Gasoline engines aren't at the end of there development. The future is fast approching.

B

Bob Dunahugh

New member
Sep 17, 2012
2,784
4
3
Thank god that the general public is demanding more efficient, and cleaner=
burning engines. As our administration isn't. And the manufactures are st=
ill responding to the public. The piston will still go up, and down for a =
while. The camshaft will be the next major part to go. The mechanical part=
s now used for valve operation. Just can't be controlled to the extent that=
will be required. The valves will need to be computer controlled. An ele=
ctric solenoid of some sort will be needed. I drought that the type of va=
lve now used. Will be up to the task. Due to it's mass. And the combustion =
chamber turbulence it creates. As I have reservations that this turbulence =
issue can be resolved as is. Electronic fuel injection well need major ch=
anges to match up to the new combustion chamber designs. As the spark plug=
will no longer be needed. The crankshaft, and rods will have a more sleek =
shape. To reduce the load resistance to rotation that the oil spray in the =
crankcase creates. This is my crystal ball of what's to come. It's excitin=
g to me. You'd never have any hint that I'm into engines. Bob Dunahugh A tr=
ue engine NUT CASE
 
> Thank god that the general public is demanding more efficient, and cleaner burning engines. As our administration isn't. And the manufactures
> are still responding to the public. The piston will still go up, and down for a while. The camshaft will be the next major part to go. The
> mechanical parts now used for valve operation. Just can't be controlled to the extent that will be required. The valves will need to be computer
> controlled. An electric solenoid of some sort will be needed. I drought that the type of valve now used. Will be up to the task. Due to it's
> mass. And the combustion chamber turbulence it creates. As I have reservations that this turbulence issue can be resolved as is. Electronic fuel
> injection well need major changes to match up to the new combustion chamber designs. As the spark plug will no longer be needed. The crankshaft,
> and rods will have a more sleek shape. To reduce the load resistance to rotation that the oil spray in the crankcase creates. This is my crystal
> ball of what's to come. It's exciting to me. You'd never have any hint that I'm into engines. Bob Dunahugh A true engine NUT CASE

Bob,

Actually Bob, the prior administration was, but they were doing it with a 54.5 CAFE. A recent engineering level analysis said that this was doable
only if the manufactures built a large portion of the fleet as electric or augmented hybrid and gave them away and then sold every fuel dependent
passcar or light truck for enough to cover the cost.

You are real close, but the camless engines have been in F1 cars for a few years. Complexity and durability have plagued them in the passcar market.
The power required to run the electric desmodromic (solenoid to open and another to close) has been a problem. Variable valve timing has been around
for a long time. My 1995 Honda Accord is a VVT engine.

As to combustion chamber turbulence, that has been controlled for years and even in something as old as the inherited Accord, it uses the controlled
timing of the intake valve to cause varied combustion chamber swirl.

VW is today offering an engine that has a different compression and expansion ratios. Without going into the actual thermodynamics of a spark
ignition cycle, I can't quickly explain the value except to say that the expansion ratio is really more important for efficiency than is the
compression ratio.

So, you see, you are looking in the right direction.

Matt
--
Matt & Mary Colie - '73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan
OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Twixt A2 and Detroit
 
> > Thank god that the general public is demanding more efficient, and cleaner burning engines. As our administration isn't.
>
> Actually Bob, the prior administration was, but they were doing it with a 54.5 CAFE.

At the end of the day, it has to make sense for everyone. Maybe it was silliness of the 55mph Federal speed limit, but I have a real aversion to
Federal mandates concerning fuel economy.

It is no secret the the public wants better fuel economy - who doesn't? If manufacturers have to be bludgeoned with tax incentives to pursue that
very obvious market need, I think they deserve to go belly up.

Look at it this way - there is no federal mandate for horsepower increases, yet we have arguably the most powerful lineup of new automobiles ever
available - across all manufacturers.

This is an exciting time for engine developments. Imagine what we can do if we keep the federal government from "helping".

--
76 Birchaven - "Wicked Mistress" - New engine, trans, alum radiator, brakes, Sully airbags, fuel lines, seats, adult beverage center... those Coachmen
guys were really thinking about us second hand owners by including that beverage center...
Columbia, SC.
 
Matt,
Isn't the I/C gasoline engine with its throttle body butterfly to control the amount of air/fuel mixture entering the combustion chamber, already a
variable compression vs exhaust stroke? With the throttle closed you get very little air/fuel in the chamber and very little compression pressure vs
wide open throttle. They could limit the maximum compression pressure buy limiting the electronic throttle control opening. I have had several GMC
and Chev pickup trucks since they introduced electronic throttle control and they all run like a mid 70's pollution controlled vehicle. Step on the
gas and it bogs while its little mind decides what to do (I get in my pre electronic throttle 2005 pickup and give myself whiplash!)

Or is there something I am missing?

