Is the GM V8 dead? Not so fast.

J.A.
By J.A. Ackley
Jan 24, 2023 | V8, GM, ice, engine, General Motors, V8 Engine

Photograph Courtesy Chevrolet

In 2021, GM said it planned to exclusively offer electric vehicles by 2035. However, on Friday, the company announced that it’s going to invest in preparing four manufacturing facilities to build the next-gen GM V8to the tune of $854 million.

They also went on to say, “Product details, timing, performance and features related to GM’s next gen V-8 engine are not being released at this time.”

 

Join Free Join our community to easily find more V8, GM, ice, engine, General Motors and V8 Engine news.
More like this
Comments
View comments on the GRM forums
Toyman!
Toyman! GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 1:09 p.m.

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

Datsun310Guy
Datsun310Guy MegaDork
1/23/23 1:25 p.m.

I guess we're getting closer every year......

"Last of the V8's"

 

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 1:51 p.m.
Toyman! said:

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

And the last high volume application will likely be in something like a truck.

Toyman!
Toyman! GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 2:42 p.m.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

That's my guess. 

 

 

GameboyRMH
GameboyRMH GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 2:54 p.m.
Toyman! said:

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

Semis will be using combustion engines for a while longer but not necessarily a V8, a hybrid setup with a turbine engine could make a lot of sense for a semi too...

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 3:13 p.m.
GameboyRMH said:
Toyman! said:

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

Semis will be using combustion engines for a while longer but not necessarily a V8, a hybrid setup with a turbine engine could make a lot of sense for a semi too...

MD and HD vehicles will also use ICE's for quite a while.   And quite a bit of gas since the rules are very tightening up for both segments (which are different than semis).

fidelity101
fidelity101 UberDork
1/23/23 3:14 p.m.

the irony is that the photo is not of a v8

J.A. Ackley
J.A. Ackley Senior Editor
1/23/23 3:29 p.m.
fidelity101 said:

the irony is that the photo is not of a v8

Good eye. We replaced it with a different photo that fits better. Thanks!

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
1/23/23 3:36 p.m.

There's also the potential for possibly hydrogen fueled v8s in the future. I know Toyota and Yamaha have a hydrogen v8.

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
1/23/23 3:41 p.m.
Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 4:37 p.m.
GameboyRMH said:
Toyman! said:

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

Semis will be using combustion engines for a while longer but not necessarily a V8, a hybrid setup with a turbine engine could make a lot of sense for a semi too...

Oh man, turbine powered series electric trucks would be awesome.

Mazda built a hydrogen powered rotary Miata 30 years ago. Hydrogen has some serious problems when it comes to actual real-world use. It might be a good option for the big OTR trucks that go between specific points, but then again we already have trains.

QuasiMofo (John Brown)
QuasiMofo (John Brown) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 5:07 p.m.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Trains? What are we, Europe? Pshhh! This is 'Merica and in 'Merica we take large vehicles with us on vacation so we can enjoy the scenic beauty of states like Iowa and Ohio!

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/23/23 6:45 p.m.

I predict that the battery electric changeover is going to be pushed out another decade at least if not two. There is no way that battery infrastructure will be ready in only 12 years.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter)
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand UberDork
1/23/23 9:30 p.m.
GameboyRMH said:
Toyman! said:

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

Semis will be using combustion engines for a while longer but not necessarily a V8, a hybrid setup with a turbine engine could make a lot of sense for a semi too...

Semis have been big inline 6s with big hair dryers for a long time. 

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter)
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand UberDork
1/23/23 9:31 p.m.
Keith Tanner said:
GameboyRMH said:
Toyman! said:

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

Semis will be using combustion engines for a while longer but not necessarily a V8, a hybrid setup with a turbine engine could make a lot of sense for a semi too...

Oh man, turbine powered series electric trucks would be awesome.

Mazda built a hydrogen powered rotary Miata 30 years ago. Hydrogen has some serious problems when it comes to actual real-world use. It might be a good option for the big OTR trucks that go between specific points, but then again we already have trains.

The biggest problem is large quantities H2 plus atmospheric levels of oxygen is explosive. 

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter)
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand UberDork
1/23/23 9:32 p.m.
VolvoHeretic said:

I predict that the battery electric changeover is going to be pushed out another decade at least if not two. There is no way that battery infrastructure will be ready in only 12 years.

I predict a lot of the energy edicts made by people that know little to nothing about energy will not come to fruition in the times demanded.  But what do I know? 

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 10:37 p.m.
Toyman! said:

They will still be sticking big engines in big trucks after the car fleet goes entirely electric. Battery tech has a ways to go before it can haul big weights, big distances without special infrastructure. The v8 may well outlive the v6 and the 4-cylinder. 

