your the one that brought that up. i never even mentioned it! but i will say i never believed in the 100 mpg carburetor either. i belive it is simply not possible! but with all the advances in the last 100 years why are we still driving with model t technology? mike

_________________
06 kj 3.7 nsg 370 np 241 dark khaki

I know I brought it up...I just thought it was a funny tidbit to share, since nobody with the slightest mechanical/engineering inclination would ever CONSIDER that just a carb swap would make anything get 100 mpg

But also...not only are we driving with model T technology...many of our late model high end cars are mostly either supercharged or turbocharged and have variable valve timing right?

The '29 Duesenberg Model SJ had a supercharger, fuel injection, and variable valve timing. HA!

AHH! and there is the rub if somebody built veicles like Dusenberg of the Rolls Royce of that era. These were works by fine craftsman who believed in craftsmanship fit and finish and were truely hand built rolling works of art. A short time back SPEED TV had a show of Jay Leno's collection of Dusenbergs. He in fact found one slightly rusted and abandoned in a parking garage in New York or Chicago. Undrivable but when trailered to Jays shop, did a little fluid changes it still fired up. That is why these cars are so memorable. They were built top run forever, but alass that pride in work and craftsmanship belong to a few, ARB, Rock Lizzard and some others but I know of knowbody building power plants or drive trains with this type of precission in work.

You can yammer on about using the same technology since the model t, but really that's a floppy point. Why are we still using wheels to move things around with, that technology is WAAAAAY older than the model T, and all we have done to the wheel is give it more grip.

The simple answer, in my opinion, to your question about using "old" technology is the same I would give the wheel. It works, and works pretty dang well for what we ask of it and no one has come up with anything better that WORKS (meaning, it is powerful, efficient, compact, easy to utilize, inexpensive to maintain, etc.).

The engine is here to stay until technology moves far enough forward to make alternative sources of motive energy available that match (or beat) the internal combustion engine. Yes, there are zero emission vehicles out there, but, are they really truly practical? And by that I mean is it something you can quickly fuel up (or energize or whatever), give you the power that you need for your application (sure you can build a zero emission commuter car, but what about a zero emission tractor-trailer rig, or bigger??), and have the durability needed to go hundreds of thousands of miles. The short answer is, right now, no.

Fuel cell technology is still in the developing stages, as are all the other forms of zero emission power sources. Plus, electric cars (the charge em up and watch em go kind that you have to plug in every night and forget long trips with them) aren't zero emission anyways, they still use the power created by power plants, and even nuclear plants have emissions (the worst kind really, the kind that take a lifetime to break down to semi safe levels).

Besides, the amount of power some vehicles need is astronomical when you look at it in watts. Small 4 cylinder engines creat the equivilent of about 130 kilowatts or so (rough average I think). That is 130,000 watts. That is a lot of force and energy created. A 1000 watt microwave that can boil hot water in a few minutes can put it into perspective. 1000 watts of microwave radiations takes a few minutes to boil that water. Imagine if you dumped 130,000 watts into that same cup of water. It would either boil really dang fast or completely vaporize into steam in a few seconds. It's pretty hard to efficiently get that same amount of energy from any other source without a lot of cost involved. That's why the technology the have right now isn't practical, even if it works. It would take rather large hydrogen cells to put out the same amount of power as a 200 hp engine is capable of producing, and then you get to lug around those heavy fuel cells in addition to everything else. Plus, electric motors that are capable of converting the electric energy created by the cells into the same amount of power as a small 4 cylinder engine are very heavy and waste a fair amount of the energy into heat. An efficient 1 hp electric motor weighs about 15-20 pounds. I don't know exactly how much one of the custom motors they use in the electric cars weigh, but it's probably pretty comparable to the engine it's replacing, if not more.

Now, I know that it can be done, eventually. The traction motors they use in diesel locomotives are massive, but four of them on an engine can move hundreds of thousands of tons of weight. But those have deisel engine powering them that put out upwards of 4,500 hp to 6,500 hp!!! The 6,500 HP engine is putting out the equivilent of over 4.8 megawatts!! That is a heck of a lot of energy to put out!


