-
According to the EU Elvas research team EVA gives us:
* CO2 emissions reduced by up to 15%;
* Car engine noise reduced by up to 10dB at 3000 rpm;
* Fuel consumption reduced by up to 15%;
* Materials 100% recyclable;
* Weight savings of 25%, compared with conventional system;
* Reduced electrical consumption.
Looks cool, but then again, I have no idea if this technology is ready today. I heard of it being used in F1, is that right ?
-
[QUOTE=Lagonda]According to the EU Elvas research team EVA gives us:
* CO2 emissions reduced by up to 15%;
* Car engine noise reduced by up to 10dB at 3000 rpm;
* Fuel consumption reduced by up to 15%;
* Materials 100% recyclable;
* Weight savings of 25%, compared with conventional system;
* Reduced electrical consumption.
Looks cool, but then again, I have no idea if this technology is ready today. I heard of it being used in F1, is that right ?[/QUOTE]
It is not being used in F1
And all that is only possible with a 42 volt system running through the whole car. I would rather try to get the engine as mechanical as possible get rid of as much electronics. But that doesn't mean the engine will be simple. I am sure that with large range control over lift, timing, and duration that even better gains can be had.
-
[QUOTE=jediali]id rather keep it NA but...for FI parallel t/c i would like. FI ruins the oppertunity for simple cross-head gasflow analysis[/QUOTE]
Don't worry jediali I was just thinking out loud.
Personally I do want some form of FI as that can make the engine more efficient but let us save the decision making until later when we know what kind of car we are tailering the engine for.
Odd though it seems people want a mid engined RWD 4 door sports car.
can't say that would be easy and I don't really like that idea (I would rather have Front or Mid mounted engine with AWD leaning more towards the front mounted engine)
-
Front engine and rear wheel drive with a conventional manual or convetional auto is the best as far as simplicity and cost effectiveness in concerned.
-
[IMG]http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2006/06/16-alfa-romeo-villa-d-este-design-story/Alfa-Romeo-Villa-d-Este-chassis-lg.jpg[/IMG]
-
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=Lagonda]You don't drive your exotic GT on a snowy road. Why would you?
[/QUOTE]
This looks like boring shit huh?
EDIT: and [URL="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4574488354578106603&q=amazing+car+video"]this[/URL]??
EDIT 2: or even this :eek: [URL="http://www.f1total.com/news/07020501.shtml"]http://www.f1total.com/news/07020501.shtml[/URL]
-
[QUOTE=Ferrer]Front engine and rear wheel drive with a conventional manual or convetional auto is the best as far as simplicity and cost effectiveness in concerned.[/QUOTE]
But it has been done to death. Have some imagination. We don't just want to design a GT we want to design a very good GT that has many good qualities, originality being one of the key ones.
-
[QUOTE=LotusLocost]This looks like boring shit huh?
EDIT: and [URL="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4574488354578106603&q=amazing+car+video"]this[/URL]??
EDIT 2: or even this :eek: [URL="http://www.f1total.com/news/07020501.shtml"]http://www.f1total.com/news/07020501.shtml[/URL][/QUOTE]
thanks. my german has deterioated a little but thats interesting.
-
[QUOTE=hightower99]But it has been done to death. Have some imagination. We don't just want to design a GT we want to design a very good GT that has many good qualities, originality being one of the key ones.[/QUOTE]
Yes but the fact that it has been done many times doesn't mean it wouldn't be a challenge. Putting the engine as far as back without compromising the interior space and as low as possible without compromising reliabilty and driveabilty plus having a transaxle gearbox would meant it's not the convetional front engine rear wheel drive car. Furthermore I honestly don't see the relation between mid engined and GT.
What's more we have to take cost into consideration, since this would be a low cash company we can't go mental with the mechanical bits. What that means is we can't have active everything and revolutionary engineering. We can innovate to a degree but we have to play it safe too. That goes to that engine topic too, I think you should ask our opinion (finance and product planning) before starting to develop an engine. That is if you want to keep real, if not you might as well erase all money related departments...
-
[quote=Ferrer][B]What's more we have to take cost into consideration[/B], since this would be a low cash company we can't go mental with the mechanical bits. What that means is we can't have active everything and revolutionary engineering. We can innovate to a degree but we have to play it safe too. That goes to that engine topic too, I think you should ask our opinion (finance and product planning) before starting to develop an engine. That is if you want to keep real, if not [B]you might as well erase all money related departments[/B]...[/quote] But that would reduce costs in labour, right? :D:rolleyes:
More seriously, maybe we should have some kind of budget to share between each of the divisions. Just to keep this from turning into a 6m long all carbon hi-tech monster with a 1248hp quad-turbo V18.
-
[QUOTE=twinspark] Just to keep this from turning into a 6m long all carbon hi-tech monster with a 1248hp quad-turbo V18.[/QUOTE]
But that sure would be fun :).
Anyways I saw further up the post that we should put our skills out. Im good with auto-cad and solidworks. I am currently working on the suspension of my universities Formula SAE team. (basically designing a highpower go-kart). It would be awesome to assist on this project. Just tell me where the suspention team is.:D
-
[QUOTE]I am currently working on the suspension of my universities Formula SAE team.[/QUOTE]
No S**t sledge? Wollongong will see you in hell, my friend :D
-
i honestly love the AWD thought, its my favorite way to drive, so think from a personal, fun, point, awd it is
-
Mid engined RWD, please. :D
-
were never gonna all decide on one haha, lets make two!!