They're doing that too. Auto engines are getting really sophisticated. But when you have so little displacement, and a 3,000 pound car, you still need a lot of gears to get reasonable performance.
I know what you mean. I'm used to large displacement V8s turning at relatively leisurely RPM, gobs of low end torque, etc. This new generation of "sporty" cars is very different. The 427s and 454s are gone, even Corvettes and Ford Cobras use 6 speed transmissions to get the most from the smaller engines they carry today.
Neither can I, which is why I haven't bought the Honda. As a weekend fun car, it is attractive, but not as a daily driver. Oddly, the most pleasant to drive of the sporty cars has the smallest engine. That's the Mazda R8. It is only 1300 cc, but it is a Wankel. It isn't peaky at all, very linear response.
There may indeed be a substitute for cubic inches, but still even today it isn't as satisfactory a substitute as one might like. The V10 Dodge Viper still rules for pure gutsy acceleration.
Great Idea, spend big bucks on a dying technology. Transmissions are rapidly becoming obsolete. In the future (probably in the near future) hybrid electric "transmissions" will be the optimal method to get power to the wheels. Improved mechanical transmissions offer only a few percentage points improvements in fuel use. Hybrid electric vehicles have the potential for a 50% increase in mileage, with performance equal to or better than current auto designs.
The army has developed a prototype hybrid electric HMMWV (High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle) that outperforms the current design and has a substantial improvement if fuel mileage. They are also working on long-haul trucks and tanks. Saving fuel is very important to the army, 70 to 90% of the tonnage shipped into combat is fuel.
Detroit has only shown minimal interest in hybrid electrics. Japanese auto companies have working hybrid electric vehicles on the market*. If Detroit doesn't do something to dramatically improve fuel mileage it will be just like the 70s, they will lose even more market share. I think Detroit's only interest in technology to reduce fuel use is to keep the government off their backs and to get some "free" research money from the government (that means you and me)
Scp
*Current designs use a parallel configuration with an electric motor assisting the transmission under high load conditions. This is a transitional design; eventually the only connection between the engine and the wheels will be electric.
On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 22:53:17 GMT, "Stephen" shouted from the rooftop:
You mean like a locomotive? I've often wondered why the #2 builder of diesel-electric locos (GM) hasn't transfered the technology to cars, although I suspect liabilty is a big part of the answer (lots of amps to kill the unwary).
-Carl "An honest man doesn't need a long memory"- Jesse Ventura
GM got burned with their Impact, and that soured them on electric drive for cars and light trucks. Batteries are *heavy*, with very poor energy storage densities, and relatively short lives. High power electric drives are complex, often very hard to troubleshoot, and make for *very* exciting electrical fires. Locomotives need the weight for traction, and they have trained crews to deal with electrical incidents. But cars with ordinary drivers are a different story.
One of the guys at work bought one of the Japanese hybrids. Horribly ugly car, poor handling, poor performance, and he's just about to drop $6,000 to replace the 2 year old battery pack. It does get good gas mileage, about 50 MPG, but the gas savings isn't enough to pay for the replacement batteries. Not much curb appeal there.
Ordinary automatic transmissions have gotten quite good. They're relatively light, reliable, and quite efficient. The computers added to them in recent years, and the increase in the number of speeds available, have also made them better able to match the load to today's smaller engines for best performance, or best economy (pick one).
Also, gas is really historically quite cheap today. Even with the current run up in pump price, it is still roughly 20 cents a gallon in 1967 dollars. People are complaining, but it isn't really pinching them the way the price run up in the 1970s did. They don't seem to be running away from the big gas guzzlers quite yet.
But Dodge is supposed to come out with a full size pickup (and later a van) that has a (parallel) hybrid electric drive train. It will be aimed at the fleet market, which is more sensitive to fuel costs than the consumer market. So the domestic automakers aren't all turning their backs on the technology.
OTOH, Chrysler has tricked out the Hemi in the 300C to dynamically shut down cylinders when high power is not needed. That results in a substantial MPG jump in a heavy performance car. I drove one, you can't feel it work, and throttle response seems as good as for a Hemi without the feature. If they do the same for the Hemis in their pickups, the hybrid might not show much of a MPG advantage.
BTW, I've been new car shopping for the last few weeks. The 300C had my interest from a technical perspective, but God it is an ugly car. The Cobra Mustangs are fast, but the interior ergonomics are really clunky. The turbo Miata is a real bargain, and it is gentle on the gallon, but my fat butt wouldn't fit in it. The Honda S2000 is a performance motorcycle on 4 wheels, but I don't think I could live with that peaky little screamer engine on the street.
