From an engineering standpoint this thing is REALLY cool, takes the Wankel and removes the inefficiency of it. If you have time check it out.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/quasiturbine.htm
http://www.quasiturbine.com/

Anyone here think this engine could be the next thing? At least for those of us who realize there will not be a Hydrogen economy anyway...

 

Fascinating...at least you're putting all that free time at work to good use, finding stuff like this! Looks like they still need to do a lot of real-world testing before it hits the market as a power source. I'd like to see some video of that go-kart powered by one of these things. -TD

 

Hehe, read about that couple days ago...sounds very cool.

 

Looks cool!

It almost looks like there is exhaust that gets into the intake chamber the way the moving diagram in the "quasiturbine" site. The place I am talking about is the dead gap between the exhast and the intake ports.

Looks neat though, but I bet it'll use alot of oil.

 

it supposed to use nearly no oil, what im wondering is what they'll use for those little wheels, everything i can think of either causes damage from friction, or is to weak...

 

Supposedly uses very little or no oil, I imagine some kind of sealed bearings in those wheels. As for the exhaust yes it is designed to let exhaust into the intake to reburn it. That's one of the problems with the Wankel, to much unburned hydrocarbons.

 

It says it's nearly oil-free.

Thanks for the link

 

Can someone explain to me why there wont be a hydrogen economy? Not in the near future, I can see that, but a ways down the road, I think it will be very do-able.

That Quasiturbine engine looked pretty neat though.

 

I'll say it as bluntly as possible.....

Oil companies & Auto Manufacturers (see below):

 

I love it when people are blunt, lol. I thought the manufacturers were trying to help the situation, what with Ford Hydro cars.
O, and by the way, I like that emoticon thing you used, lol.

 

Think about it, with all the technology we have and the best most auto manufacturers can do is produce at best 40 mpg's on a sub compact car?

While thinking ont that ponder this too, a Ford Ranger 4x4 with a 4.0 V6 compared to a super duty 4x4 with a V10 doesn't have much difference in mpg's but a huge difference in power.

If someone expalins that one to me other than oil and auto companies in bed I'll listen.

 

Well, there is only so much chemical energy we can physically use in an internal combustion engine. Those 2 engines are completely different in size, design, and efficiency.

 

When Ford started work on their Hydrogen ICE, they had great success with it.. They found out that adding by supercharger, and leaning the mixture way out they could get some great MPG number (like it matters on hyrdogen), and ALMOST the same power as it's gas counterpart. They used the 2.3 4 cyl for the tests. It's a neat idea but we don't have the technology to make if cheap and reliable yet. It cost's more, and pollutes more to extract the hydrogen than a gas ICE.. I forget the exact numbers but it's more enviromentally friendly to run gas right now. In the next 30 to 50 years I can forsee hydrogen becoming a viable alternative.

 

Study chemistry and thermodynamics. Im sick of these conspiracy theories based on wishful thinking and not science. Straight hydrogen is not practical as a transportation fuel and never will be. What would the hydrogen car be called anyway, the Ford Hindenburg? Fuel cells use hydrogen, but the only practical fuel cell cars require a liquid hydrcarbon fuel in the tank.

Jim

 

I'm going to get an Edlebrock side plate for mine.
Dono