc engines :p) at half the price, claiming that the owners are forced to pollute because Tesla (BTW, I do object to that name- it's offendingly inappropriate) left them no option... :p Money is to be made, at the same time bad press that would be generated would force them to rethink their approach. :p

BTW, wouldn't it be prudent to run their gadgetry from secondary battery (like conventional car battery) to keep main battery from 'bricking'?

#368 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 07 March 2012 - 04:06

I think on this on my sympathy is slightly on Tesla's side. There are multiple warnings about bricking the battery, and I'd have thunk RTFM was pretty much expected on a product like this.


Well it's a point against it imo and nothing to do with my anti-zap car attitude, people are inherently lazy and simply don't want to know. Then there's the problem of being caught in a situation even if you do know.

Many will most certainly not RTFM but you're right, I would expect a higher percentage of owners to read it.


#369 seldo

seldo
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 07 March 2012 - 05:34

I think on this on my sympathy is slightly on Tesla's side. There are multiple warnings about bricking the battery, and I'd have thunk RTFM was pretty much expected on a product like this.

Having said that they seem to have handled the PR side of things rather poorly.

This situation exemplifies the way to make or break customer' satisfaction, and consequently, the product's success or ultimate failure. It's a man-made gadget and therefore will invariably have some failings.

But it's how these problems are dealt with that is the measure of a quality up-market product.

I am a firm believer that no matter what consumer product you are selling - be it cars, cameras, TVs, fridges or whatever - you can make or break owner satisfaction, and ergo, the product's market reputation, simply with the way these problems are dealt with. Or not...

It isn't so much that the car has a problem - it is all about how the issue is handled, firstly on a dealer level, and then, by the manufacturer.

When you take the car in with an issue, and get the brush-off and "Oh - You should have read the Owner's Manual - Sorry - your fault".- it is very disappointing, and, at that point, even though the issue might eventually get fixed, irretrievable damage is already done.

The manufacturers make sufficient profit that any issue should be dealt with immediately and comprehensively if they are to have a hope in hell of maintaining any customer loyalty. Maybe they need to have a 'slush-fund' funded by a levy on each car sold to accomodate this issue.

In a lifetime of retail experience I have seen over and over again that it is not the original fault that is the cause of the discontent - it is how the issue is handled.

It always works the same way - there is a fault in the product and the customer takes it back to the seller/dealer. If it is fixed quickly and without argument, the customer goes away happy as if the fault had never occurred.

But - if there is an initial argument or non-repair, it escalates, the service manager gets involved, then the dealer principal, then the manufacturer's rep, and, and, until usually finally the problem is attended to as it should have been from day one.

Result - the owner hates the car, the dealer, the manufacturer, and swears to never buy one again and tells all his friends the same.
Yet - if the issue was handled correctly initally, for far less cost and aggravation, the end result is so totally different and better.

For example - I have a Smeg cooker in my kitchen and after about 6 years the markings on the knobs have worn off. The original warranty was 12 months, so I rang the company in Sydney, explained the issue and asked for a price on replacement knobs for the 'function' and the 'temperature' controls. They said - oh they're $37 each, but that shouldn't happen, so at no cost we'll send you some new ones and a couple of spare ones for good measure.
Am I happy ? - Yes. Am I concerned that I had the problem in the first place ? - Not in the slightest, because it was dealt with appropriately by someone with some savvy marketing skills.

If Tesler is to ever become a genuine up-market brand, they need some serious lessons in this regard.

#370 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,373 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 07 March 2012 - 06:22

BTW, wouldn't it be prudent to run their gadgetry from secondary battery (like conventional car battery) to keep main battery from 'bricking'?

Methinks the gadgetry should automatically switch off at 5% battery level causing what? - some inconvenience? Better than a $40,000 "bricking". ("Bricking" used to mean something even worse - using a pair of testicles as fenders in a collision between two bricks).

Edited by gruntguru, 07 March 2012 - 06:25.


#371 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 07 March 2012 - 07:33

...using a pair of testicles as fenders in a collision between two bricks).

Which, as you know, doesn't hurt...

#372 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,540 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 07 March 2012 - 08:02

Methinks the gadgetry should automatically switch off at 5% battery level causing what?


It sort of does switch off at 5%, but to survive for months it needs to switch off at 20%, which they obviously decided was too big a hit on range. The trouble is self discharge of the pack, I suspect, in which individual cells drop to zero ahead of others. I've destroyed all my LiPo cells, otherwise I could have had a look at whether it is possible to bring them back from the dead. I vaguely rememeber some success doing that, but with a definite loss of capacity.

Probably worth adding that they introduced a much more robust monitoring system after selling the first few hundred cars, to the extent that the car phones home if the battery is in trouble. Why didn't they retrofit the early cars? Don't know.








#373 Hyatt

Hyatt
  • Member

  • 1,120 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 07 March 2012 - 08:33

i'm pretty surprised of the high selfdischarge rate of the Tesla batteries. Usual LiPo batteries used in RC cars will lose < 10% over a whole year ...

#374 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,729 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 07 March 2012 - 08:36

Which, as you know, doesn't hurt...

Unless you catch your thumbs between the bricks.

#375 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 07 March 2012 - 09:39

boom boom!

#376 saudoso

saudoso
  • Member

  • 4,671 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 07 March 2012 - 10:41

:lol: :lol:

http://jalopnik.com/...em?popular=true



On top of that, you'll have to chip the 40k in every 10 years anyway. At least that's what was implied in the facts card next to the Tesla I've seen being showed in a garage in Geneve.

#377 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,729 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 08 March 2012 - 07:05

boom boom!

:lol: