TIGON Diesel Hybrid

[elhigh]

Originally Posted by GreenHornet

Now 3600 rpm is not max rpm it is the nominal operating rpm. Max rpm is actually 3800 roughly stock so 1800rpm is actually 47.5% load. Now knowing that fuel consumed is proportional to power developed we need to know how much horsepower is used at 1800rpm. This figure will be in KW and we will also need to know the g/KWH usage which will be for the Yanmar around 256g.

I notice that your specified engine is described by Yanmar as a fixed-speed model. Will it function well in a variable speed mission like a car? You might be better served by the related 2TNV70-ASA


Some of your math looks strange, I think you might be considering variables that shouldn't be considered.

[GreenHornet]

Originally Posted by elhigh

I notice that your specified engine is described by Yanmar as a fixed-speed model. Will it function well in a variable speed mission like a car? You might be better served by the related 2TNV70-ASA


Some of your math looks strange, I think you might be considering variables that shouldn't be considered.

Hi Elhigh,

Thanks for stopping by you are correct the HGE model was fixed and was offered inexpensively through a surplus center for around 1,100 shipped to my door. They ended up selling out of them before I had the opportunity to act. My plan was to modify it for variable speed however after researching into it the cost and time involved would have not made it worth it. Essentially it made more sense to just go get the variable speed ASA or comparable engine as you suggested. That is exactly what I did and ended up getting it for under $1,750 brand new so I am pleased to this point with my decision and feel like I have a good engine selection now for achieving my goals.

I have determined how to eliminate all the belt accessories and utilize only electric options such as electric water pump and AC. I also went with the electric fuel pump model vs the mechanical.

I am currently working with a few companies on the hybrid design of the engine. I favor the ISG Integrated starter generator setup similar to what you would see in the Honda IMA sytem. However this may prove to costly of a setup over a simplified belt driven ISA Integrated starter alternator which I can implement for around $1,500. There are always trade offs when money is an issue to bad I could not win the lotto LOL :-)

Talk to you later,

GH

[GreenHornet]

Today I wanted to do a quick update on my custom wheel modification progress. As noted in a previous post I am adapting a Smart car wheel to the Triumph GT6. The Smart car wheel is a 4.5 X 15" with a 3 bolt pattern that weighs in at 10lbs. The tire for the Smart car is a LRR Continental that weighs in at 12lbs for a combined weight of 22lbs. Compare this to the 4.5 X 13" 18lb stock wheel of the GT6 and you can quickly see why I am trying to make this happen!

At first I thought I was going to be able to purchase a blank hub from a Triumph performance company but I was informed the 2 bolt patterns conflicted and this would not be possible. So this left me with 2 other options. I could either pursue making custom hubs or making hubcentric wheel adapters.

I opted to go with the Wheel adapters mainly for cost reasons as a single custom hub would have cost close to $1,000.00. Compare this to a set of 4 light weight aluminum wheel adapters for $360.00 and its no contest

I have a lead time of two weeks on the adapters currently and once they are finished I will have completed one of the main modifications for the vehicle.

I also finished purchasing the Smart wheels at $100 a piece and priced the tires locally for $75.00 or $300 for a set of 4.

So for 10lb Light Alloy wheels, 12lb LRR tires, 1.76lb Alloy performance hubs & Stub axle kit, and 1lb Alloy adapters the total cost = $1,624.00

The unsprung weight savings I am estimating at around 20lbs per side and once I get the brakes factored in to the equation the weight savings will be closer to 30lbs per side which is dramatic and will have a tremendous effect on MPG as well as overall performance. Total unsprung weight savings for the car will be over 100lbs and was achieved with only a single custom modification.

With these kinds of weight savings figures I might just beat my goal of the 1,200lb initial curb weight however its likely I will go over my budget in the process LOL

I guess I can justify going over budget in the essence for extreme MPG. Also I will probably take this car to the grave if it was possible that is
I don't plan on selling it so why not do it right the first time!

GH..

[GreenHornet]

Hey gang,

It has been 3 weeks since I have updated so I figured it would be a good time to do so. Time just seems to fly when you get older LOL :-)

So to quickly recap the project changed from a 3 wheeled reverse trike platform to simply utilizing the original Triumph Spit/GT6 chassis in its 4 wheel layout.

The engine will be up front where you would find the Spit/GT6 engine originally rather than in the proposed RMR layout that I had originally intended to design.

The engine selection is a .57L 2 cylinder Yanmar variable speed engine vs the .8L 19hp 2 cylinder Chinese motor I was going to go with.

The transmission has changed form a small go kart style CVT to a 5 speed manual transmission.

These changes were adopted to not only simplify the build process which will save a great deal of time but also hopefully increase vehicle efficiency and performance. After further research the CVT designs proved to be very inefficient in comparison to a straight manual transmission. While they were cheap and simple the efficiency losses really bothered me. Another aspect that bothered me was the fact you would be limited in your driving style with the CVT vs the manual. The manual tranny gives us ecomodders the ability to utilize hypermiling strategies into our arsenal and the CVT would have eliminated these abilities.