Well railroad trains have been pulling miles of railroad cars with relatively small electric motors powered by diesel engines.   IE Hybrids. Some trains are even all electric. 
      So what's to prevent an electric truck lane?   Picking up voltage overhead?   
      Or for hybrid's why not small turbines?   Throttle of the turbine  to be controlled by feedback from the battery system?  Turbines are simple and efficient. But like relatively stable RPM. 
   Instead of oil based fuel  the Navy is using Biofuel. 

Datsun310Guy
Datsun310Guy MegaDork
1/23/23 11:23 p.m.

In reply to frenchyd :

Those diesel locomotives need a big engine to run a huge generator so can we really run trucks? Will this package all fit?

I used to visit Electromotive Locomotives for sales and the volume of copper wire waiting to become coils was impressive.  The 710 engine model meant 710 cubic inches per cylinder times V8, V12, V16  or a V20. 

And in keeping the theme EMD was once owned by General Motors. 

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/23/23 11:49 p.m.

In reply to Datsun310Guy :

We aren't talking about hauling hundreds of thousands of tons.. Rather 80,000 pounds max. So things don't need to be railroad size.  Just use the principle. 

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/24/23 12:21 a.m.
MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
1/24/23 12:34 a.m.
stuart in mn
stuart in mn MegaDork
1/24/23 6:55 a.m.
GameboyRMH said:

Semis will be using combustion engines for a while longer but not necessarily a V8, a hybrid setup with a turbine engine could make a lot of sense for a semi too...

Did you say turbine powered truck?  Behold the Chevy Turbo Titan from 1966.  smiley https://www.topspeed.com/cars/guides/the-story-of-turbo-titan-chevy-s-long-lost-gas-turbine-truck/

There was also the GM Bison concept truck from 1964.  https://tfltruck.com/2018/01/truck-rewind-1964-general-motors-bison-concept-the-future-looked-awesome/

Ford had a concept turbine truck as well, in 1964.

pinchvalve (Forum Supporter)
pinchvalve (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 8:24 a.m.

This has nothing to do with V8s, but since we were talking about odd truck concepts...

DaleCarter
DaleCarter GRM+ Memberand New Reader
1/24/23 10:00 a.m.

LONG LIVE THE CHEVY V8!!!!! GM seems to understand that government mandates, like the one in CA, will be pushed back well past 2035 due to the near impossibility of actually implementing them.

One problem with hydrogen fuel for vehicles is the massive amount of electricity or carbon-based fuels, almost always natural gas,  needed to create the fuel. Desalinization has the same problem with the electricity demands. My solution is to build dedicated nuke and natural gas generation plants for the two purposes, which would solve the water, fuel and emissions problems in California.

I'm sure CA will be happy to build a dozen small-scale nuke and natural gas plants for this "green" fuel industry :-)

I think the most interesting area for EV trucking is in local delivery. Think UPS, FedEx, USPS and local food service deliveries, among others. Usually, those fleets run out-and-back routes, returning to a central depot where they sit overnight. They comprise about 85% of all trucking miles driven in the US.

DaleCarter
DaleCarter GRM+ Memberand New Reader
1/24/23 10:02 a.m.

I think that you are SPOT ON!!! The virute-signalling will fall victim to reality.

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 10:12 a.m.

I missed the turbine suggestion.  

The industry BTDT.  They are considerably more expensive than diesel engines, and have the exact same emissions problems.  Unlike airplanes, the weight advantage is very muted.  So I don't see that every happening.

And, frenchy, just having a diesel + electric motor does not equal hybrid- you need a way to store energy to make a combination of EV and ICE - aka hybrid powertrain.  The diesel electric is just understanding how they are loaded.  Same goes for ships that are also diesel electric.

ICE hybrids will be developed quite a bit, and until batteries are so cheap that a 100mile pack is less expensive than an entire ICE powertrain- hybrids will make financial sense.  People forget that the constant improvement of batteries also helps hybrids be better at their jobs, too.

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 10:17 a.m.
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
 

The biggest problem is large quantities H2 plus atmospheric levels of oxygen is explosive. 

And that's different than any HC fuel, how?  Well, other than H2 having less energy than HC fuels, which is why HC fuels are used for thermobaric bombs....  

Appleseed
Appleseed MegaDork
1/24/23 10:20 a.m.

Hopefully GM isn't going to GM and nuke it after a less than a year run. I'm looking at you 4.2 turbo Blackwing.

David S. Wallens
David S. Wallens Editorial Director
1/24/23 12:27 p.m.
Appleseed said:

Hopefully GM isn't going to GM and nuke it after a less than a year run. I'm looking at you 4.2 turbo Blackwing.

For a second there, I thought you were going to bring up the 1988 Fiero. 

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 12:40 p.m.
alfadriver said:
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
 

The biggest problem is large quantities H2 plus atmospheric levels of oxygen is explosive. 

And that's different than any HC fuel, how?  Well, other than H2 having less energy than HC fuels, which is why HC fuels are used for thermobaric bombs....  

