Lancer Evolution XI goes hybrid [merge]
Concept cars are very rarely ever actually put into production as a whole. The production cost would be through the roof, instead they take bits and pieces, then design another, take some more bits and pieces, etc. Ultimately its what is most cost efficient and productive that wins. That being said, actual concept cars are not made as a production model, just kinda a step in the right direction towards another step of actually designing the car.
Evolving Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
From: CA
I know that we will be forced to embrace newer technologies and learn how to extract power from them. I also agree with the fear of change, etc.
Mitsu hasn't had a factory backed rally car in ages, so you can bet they aren't doing it for the performance, rather the pressure. Subaru decided to cave in too, voila. You know that there is no way they will make anything large displacement, but we can hope/dream.
I see hybrids here catching on due to them being rammed down our throat, but people time and again have proven that diesel passenger cars just don't sell here. If that is the case, it will be the exit of the Evo/STI from this country, I am confident of at least that.
The good old days are right now. It will take the technology some time to catch up, but you are right it will eventually. But today is 1969 all over again, just with way newer stuff.
Mitsu hasn't had a factory backed rally car in ages, so you can bet they aren't doing it for the performance, rather the pressure. Subaru decided to cave in too, voila. You know that there is no way they will make anything large displacement, but we can hope/dream.
I see hybrids here catching on due to them being rammed down our throat, but people time and again have proven that diesel passenger cars just don't sell here. If that is the case, it will be the exit of the Evo/STI from this country, I am confident of at least that.
The good old days are right now. It will take the technology some time to catch up, but you are right it will eventually. But today is 1969 all over again, just with way newer stuff.
I'm excited, this is what I do for a living! Hybrid Diesel-Electric Buses, they have too derate the electric transmission because torque (you could put down all 200lb ft) is instant. I hope Mitsubishi do it right thou, they need to use Nano phosphate lithium ion batteries, they are extremely powerful and super light weight! Imagine having a 200hp engine and two hundred hp transmission stock with a real warranty, also Diesel has a lot more btu's than gasoling or E-85, tons more power potential.
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 0
From: From Ohio, now in N. Virginia
I think the turbo diesel has huge potential. I'm optimistic, I think the next gen Evo will be better.
Have you watched ALMS with diesel prototypes? Even the BMW 335d is pretty good for a everyday car. Imagine something like the 335d but with more HP and tons and tons of torque.
Have you watched ALMS with diesel prototypes? Even the BMW 335d is pretty good for a everyday car. Imagine something like the 335d but with more HP and tons and tons of torque.
copied and pasted, I don't know, just interesting.
“Converting half of our passenger fleet to diesel could save about 17.8 billion gallons of oil per year. “
Actually, it would not. Diesel engines provide approximately 33 percent better mileage per gallon compared to gasoline engines. It is almost certain that the diesel vehicles will not achieve 70 miles per gallon, as that is achieved only with very small and light vehicles at highway speeds, not for big SUVs. Under the gasoline CAFE standards, light vehicles will achieve 35 miles per gallon with gasoline engines. The break-even point for total crude oil refined is approximately 52 miles per gallon for diesel fuel compared to 35 miles per gallon for gasoline. Yet, 52 divided by 35 is 1.486, or approximately 48 percent better fuel economy. A much more realistic number is 47 miles per gallon for diesel vehicles, which is 33 percent better than for gasoline engines. With that result (47 mpg for diesels), using diesel for half the passenger fleet would INCREASE crude oil refined in the USA by approximately 16 million gallons per year.
With the present US refinery configurations, one gallon of diesel fuel requires approximately 3 gallons of crude oil be refined, whereas one gallon of gasoline requires only 2 gallons of crude. Different refineries have slightly different yields, but those figures are a good average. It is possible to change the yields to provide more diesel and less gasoline per barrel of crude refined, but to do so requires extremely expensive capital investment in the refineries. Since refineries typically run on very small profit margins or at a net loss, that is not likely to happen.