Moving the engine to the rear in the RMR layout was an exciting concept but proved to be to much of a headache utilizing the Spit/GT6 chassis. I would have had to stretch and Frankenstein the chassis which is something I really did not want to do! This would have been costly and would have made it very difficult to recreate for others. Not to mention the design time to create something that would perform well and be safe for me and all others.

After exploring these various options it just proved to hard to beat simply using the original Triumph Spit/GT6 chassis unmodified from a cost and time perspective as well as the performance aspect.

GH

[GreenHornet]

Now that I have settled on the original Triumph Spitfire/GT6 chassis for my vehicle(s) platform it has opened up the ability to explore different engine and transmission options with in the TIGON design.

The Triumph GT6 was considered a front engine rear wheel drive vehicle due to the fact that its last 2 cylinders of its straight 6 2 liter engine would hang over the front axle.

With careful engine selection one can quite easily create an FMR layout car and decrease front end nose weight while increasing handling and performance characteristics of the vehicle.

Now for a little history on the Triumph GT6

"In early 1963 Giovanni Michelotti was commissioned by Standard-Triumph to design a GT version of their recently introduced Spitfire 4 (also designed by Michelotti).[1] An unmodified Spitfire 4 was transported to Michelotti's design studios in Italy and late in 1963 the prototype Spitfire GT4 was returned to England for evaluation. The styling of the vehicle was a success but unfortunately the extra weight of the GT bodyshell resulted in extremely poor performance, with the 1,147 cc (70 cu in) Spitfire power unit, and plans for producing the Spitfire GT4 were shelved.

However, Michelotti's fastback design for the Spitfire GT4 prototype was (for the 1964 season) adopted by the Triumph racing-programme as it was deemed to provide an aerodynamic benefit over the standard Spitfire body-shape. Fibreglass copies of the Spitfire GT4's fastback were grafted on to the race-modified Spitfires destined for competition. The Spitfire racing programme was successful[1] and, in 1965, resulted in 13th overall and a 1st in class at the prestigious 24 Hours of Le Mans (beating their main rivals, the MG Midgets). The Spitfire's competitive success and the continuing commercial success of the production vehicle led Triumph to re-evaluate its shelved plans for a GT version of the Spitfire. To overcome the lack of performance inherent in the heavier body-style the Spitfire's 4-cylinder engine was replaced with the more powerful 2-litre (1,998 cc) 6-cylinder engine from the Triumph Vitesse (which shared a similar chassis with the Spitfire and Triumph Herald). The car was further developed and refined and eventually launched as the Triumph GT6 (dropping the "Spitfire" prefix) to identify its GT styling and its 6-cylinder engine.

Contemporary Triumph marketing advertised the GT6 as being developed from the "race winning Le Mans Spitfires" to capitalize on their aesthetic similarities, whereas the Le Mans Spitfires and the GT6 were actually two entirely separate development programmes (the GT programme pre-dating the racing programme). However, the marketing spin was so successful that many people erroneously believed the Le Mans Spitfires to actually be GT6s."

Source: Triumph GT6 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GH

[GreenHornet]

Now after looking into the GT6 history a bit further we learned that it was originally slated to use the Triumph Spitfire 4 cylinder 1,147cc engine and called a GT4. While this was a good thought the increased weight of the GT6 design proved to be to much for the little 4 cylinder to overcome and performance was lack luster at best. So the designer scrapped the GT4 concept and went with the Triumph Vitesse straight 6 2 liter engine that gave rise to what the car is known today as the Triumph GT6

The idea of the GT4 concept to me has always intrigued me. I often told myself one day I would recreate such a vehicle with a modern 4 cylinder to see if I could produce or best the original designers intentions. This thought has always been in my mind and while I am fully committed to building TIGON as a 2 cylinder high mileage vehicle. I see no reason why I could not also build TIGON with a 4 cylinder and create this option for individuals who would like a more sporty performance based option.

The majority of the car would be the same except the 4 cylinder version obviously would have a larger engine and most likely I would have to upgrade the original GT6 rear differential to something that could handle the added torque of a modern 4 cylinder.

The Triumph Spitfire 4 cylinder had specs of 63 bhp (47 kW) at 5750 rpm, and 67 lb·ft (91 N·m)of torque at 3500 rpm. This gave a top speed of 92 mph (148 km/h), and would achieve 0 to 60 mph (97 km/h) in 17.3 seconds. Average fuel consumption was 31mpg. This was achieved a a curb weight of 1,568lbs and a coefficient of drag for a roundtail model (62-70) Spitfire is 0.39 and a squaretail model (71-80) Spitfire is 0.42.

GH.

[GreenHornet]

So where is all of this 4 cylinder talk heading?

Well as you might of guessed it. I will be offering 3 versions of my TIGON diesel electric hybrid kitcar

Model #1 (TIGON GT2) = 2 cylinder .57 liter Yanmar engine based 5 speed electric hybrid. This will be for the person who wants MPG supremacy or 1 liter fuel economy performance!

Model #2 (TIGON GT3) = 3 cylinder engine undecided can utilize either 5 or 6 speed transmissions. This will be for the person who wants something in the middle of excellent economy and performance. Something between 1 liter and 2 liter fuel economy with much improved speed and acceleration over the GT2 model but not sub 5 second 0-60 acceleration like the GT4 model!