Anyway, sorry for the long post, but I think it's funny when people talk about using "old" technology to drive around with. I say, show me something that works just as well if not better, otherwise move on. We still use wheels, no hovercraft or flying cars yet. Same goes with the internal combustion engine. No compact fusion reactors, no supercompact energy cells, no practical zero emission power source yet for transportation. [/u]

_________________
2005 Jeep Liberty Limited 4x4
BFG A/T KO's
Custom roof rails

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2935427

It was found in LA. It needed engine work. It needed rare parts they were lucky to find. He did not do a complete restoration on it, choosing to leave it feeling "original."

_________________
http://www.Colorado4Wheel.com
"Its not about what you can DO with your Jeep, its about where you can GO with your Jeep."
Knowledgeable - But Caustic

I stand corrected but the craftman ship of the Dusenberg is still a point. Precission craftsmanship.

your comparison to to the wheel uses flawed logic! the wheel does not rely on corporations in the middle east to keep it running! and some one can make one in their basement and put it to work within an hour! it is a matter of physics! the wheel is superior! unlike the wheel, the internal combustion motor relies on countries getting along and people not getting greedy!

your same logic applies to the spoon also! why are we still using spoons? because they work and they are cheap and anybody can manufacture them! thus keeping the cost low! if you are a miser you can even make one for free! but the internal combustion engine does not work in that sense, because of politics and the inability of people to get along. people go psycho when money is involved and that is what we are seeing!

you are right about the fact that the internal combustion motor is the best we got so far! mike

_________________
06 kj 3.7 nsg 370 np 241 dark khaki

So why do we have vehicles with big power and little fuel economy....because people are still buying them. If no one buys them no one will make them....plain and simple. We are a "more power" nation for the most part, although that is changing I think. An 85 Civic had something like 60Hp on 1.3 litres and now they have 140 Hp on 1.8. Maybe thats part of it, but what it really boils down to is what the buying public demands. If we demand better fuel economy and are willing to take a smaller vehicle to get it, then it will happen.

Parting thoughts:
What would happen if we discovered that the earth produced enough oil constantly...an oil cycle if you will...to support our current energy usage?
War? Peace? Higher prices or lower? Would research towards alternative energies come to a halt? Would we then burn so much the we REALLY caused global warming?

_________________
It may be that your only purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.

06 CRD Sport
Built 5/11/06
Jeep Green
Rocklizard diff cover
V6 Airbox

i think your right! people say one thing (we want good fuel economy) and then do another (buy a hummer). maybe its a sense of entitlement? i don't know. but their own actions are causing for example: the civic to get as big as the original accord! you do know we have to make vehicles better and bigger than last years model! mike

_________________
06 kj 3.7 nsg 370 np 241 dark khaki

The issue is that the corporations in the middle east aren't as in control as you would like to think. They are in control, yes, but only because that control was GIVEN to them. Anyone can make bio diesel fuel in their backyard (there are at least a couple people on this board that do just that), so there goes that theory, since it isn't even really that hard, people are just lazy. Besides, my point with the wheel was because of your point that we are using old technology. Nothing was mentioned about who was in control of what. So it wasn't flawed logic, you were just applying it wrong.

Any way, the only reason they have control is the public isn't clamoring for something different. But that is starting to change, as you can see by companies starting to seriously invest in researching the new technologies. If OPEC was truly in control, they would crush that before it even hit the drawing board. But they didn't, because they can't. There goes another "Big Oil" theory. Companies are in business to do business, and that means making money, and that means chasing after whatever item will guarantee them money in the future.

The car companies are reading the writing on the wall, the average consumer is willing to switch to new, cleaner, more efficient technology, so that is what they are starting to pursue. "Big Oil" isn't stopping them, and it certainly isn't like the car companies are just making a couple models and then axing them a year later under some guise, they are keeping them and adding new models that follow suit of either low or zero reliance on combustible fuel. Why? because the consumer market is pushing for it. I'm sure that there isn't a single person who would not be willing to switch away from the internal combustion engine if the alternative was just as powerful if not more powerful for the same cost. But until those options are available, do you really think people are going to try and make a stand and buy nothnig but Honda electric cars that are only good for short commutes? I bought an SUV because I need the capability, I've owned a muscle car because I wanted to be able to go fast and get going fast fast. Others buy pickup trucks because they need the hauling capability. The only people who buy a car for gas mileage alone are people who do nothing but commute to work and trips to the grocery store. If they do anything else they compromise on fuel efficiency to gain the capability they need.

