View Single Post
Old 12-08-2010, 05:10 AM   #191 (permalink)
needs more cowbell
dcb's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,038

pimp mobile - '81 suzuki gs 250 t
90 day: 96.29 mpg (US)

schnitzel - '01 Volkswagen Golf TDI
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 158
Thanked 267 Times in 210 Posts
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
This may make the engine a little more efficient, but at the thermal efficiency level -- why isn't an internal combustion engine as efficient (or even close to the same efficiency) of an electric motor? I'm talking quantum leaps here. Streamlining cranks ain't going to be enough.

It has to be the connecting rod / crankshaft that are causing the greatest loss within the engine, or the long 3 strokes of coasting, or something basic, that is keeping ICE's from being 50-60-70-80-90% efficient, right? ...
you cannot compare electricity to gasoline like that.
That is what this 16 page thread Started by Ernie Rogers is about (which took me a while to get, having gone into it with electrical bias too):
And is also what is wrong with mpge.
The electricity has undergone the major heat losses at the powerplant, when they burned the coal or whatever to make the electricity. You are using a refined form of power. It would be like using compressed air to run an engine, and not counting the energy used to compress the air in the first place.

It isn't the crankshaft, it is thermodynamics.

  Reply With Quote