“Converting half of our passenger fleet to diesel could save about 17.8 billion gallons of oil per year. “
Actually, it would not. Diesel engines provide approximately 33 percent better mileage per gallon compared to gasoline engines. It is almost certain that the diesel vehicles will not achieve 70 miles per gallon, as that is achieved only with very small and light vehicles at highway speeds, not for big SUVs. Under the gasoline CAFE standards, light vehicles will achieve 35 miles per gallon with gasoline engines. The break-even point for total crude oil refined is approximately 52 miles per gallon for diesel fuel compared to 35 miles per gallon for gasoline. Yet, 52 divided by 35 is 1.486, or approximately 48 percent better fuel economy. A much more realistic number is 47 miles per gallon for diesel vehicles, which is 33 percent better than for gasoline engines. With that result (47 mpg for diesels), using diesel for half the passenger fleet would INCREASE crude oil refined in the USA by approximately 16 million gallons per year.
With the present US refinery configurations, one gallon of diesel fuel requires approximately 3 gallons of crude oil be refined, whereas one gallon of gasoline requires only 2 gallons of crude. Different refineries have slightly different yields, but those figures are a good average. It is possible to change the yields to provide more diesel and less gasoline per barrel of crude refined, but to do so requires extremely expensive capital investment in the refineries. Since refineries typically run on very small profit margins or at a net loss, that is not likely to happen.
Evolving Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: Western Washington
copied and pasted, I don't know, just interesting.
“Converting half of our passenger fleet to diesel could save about 17.8 billion gallons of oil per year. “
Actually, it would not. Diesel engines provide approximately 33 percent better mileage per gallon compared to gasoline engines. It is almost certain that the diesel vehicles will not achieve 70 miles per gallon, as that is achieved only with very small and light vehicles at highway speeds, not for big SUVs. Under the gasoline CAFE standards, light vehicles will achieve 35 miles per gallon with gasoline engines. The break-even point for total crude oil refined is approximately 52 miles per gallon for diesel fuel compared to 35 miles per gallon for gasoline. Yet, 52 divided by 35 is 1.486, or approximately 48 percent better fuel economy. A much more realistic number is 47 miles per gallon for diesel vehicles, which is 33 percent better than for gasoline engines. With that result (47 mpg for diesels), using diesel for half the passenger fleet would INCREASE crude oil refined in the USA by approximately 16 million gallons per year.
With the present US refinery configurations, one gallon of diesel fuel requires approximately 3 gallons of crude oil be refined, whereas one gallon of gasoline requires only 2 gallons of crude. Different refineries have slightly different yields, but those figures are a good average. It is possible to change the yields to provide more diesel and less gasoline per barrel of crude refined, but to do so requires extremely expensive capital investment in the refineries. Since refineries typically run on very small profit margins or at a net loss, that is not likely to happen.
“Converting half of our passenger fleet to diesel could save about 17.8 billion gallons of oil per year. “
Actually, it would not. Diesel engines provide approximately 33 percent better mileage per gallon compared to gasoline engines. It is almost certain that the diesel vehicles will not achieve 70 miles per gallon, as that is achieved only with very small and light vehicles at highway speeds, not for big SUVs. Under the gasoline CAFE standards, light vehicles will achieve 35 miles per gallon with gasoline engines. The break-even point for total crude oil refined is approximately 52 miles per gallon for diesel fuel compared to 35 miles per gallon for gasoline. Yet, 52 divided by 35 is 1.486, or approximately 48 percent better fuel economy. A much more realistic number is 47 miles per gallon for diesel vehicles, which is 33 percent better than for gasoline engines. With that result (47 mpg for diesels), using diesel for half the passenger fleet would INCREASE crude oil refined in the USA by approximately 16 million gallons per year.
With the present US refinery configurations, one gallon of diesel fuel requires approximately 3 gallons of crude oil be refined, whereas one gallon of gasoline requires only 2 gallons of crude. Different refineries have slightly different yields, but those figures are a good average. It is possible to change the yields to provide more diesel and less gasoline per barrel of crude refined, but to do so requires extremely expensive capital investment in the refineries. Since refineries typically run on very small profit margins or at a net loss, that is not likely to happen.
Last edited by dreamerak; Aug 26, 2010 at 01:58 AM.