Model #3 (TIGON GT4) = 4 cylinder 1.9 liter VW TDI engine based 6 speed electric hybrid. This will be for the person who wants a solid 100mpg car that can also get you a fat speeding ticket in a blink of the eye!

The GT3 model I have considered using the VW 1.2 and 1.4 TDI engines as candidates. However getting the engines will not be easy tasks. Can it be done yes as I have a friend who imports them but they are not cheap! I am also considering using 3 cylinder industrial turbo diesels for this model with an increased electric motor and battery capacity to make up the power difference! From a parts and availability perspective as well as cost point of view this one is the most logical as there are 3 cylinder industrial diesels everywhere. I wanted to go with the Smart .8 liter engine but this would not be possible with the Triumph platform as you have to use the Smart Diesel transmission only! This is due to the way Smart has there ECU transmission settings integrated into the main ECU as well as the sensors on the transmission (Some would say that is Smart engineering but I say Dumb LOL). So unfortunately the only way to use the Smart engine is by going with a custom chassis platform in a rear engine design like the Smart or a front engine design utilizing both the engine and transmission. Which limits your gearing options to only that of the Smart car diesel!

The GT4 model utilizing the 1.9L engine was a pretty clear choice as they are abundant and proven. I also know that with my body kit design and hybrid engine design platform I can easily achieve 100mpg out of it. Even without my hybrid engine design I could get 100mpg out of these engines unmodified diesel only with my body kits for the Triumph Chassis.

So there you go guys the cat is out of the hat and now you all know my master plan LOL

Which is build Triumph Spit/GT6 kit cars based on diesel electric hybrid design of 2,3, and 4 cylinder variants. The cars will all use the same basic body kits with small styling updates! You will get a choice of 3 models the GT2,GT3, and GT4 with either a 5 speed T5 transmission or the larger T56 6 speed transmission.

The GT2 will have the 5 speed exclusively and GT4 will utilize the 6 speed exclusively. The GT3 will have the option of either going with the T5 or T56! The other option I am playing with at the moment is a rear differential swap for the GT4 models. While the GT4 1.9L TDI unmodified would be ok with the strongest Triumph GT6 3.27 differentials. The TDI engine is to easily modified to produce much more HP and torque with a simple chip tune. To me people would be way to tempted to do this and it would most likely result in them destroying the Triumph GT6 rear differential in record time!!!

So in order to prevent this highly likely scenario I am looking into common differential swaps that are well known to the Triumph Spitfire and GT6 crowd. Some of the likely candidates are the Datsun/Nissan/Subaru differentials such as R160/R180 other options are also the Jaguar E-type units that have the Dana 44 with inboard brakes. The Jag would be cool as the GT6 was dubbed as the poor mans E-type anyways so it would be cool to keep it with in that theme There is also the Ford 8.8" rear differentials that would give the ability for tons of gear options! So there are quite a bit of possibilities and options to consider here.

GH

[Frank Lee]

I think you are getting a bit ahead of yourself.

Build one first.

[GreenHornet]

I want to expand on the TIGON GT4 model a bit here as I am sure people will have there doubts as to my 100mpg claims with this engine selection. So let me go into greater detail here as to why I believe its possible and what has all ready been achieved with this engine in other cars!

A while back I read a project build diary that was a culmination of several articles put together by BBC America Top Gear called Project Sipster! In a nutshell these guys modified an old school 1981 VW Rabbit to achieve 84mpg with an MK4 1.9L TDI and transmission swap. Now of course this was not the only things they did to the car to get this 2+ liter fuel economy but it was a solid start to there plan.

There goals were to create a car that could destroy current gas electric hybrids from a cost and performance point of view. There objectives were 7 thousand, 70mpg and 7 second 0-60

Did they pull it off? Well after studying the articles I can confirm that they did break 70mpg and they did hit 7 seconds in the 0-60. The 7 grand mark was not achieved in my opinion as there were holes in there story that did not jive with there final cost breakdown! However could they have spent under 7 grand for the project? Yes I do definitely believe so if they were not pressed for time with deadlines!

Here is an awesome video link of the project I highly recommend checking out = Project Sipster | Videos | Top Gear | BBC America

If you would like to read in greater detail about this project here is the build diary link = The Rabbit Sipster: Remember Project Sipster?

So when I read about a 84mpg highly modified 1981 VW Rabbit I was captivated and truly inspired. This story brought back much memories as my father owned a 1.6L diesel rabbit! In fact he used to let me drive it around the farm when I was a young boy and help him work on it. For all purposes this car was the first car I worked on and drove as a boy! So this project Sipster for me was huge to see done and read about

GH

[GreenHornet]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I think you are getting a bit ahead of yourself.

Build one first.

Yes I agree as I often do Frank :-)

I have decided to dedicate however long it takes to this endeavour. I have a lot of time here to make it happen. Money can be spread out over many years. I have the skills, knowledge, help, and desire to make it happen.

Where there is a will there is a way my friend. The first one is the tuffy after that its all down hill

GH..