--
Bruce Hislop
ON Canada
77PB, 455 Dick P. rebuilt, DynamicEFI EBL EFI & ESC.1 ton front end
http://www.gmcmhphotos.com/photos/showphoto.php?photo=29001
My Staff says I never listen to them, or something like that
 
> Matt,
> Isn't the I/C gasoline engine with its throttle body butterfly to control the amount of air/fuel mixture entering the combustion chamber, already
> a variable compression vs exhaust stroke? With the throttle closed you get very little air/fuel in the chamber and very little compression pressure
> vs wide open throttle. They could limit the maximum compression pressure buy limiting the electronic throttle control opening. I have had several
> GMC and Chev pickup trucks since they introduced electronic throttle control and they all run like a mid 70's pollution controlled vehicle. Step on
> the gas and it bogs while its little mind decides what to do (I get in my pre electronic throttle 2005 pickup and give myself whiplash!)
>
> Or is there something I am missing?

Bruce,

You are only missing a little bit.

The problem is that by controlling with the throttle plate, you are reducing the power out put by causing pumping losses - making it less efficient.
If you can open and close the intake valve so as to cause the charge pressure before compression to be what you want, you can still reduce the power
output and not hammer the engine efficiency.

And yes, that bog it the big complaint about the drive-by-wire engines.

Matt
--
Matt & Mary Colie - '73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan
OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Twixt A2 and Detroit
 
Compression ignition? Quite a cost savings >if< the required upgrades to handle ther hugher compression don't overcome the savings. The improvement
in design over 45 years is apparent in two cars I've run past 100K miles. The Datsun made 96HP by 1968 measurement standards. The Kia makes 135 by
2012 measurement standards. Both displacing 1.6 liters. Two cmas instead of one, loss of the distributor, direct injection,makes a difference.
Datsun was 2K 1968 dollars, Kia was 14K 2012 dollars. Anybody know what those prices would be in constant dollars? Datsun did 25 MPG, Kia does 35.
Kia is 550 pounds heavier as well.

--johnny
--
76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
"I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell" - ol Andy, paraphrased
 
Mazda has been working on a "part time" compression ignition gasoline engine for some time... Not sure when or if it will ever make it to market, but
the solutions Mazda's engineers have come up with to the various problems associated with CI gasoline engines are very innovative...

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a17171105/mazda-skyactiv-x-how-it-works/
--
Mark S. '73 Painted Desert,
Manny 1 Ton Front End,
Howell Injection,
Leigh Harrison 4bag and Rear Brakes,
Fort Worth, TX
 
$2000 in 1968 inflated to 2012 ($13,300):

https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=2000&year1=196801&year2=201201

The horsepower difference you quoted is actually quite a bit larger than you’re numbers suggest - the 1968 value would be “gross” HP vs the 2012 “net”. The Datsun net value is probably around 70-80 HP!

Rob
Victoria, BC
76 Royale - Rear Twins/Dry Bath

>
> Compression ignition? Quite a cost savings >if< the required upgrades to handle ther hugher compression don't overcome the savings. The improvement
> in design over 45 years is apparent in two cars I've run past 100K miles. The Datsun made 96HP by 1968 measurement standards. The Kia makes 135 by
> 2012 measurement standards. Both displacing 1.6 liters. Two cmas instead of one, loss of the distributor, direct injection,makes a difference.
> Datsun was 2K 1968 dollars, Kia was 14K 2012 dollars. Anybody know what those prices would be in constant dollars? Datsun did 25 MPG, Kia does 35.
> Kia is 550 pounds heavier as well.
>
> --johnny
> --
> 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
> Braselton, Ga.
> "I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell" - ol Andy, paraphrased
 
Thanks Rob. Essentially the same bux for a car which certainly shows the efficiencies throughout the car industry in 45 years. Datsun had a 4 speed
and though they survived being T-boned, I think the Kia would of done a better job.

--johnny

--
76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
"I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell" - ol Andy, paraphrased
 
"It is no secret the the public wants better fuel economy - who doesn't? "
What planet do you live on? surely not the same as me.

And the current admin is still increasing the CAFE, they just caped it at 2020 levels. The previous admins attempt at forcing the issue was just virtue signaling at it's finest. they new it would never stick

Maybe people whine about fuel economy, but they don't show it in their car purchases.
I see a LOT of trucks, SUVs and crossovers on the roads, only a few economy cars. People don't give a damn about economy untill they are at the pump in their new $70,000 Suburban and complain about a $100 gas bill. 2 seconds later they forget about it.

If you want to increase CAFE you're not going to do it by listening to the consumer

________________________________
From: Gmclist on behalf of Johnny Bridges via Gmclist
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 2:40 PM
To: gmclist
Cc: Johnny Bridges
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Gasoline engines aren't at the end of there development. The future is fast approching.

Thanks Rob. Essentially the same bux for a car which certainly shows the efficiencies throughout the car industry in 45 years. Datsun had a 4 speed
and though they survived being T-boned, I think the Kia would of done a better job.

--johnny

--
76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
"I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell" - ol Andy, paraphrased

_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Get your shine on at www.cruzingear.co
GMCMI Fall 2026 Rally

Share this page

Share this page
Top Bottom
Back