I wanted a Viper roadster, but I settled on a 350Z roadster. Very attractive car, very fast, very smooth handling, and I didn't have to win the lottery to afford it. 26 MPG isn't great, but I don't think a hybrid would be this much fun to drive.
When I look at my "fleet", I realize that fuel economy really hasn't been much of a deciding factor in purchasing any of them. My 1966
98 Oldsmobile has the 425CI Rocket V8 and gets 18 MPG on the interstate. My 1978 F350 welding truck struggles to get 6 MPG. My 1987 Jeep Comanche pickup (4x4) gets 24 MPG out of its
4.0 liter straight 6. My 1993 2 wheel drive Cherokee only gets
22 MPG from the same engine (go figure). My Dodge Intrepid does leisurely sip the gallon, getting 27 MPG, but my 1998 Ram pickup struggles to get 14 MPG, and my Z gets 26. No econo- boxes in the bunch, but only the old Ford and the newer Dodge Ram have MPG numbers that really suck.
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 00:16:22 -0400, Gary Coffman brought forth from the murky depths:
You want ugly? Most of the Chrysler concepts are BFU, but this one...
formatting link
the cake. The Willys1 looks like a glorified VW dunebuggy, the Chrysler Pacifica and Dodge Powerbox look like they wanted to impress the yuppie Volvo lovers. I guess the Super8 Hemi (motel with a hot engine?) ties in BFUness with the Kalifornia Koncept Kar.
Vipers are sexy. At $81,890 they ought to be.
Yeah, that certainly is a fleet. Do you do your own sheetmetal work whenever your fun gets out of hand?
----------------------------------------------------------------------- A PSYCHOLOGIST looks at everyone -else- ||
formatting link
an attractive woman enters the room. || Full Website Programming
Actually, the PT Cruiser sort of grows on you. I didn't like it much when it first came out, but now I think it is kind of cute in a retro way. The 300C just gets uglier every time I look at one. The high belt line, the ugly grille, the fat butt, just don't work. They did a styling exercise that looked really good, pity that wasn't the car they decided to build.
Add $6,000 to that figure for a properly optioned Viper. The local dealer has a white roadster that is just to die for. If I were to win the lottery (I don't actually play the lottery), that would be my first stop.
The only one that's ever had any bent sheetmetal is the old welding truck. When I got it, the passenger door was caved in, and it had been painted with a roller (it looked ghastly). For a work truck, I suppose it doesn't matter, but I did the body work and repainted it anyway to suit my sense of aesthetics. Mechanically, it is in great shape.
The Olds looks just the way I bought it in 1966. That's really the crown jewel. It only has 63,000 miles on it, 100% original, and it has been garaged every day of its life. The newest Ram looks like new too. The Z obviously is new.
The others show the sorts of wear you'd expect from daily drivers with over 100,000 miles on the clock. There are parking lot dings, and some of the striping and plastic show signs of UV damage. They aren't yet embarrassing, so I haven't redone them. They all still run great. I like each and every one of them enough to keep paying the insurance and tag fees rather than give them away to a dealer as a trade in.
Yeah, about as cool (not!) as a 57 Ford Ranchero. The front end actually has some curb appeal. It looks like the 49 Chevy pickup I once had. But the side and rear profiles are just wrong.
Realize, however, that the government had a hand in the appearance of the SSR. Because it has a cargo bed, the EPA classifies it as a truck. So Chevy can stuff the LS1 Corvette motor in it without hurting their CAFE numbers.
Snort! Last time I had the van serviced I walked around the showroom and reached in and opened the door on the Viper. 10 minutes of car alarm as they looked for the keys! Too funny. "Sorry, I didn't see the please do not touch sign".
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 12:11:38 -0400, Gary Coffman brought forth from the murky depths:
I feel the opposite. The Kruiser grows uglier every time I see it. I still can't believe they went for $45k when they were new. Our very own brainless and deep-pocketed Boomers. Of course, I've only seen one 300C and it had a gorgeous blonde driving it. Could that have biases my opinion? ;)
I wish I'd win the lottery, too, but I don't play, either.
You're quite lucky.
Kudos on maintaining them. I need to get a paint job on my '90 F-150, my only vehicle if you don't count the project trailer with the Hercules/Lincoln welder on it. Anyone want to trade a small O/A set and a small mig/stick welder for it? It's a project I may never get to otherwise. I'm not independently wealthy like some fleet owners I know. ;^)
Yeah, cars really are an extension of man, and not (necessarily) always in phallic and Freudian ways.
========================================================== CAUTION: Do not use remaining fingers as pushsticks! ==========================================================
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.