Both are useful. I'm just fixated on the idea that the power actually required to move a person and groceries, rain or shine, at highway speeds (ar or near) is at least an order of magnitude less than the current average mode of transport.
I'm also frustrated at the limits of my car and don't like the constraints imposed by the automotive industry. I know that what I'd like (and what the world needs) can be designed and only has to be designed once, then mass produced. It might also be possible that retrofitting is an option - the only problem is that the cars out there are all different, so there is no one size fits all solution - you can only target low hanging fruit, where the modifications are easy and significant.
Modifying the car serves several purposes:
1. Further improvements to FE after adjusting the nut behind the wheel has approached diminishing returns.
2. Proof of concept that load on engine can be further reduced at highway speeds (aero).
3. A starting point for reducing fuel consumption given that smaller load, or switching powerplants.
A logical endpoint is the VW 1 litre car, or something like a heavily faired Honda Cub.
Modifying the driver is always going to have a great return - barring some sort of miraculous battery technology that is near 100% efficient to charge and discharge, of appropriate weight, etc.
__________________
"Every body perseveres in its state of being at rest or of moving uniformly straight forward, except insofar as it is compelled to change its state by force impressed." - Isaac Newton
Last edited by newtonsfirstlaw; 12-08-2007 at 10:49 PM..
|