Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Mechanic
If the incorporation of regenerative braking only requires a single component with relatively little added weight then most regenerative braking can be very helpful to overall efficiency.
I would prefer that option to waiting for the driving population to be reeducated and the road system redesigned. Around here it takes the traffic engineers 6 months to figure out the new light is totally out of sequence with the other 12 in a 3 mile stretch .
Lightweight vehicle with no exotic materials. Individual in wheel regenerating IVTs, with a small capacity accumulator and a .6 to 1 liter engine with electric supercharging.
Practically speaking, I don't see any significant improvement in the abilities of the driving population to become as situationally aware as those of us who drive for mileage. It would be nice to know what stage in the cycle the upcoming traffic lights are approaching, but around here that would not stop the blast and brake stupidity I see daily.
Maybe at some point we may actually change driving habits, but I doubt it in my lifetime. In the interim we should try to change the way the machine approaches the optimization of the fuel used for the distance travelled. In essence to incorporate hypermiling techniques into the vehicle itself instead of relying on the drivers actions to accomplish the same.
regards
Mech
|
In spirit,I agree with everything you mention.
What disturbs me,is that the infrastructure is like the elephant in the living room.
It has the potential to bankrupt.In a sense it already has.
Since the physics is well understood as well as construction technology,along with requiring automakers to increase CAFE standards to 35-mpg,we could begin to undo the mess we've made of our road system,which is robbing 10-mpg from every vehicle in urban traffic,something I'm not sure that automakers can compensate for.
My T-100 will do 39 mpg in the city with synchronization.Without it,we're looking at a little better than half of that.
That is highway robbery.