Electric Motorcycles - what do you want to know?

[Hardware]

This is the format I've always wondered about.  The biggest draw back to a internal combustion isn't that it uses gas....it's that it uses it so inefficiently.

A turbine on the other hand is very efficient.  In fact, if you use it to drive a generator, use the generator to charge batteries and high amp capacitors, and use those to then drive an electric motor you might have something that is 2-3 times more efficient than the best gas IC engines out there to day.  And it runs on gas.

If everyone reduced their gasoline intake by 50 to 65%....that’s a big part of the problem solved.

But....are these numbers right?  Would it cost less to make?  And would the components (turbine, batteries, and capacitors) last for 65k to 100k like a current IC?

Shaw, go find a government project building this type of system and get back to use.

Turbines have to be built from extremely high grade materials, run at very high rpms and high temperatures.  I remember riding in a Bell Long Ranger once and the pilot explained that after we landed, their company policy was to let the turbine run at idle speed for four minutes to let it cool properly.  

They are also best suited to running at a constant speed - so having one connected to a generator might be the better application.  

Then there's issues with the exhaust.  Apparently Jay Leno's turbine bike has melted the grill on a car stopped too closely behind him in traffic.

Add up the turbine + generator + batteries + capacitors + e-motor + exhaust issues = high costs + serious packaging/engineering challenges.

[shah269]

Shaw, go find a government project building this type of system and get back to use.

Ge I don't know....maybe the M1 main battle tank!
Or the latest generation of light infantry vehicles?
Or the new Hummer that has been proposed?
Or.....any locomotive since what? 1960?
Turbine electrics are a well proven technology, and are very very sexy!
Think of it, the sound of that turbine coming up to speed when you turn your bike on!
And it wouldn't even have to be a big turbine. A little one no bigger than say a coffee mug would produce enough power.
Also the exhaust gases can be diverted to the front of the rear wheel so as to clean and dry the road as you ride!

[Heaven Bound]

Chrysler did a lot of research on turbine cars and much of that showed turbines were not efficient enough...at low altitudes and high ambient air temps, and with the technology of the 60's and 70's.  Would be interested to see how much of that changes with today's technology, but I suspect not much has changed.  They were talking about the potential for ceramic parts at the time but those didn't exist then, and even today cost a lot.

As for military apps, efficiency is one part of the equation along with power, time before rebuild, logistics, etc.  The one part that Chrysler had the most problem with IIRC was the intercooler needed to make the auto application work.  A tank has a honkin big intercooler hidden in that hunk of steel to get the better efficiency numbers.

Don't forget that torque is really low on those small turbines, and they are limited in RPM range which makes running on the road at low speeds difficult.

[Heaven Bound]

I'm still waiting on a Mr. Fusion for my vehicle power needs...



I want a pair of sunglasses like those too.

[DantesDame]

Please note that I have posted up my preliminary article for you wolves to have some fun with. It should answer a few of your questions, but please let me know if I missed something obvious.


And remember: they're making a commuter right now, not a sport-tourer  

[ZED]

I'm still waiting on a Mr. Fusion for my vehicle power needs...
...

Yeah, I'm looking forward to that too.  Hopefully I'll find out about it a bit before everyone else too so I can sell my conventional energy investments first.

[ZED]

Please note that I have posted up my preliminary article for you wolves to have some fun with. It should answer a few of your questions, but please let me know if I missed something obvious.


And remember: they're making a commuter right now, not a sport-tourer  

Thanks for the preview DD.  

I didn't see anything about front suspension adjustability.  Is it adjustable, or fixed?

I think the idea's great for a commuter, but for the varying sizes of riders I think you'd need a fair range of adjustment.  I suppose there's always a fork swap as an option, but what a PIA on a new bike.  I await the final report.  

[DantesDame]

Thanks for the preview DD.  

I didn't see anything about front suspension adjustability.  Is it adjustable, or fixed?

I think the idea's great for a commuter, but for the varying sizes of riders I think you'd need a fair range of adjustment.  I suppose there's always a fork swap as an option, but what a PIA on a new bike.  I await the final report.  

Don't wait too long - this is actually fairly close to the final. I'm just covering my butt and saying that it'll need to be tweaked. I'll see what I can find out about the front shocks though....

[ZED]

 

[M.Brane]

 No cost of ownership comparison to say a EX250 or other similar bike?

 Even a WAG would be good. Shouldn't be too hard to come up with a ballpark figure based on projected costs. Just something to sway a potential buyer other than the fact that it's quiet, and clean.

[DantesDame]

 No cost of ownership comparison to say a EX250 or other similar bike?

 Even a WAG would be good. Shouldn't be too hard to come up with a ballpark figure based on projected costs. Just something to sway a potential buyer other than the fact that it's quiet, and clean.

Well, $7/month for electricity vs say... $4/gal at 70mpg, 40 miles a day. It's late. I'll do the maths later...

[Mephistopheles]

Chrysler did a lot of research on turbine cars and much of that showed turbines were not efficient enough...at low altitudes and high ambient air temps, and with the technology of the 60's and 70's.

Hell, they came to it late.

GM was doing it as early as the 30's and built cars in the 50's

Check out the sweet pages about the projects...

http://www.conklinsystems.com/firebird/



/ I know I geeked out, I have had this page bookmarked for ages, and never needed it, until now!

[Heaven Bound]

Hell, they came to it late.

GM was doing it as early as the 30's and built cars in the 50's

Check out the sweet pages about the projects...

http://www.conklinsystems.com/firebird/



/ I know I geeked out, I have had this page bookmarked for ages, and never needed it, until now!

I don't believe we had turbine technology until late in WWII...

[Mydlyfkryzis]

I don't believe we had turbine technology until late in WWII...

1918 - General Electric company started a gas turbine division. Dr. Stanford A. Moss developed the GE turbosupercharger engine during W.W.I. It used hot exhaust gases from a reciprocating engine to drive a turbine wheel that in turn drove a centrifugal compressor used for supercharging.

1920 - Dr. A. A. Griffith developed a theory of turbine design based on gas flow past airfoils rather than through passages.

1930 - Sir Frank Whittle in England patented a design for a gas turbine for jet propulsion. The first successful use of this engine was in April,

1937. His early work on the theory of gas propulsion was based on the contributions of most of the earlier pioneers of this field.
        The specifications of the first jet engine were:

         Airflow = 25 lb/s
         Fuel Consumption = 200 gal/hr or 1300 lb/hr
         Thrust = 1000 lb
         Specific Fuel consumption = 1.3 lb/hr/lb

1936 - At the same time as Frank Whittle was working in Great Britain, Hans von Ohian and Max Hahn, students in Germany developed and patented their own engine design. 1939 (August) - The aircraft company Ernst Heinkel Aircraft flew the first flight of a gas turbine jet, the HE178.

1941 - Sir Frank Whittle designed the first successful turbojet airplane, the Gloster Meteor, flown over Great Britain. Whittle improved his jet engine during the war, and in 1942 he shipped an engine prototype to General Electric in the United States. America's first jet plane was built the following year.

1942 - Dr. Franz Anslem developed the axial-flow turbojet, Junkers Jumo 004, used in the Messerschmitt Me 262, the world's first operational jet fighter.