you do realise that it also uses a hell of a lot of energy to get hydrogen - mainly electricity (the organic way of getting hydrogen is still VERY expensive and slow to do)

ethanol is by far a lot cheaper to make

 

Not even close. Diesels run anywhere from a 18:1 AFR at WOT all the way up to 85:1 at idle. And there is no Air/fuel mixture. It's simply very compressed air, into which the fuel is injected into.

 

Have you heard of an ethanol to hydrogen reactor...

http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,62439,00.html

The nice thing is hydrogen has more usable energy than ethanol. There are still many obstacles with hydrogen too. Storage and cost come to mind. Cost is a problem with most known alternative fuels because gasoline is still "relatively" cheap.

 

Wouldn't injecting fuel into very compressed air be a mixture? I thought the definition of a mixture was combining 2 or more substances. Yes, I'm no expert on how a diesel works. I read that stoich with diesel fuel is 14.6:1 (gasoline=14.7:1) from Innovative Motorsports literature. If burned in a gasoline engine (as I was talking about) the fuel maps should be close. The octane may be reduced with oil and other additives in diesel fuel so the timing may still need changing.

 

well, generally under 18:1 on a diesel is what causes that black smoke. Stoich depends on the quality and type of fuels and is genreally in the high teens range, but the fuel will never burn in time to make it efficient.

about the mixture thing, i tend not to refer to it as that because it tends to confuse people. The simple fact is that the air and fuel are only mixed for only a few milliseconds, and then it's just exhaust and gets pushed out. That's the difference between diesels and gasoline motors, diesels are excess air lean-burn motors, while gasoline needs to meter the air AND fuel, and is usually on the richer side of things.

edit

In reguards to a diesel rotary, theoretically it's possible, but just a pipe dream. I remember seeing one design where it was 2 rotors, one aobut twice as large as the other. The large rotor would compress air into the chamber of the smaller rotor on its intake stroke, then the smaller rotor would compress the air even further until the diesel is injected. But, such an overcomplicated design is just not worth it. That and i beleive that the apex and side seals wouldn't be able to handle those types of pressures for very long.

 

As far as electric power goes, I am a member of the electric vehicle club at my highschool. We have a 83 ranger that runs on 96 volts, but we (used to) compete against a team that used an s4 on 96 volts. Itwas a clean swap, they just didnt have any cargo room in the back (it was all deep cycle batteries). They could go between 50 and 70 miles on a charge, turn some good numbers in an autox and have enough torque (the electric motors forte) to break traction up to 2nd or 3rd gear. The worst downside I can think of (besides the lack of good mileage) was the charge time, it was between 5 and 8 hours I think.
Hope it helps,
-Rob

 

No way am I doing electric. I do about 50 miles a day on average, 100 a day isn't uncommon. There have been days that I've done over 300 miles. (I reset the trip odometer when I fill up.)

Additionally, I can't spare the bed of my truck. It's actually used for hauling things, and my toolbox is back there.

Lastly, I live on a 4th floor apartment. No access to a charging socket. The apartment complex won't like me hanging a cord out the window.

 

Youre right, I wouldnt do electric either, its fun for go carts and such, but anything larger than a shifter cart size just isnt practicle. However, what I have seen done is a super ghetto(although pretty intelegent) hybrid electric in an opel gt. what was done there, was a 5 hp lawnmower engine connected directly to an (I think) ac motor, so as to produce power. this power went straight to a battery pack and then to an electric engine mounted straight to the bellhousing. Im not sure what voltage it was, but the owner was able to do as many miles/day as he wanted, had enough power to get the gt up to 110ish which is the stock max speed and 'spirited acceleration'. So, theres enough power, and the gas mileage was something like 60 mpg I think...granted a fc is about 800 lbs heavier, so you might have to do something different. Now, I wouldnt really reccomend that either, especially if your car is anything more than a total beater.
-Rob

 

Yep. Beater... 1989/1990 Mazda B2600i 4x4 pickup... The parts hauler/tow vehicle for my 7...

It's only slightly heavier than an S5 TII or Vert actually. I fairly light truck at mabe 3200 Lbs.

The idea about propane was that I could do the conversion cheaply, as all I'd have to do is buy injectors, a tank, and an ECU. The engine will work as is.

 

i have seen trucks that run on both propane and or gasoline according to what was available. and dont forget the military multifuel engines. there were a few ***** to turn and switches to switch fuels in the former. abt the multifuel engines i couldnt tell you anything

 

Pele,

I wanna go hydrogen too.

Here's my plan:
When I build my house in a few years...
A bunch of solar panels on my roof and probably a few turbines too.
I plan to power my house as well as use it to "crack" water into h20 (using electrolysis).

Then all I gotta do is store and complress the H2 properly, and pump it into the car.

FREE GAS