If you were to look into the technology required to make alternative sources of energy as compact and powerful and long lasting as is required by the general public, you'd realize why we still don't have the end all answer to reinventing the wheel. Hyrogen cells have been around for a long time, but until several years ago they were friggin' HUGE. You would have needed a pickup truck just to haul the dang thing. Plus there was reliability issues. The model -t wasn't invented overnight, and neither will the technology you're wishing for. I'm certainly not going to sit around and suffer while waiting for someone else to polish it off. I'm going to enjoy my gas drinking KJ dang it!

Trust me, the day WILL come when we either severly cut or completely eliminate our dependance on oil for transportation (we will still need it for plastic and such), but that is quite a ways in the future. Even though the Model t revolutionized transportation, it took decades for the horse and carriage to be phased out as a primary means of transportation. Same thing will happen with the internal combustion engines. I'd say they won't get phased out until maybe 30-50 years from now.

_________________
2005 Jeep Liberty Limited 4x4
BFG A/T KO's
Custom roof rails

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2935427

The issue is that the corporations in the middle east aren't as in control as you would like to think. They are in control, yes, but only because that control was GIVEN to them. What? are they or aren't they?Anyone can make bio diesel fuel in their backyard (there are at least a couple people on this board that do just that), so there goes that theory, no not at all! the capacity for biodiesel is severely limited (not every body can get free waste fryer oil)! since it isn't even really that hard, people are just lazy. Besides, my point with the wheel was because of your point that we are using old technology. Nothing was mentioned about who was in control of what. that was my point! nobody is in charge of the wheel! but oil is regulated out the wazoo!!!! So it wasn't flawed logic, you were just applying it wrong. of course its not your fault!. There goes another "Big Oil" theory. Companies are in business to do business, and that means making money, and that means chasing after whatever item will guarantee them money in the future. i am not against profit! but i am against fleecing, example b.p's recent multi million dollar fine for illegal manipulation of the propane market!I'm certainly not going to sit around and suffer while waiting for someone else to polish it off. I'm going to enjoy my gas drinking KJ dang it! i agree!!!!

Trust me, the day WILL come when we either severly cut or completely eliminate our dependance on oil for transportation (we will still need it for plastic and such), but that is quite a ways in the future. Even though the Model t revolutionized transportation, it took decades for the horse and carriage to be phased out as a primary means of transportation. Same thing will happen with the internal combustion engines. I'd say they won't get phased out until maybe 30-50 years from now. i agree!!!! it will take decades![/quote]

link to propane article: http://www.boston.com/business/globe/ar ... per+A+to+Z

another link with 303 million fine! http://www.platts.com/Oil/News/6540727. ... headlines1

_________________
06 kj 3.7 nsg 370 np 241 dark khaki

Back to the stated topic,

Current world reserves are expected to last 50 years at current rate of consumption.
1. Consumption is rising so the number of years, so that estimate will go down.
2. But reserves are based on "proved reserves" which are estimated quantities that analysis of geologic and engineering data demonstrates with reasonable certainty are recoverable under existing economic and operating conditions. New oil is being discovered everyday. so that means the estimated number of years will go up.
3. But technologies to extract oil continue to improve. Oil fields that were considered played out in the 80's and 90's are being reopened (because the price is high enough to justify the expense of extraction). so the estimate will go up.

Last tidbit, a little more controversial is the theory that oil and gas are fossil fuels is being challenged. some scientists believe that oil and gas are constantly be regenerated by geologic sources and not buried organic materials as has long been theorized. If this is true and oil and gas are constantly being regenerated by the earth, that leads to the conclusion that we will never run out of oil....

The most likely scenario for gasoline not being available anymore is for a newer technology like hydrogen being made available at prices that compete with gasoline or self contained energy sources incorporated into vehicles.

IMHO, you can count on being able to get gas for at least the next 50 years...

_________________
2005 CRD "Ol' Blue"
Red Ryder carbine-action, two hundred shot range model air rifle with a compass in the stock and this thing which tells time.
My build page- RL Komodo Rear and TJM Front Bumper, armored, lifted, JBA Steel D30, 4.10s and ARB air lockers.

I thought I read somewhere that the untapped oil in Alaska rivals that of the mid east. Is this true? We already have the pipeline but from what I've read (or so I thought) is that we have not even scratched the potential for oil reserves up in the great white north...anyone have any info on what is yet to be had in Alaska should we ever get it passed to tap into that oil???? I know the conservationists are constantly up in arms over drilling in Alaska, but hypothetically, what kind of barrel numbers are we talking about up there?? I know there's pros and cons to drilling in Alaska, but aside from that, just the raw numbers of what we could pull out of there so we could potentially tell the mid-east to kiss it!!!

_________________
2003 Silver Sport - Debadged
245/75/R16 DuraTracs
Cragar Soft 8s
OME Coils & Front Shocks, Bilstein Rear Shocks - Muddified Lift
JBA 4.5 UCA
K&N CAI
MagnaFlow Exhaust
Rola Vortex Rack

http://www.fusion-multimedia.com

The only significant recognized untapped source was the Artic National Wildlife Refuge and even the oil guys would not suggest that it had more than about 5 years capacity. Very small drop in the bucket that most all have stepped away from and likely will stay a long way from now that son, and possilbly soon Senator father, Stevens are convicted of taking bribes from the oil industry to pass legislation.

_________________
Dave

'06 CRD Limited, Lt. Khaki, MOPAR Slush Mats/Skids, DrawTite Front Hitch, Mag Lite, Yakima Bars, Thule Bike Rack, Fumoto, ORM, 245/70 Revo 2

Wish list: Lift, Boulder Bars, Something Bigger in the Front and Back, More Lights

Somewhere between 5.7 and 16 billion barrels in Alaska,

Saudi has an estimated 262 billion barrels under the sand, and the whole region has around 740 billion barrels to be pumped out.

Most of the oil in the mideast is very easy to get too, making it much cheaper than the Alaska oil.

_________________
2005 CRD "Ol' Blue"
Red Ryder carbine-action, two hundred shot range model air rifle with a compass in the stock and this thing which tells time.
My build page- RL Komodo Rear and TJM Front Bumper, armored, lifted, JBA Steel D30, 4.10s and ARB air lockers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/21/business/21shale.htm

It's not going to be cheap - but it's there

_________________
2005 CRD
stuff
Skeptic quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Excellent thoughts, great discussions, and reasonable ideas. I listen to a lot of talk radio that allows various types of theories to be expressed. Coast to Coast , one of the largest talk radio shows in the world periodically covers peak oil, alternative fuels, and other related topics. The idea that our earth is producing more oil is gaining more popularity and has increased a lot of attention. The fact that dozens of oil wells, including off shore wells, have reported increased amounts of oil is staggering. The critics say that the increase of oil could be from other oil reserves seeping into the empty reserves. Now the critics face another challenge, why are there so many reserves filling up?

_________________
2015 Ram Ecodiesel/Big Horn/4x4/Quad Cab
2016 Arctic Fox 22G/Onboard 2500 LP Cummins Onan Generator/160 Watt Solar Panel

I took the road less traveled. Now I'm LOST.

Maybe it's like the earths version of blood, and we're a bunch of mosquitos?

_________________
2005 Jeep Liberty Limited 4x4
BFG A/T KO's
Custom roof rails

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2935427

i got an open mind! i am willing to hope and entertain it is true! the fact is we probably know less than 10% of how the planets really work. maybe 8 generations from now we will know a little more at how our planet really works?

_________________
06 kj 3.7 nsg 370 np 241 dark khaki

The concept of oil being totally organic is quite silly. Nobody is going to dig grandma up in 1 million years to power the car with her. There is a reason they say ashes to ashes, dust to dust and it is a bit silly to think that plants and animals are the sole, or even primary, source of oil material when the only thing in common between the two is that they are both assembled from carbon particles-- carbon being one of the most numerous substances on earth.