It's kinda the point of HC fuels, really :)

GameboyRMH
GameboyRMH GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 12:51 p.m.
alfadriver said:

I missed the turbine suggestion.  

The industry BTDT.  They are considerably more expensive than diesel engines, and have the exact same emissions problems.  Unlike airplanes, the weight advantage is very muted.  So I don't see that every happening.

You don't think a turbine series-hybrid could make sense? I figure this would allow the turbine to run at peak efficiency feeding power into the electric powertrain which might improve efficiency and emissions. I suppose the point of this not being massively better for a super-heavy land vehicle than doing the same with a diesel ICE is a valid one though...

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 1:06 p.m.

Jaguar did a show car a while back with microturbines - the C-X75 (catchy name, seems a little Mazda to me). The turbines were generators to top up the battery pack, which had a 68 mile range that could be extended to over 500 with the generators. I really wish they'd moved forward with the idea. From my limited understanding, turbines aren't good at rapid throttle response but they're pretty well suited as an APU. Jaguar also pointed out they are tolerant of a bunch of different fuels, don't need water cooling or oiling which makes them more compact for packaging. The ones used in the car were 94 hp and 77 lbs each. I can see Alfa's point about cost vs weight, though. Just make the vehicle a foot longer and jam an Onan gennie in there instead.

I still want to hear a semi making a turbine noise as it rolls past on the interstate, though :)

Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter)
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) UltraDork
1/24/23 1:12 p.m.
Keith Tanner said:
alfadriver said:
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
 

The biggest problem is large quantities H2 plus atmospheric levels of oxygen is explosive. 

And that's different than any HC fuel, how?  Well, other than H2 having less energy than HC fuels, which is why HC fuels are used for thermobaric bombs....  

It's kinda the point of HC fuels, really :)

It's just people that don't know what they are talking about pointing out that something is different, and somehow bad. 

tuna55
tuna55 MegaDork
1/24/23 1:13 p.m.

No a turbine doesn't make sense. You need diameter to make it efficient.

 

I drive an electric car. I want my next people mover to be electric. I don't ever want to deal with an ICE for daily driving duties ever again. I don't want to ever have to replace a catalytic converter, replace a fuel pump, replace a timing belt, motor mounts, torque converter or clutch ever again.

 

But I think the prediction of the demise of the ICE is overblown, despite proposals and legislation seemingly to the contrary.

 

I do not believe the driving cause is the grid, or precious metals, or anything like that. I believe that a large enough population will simply want an ICE. They might get more expensive and more difficult to find gasoline for, but I do not think any of us will live in a world where they cannot be purchased and driven on the road.

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 1:15 p.m.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

From a potential efficiency point, yea, it makes sense.  From a cost and fuel availability standpoint, it doesn't.  20 years ago, a handful of cruise companies tried to make the turbine work, but they didn't last more than one ship series.  Gas turbines don't have the same operating windows, too- which was one of the problems 60 years ago.  But these days, emissions are also super expensive to meet- they have the same problems that diesels do, but GT's can't do some of the basic solutions diesels do.

Lastly, the cost of a single speed, super high efficiency gasoline motor is so cheap.  Like super cheap.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter)
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand UberDork
1/24/23 1:17 p.m.
alfadriver said:
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
 

The biggest problem is large quantities H2 plus atmospheric levels of oxygen is explosive. 

And that's different than any HC fuel, how?  Well, other than H2 having less energy than HC fuels, which is why HC fuels are used for thermobaric bombs....  

HC fuels are less explosive.  That's why the exploding car is a Hollywood thing and not a reality thing.  Pure H2 in vast quantities is a Hindenburg thing.  But what do I know?  H2 with as little as 6% O2 is explosive.  The atmosphere with lots of pure H2 is explosive AF to put it in parlance you might understand.  
 

I'll try to teach you all while you need big power plants and large generators typically cooled by H2 to maintain a power grid, etc, but we all already know I'm the dumbest guy in the room and you green energy gurus got it all figured out.

Yah, I'm a lot more worried about that H2 than the other parts of power generation.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 1:29 p.m.
Keith Tanner said:

Jaguar did a show car a while back with microturbines - the C-X75 (catchy name, seems a little Mazda to me). The turbines were generators to top up the battery pack, which had a 68 mile range that could be extended to over 500 with the generators. I really wish they'd moved forward with the idea. From my limited understanding, turbines aren't good at rapid throttle response but they're pretty well suited as an APU. Jaguar also pointed out they are tolerant of a bunch of different fuels, don't need water cooling or oiling which makes them more compact for packaging. The ones used in the car were 94 hp and 77 lbs each. I can see Alfa's point about cost vs weight, though. Just make the vehicle a foot longer and jam an Onan gennie in there instead.

I still want to hear a semi making a turbine noise as it rolls past on the interstate, though :)

But Jaguar was using the X designation way back with the 1948 introduction of the XK 120 -150 XKE  XJS etc. right up to current production.   
  So move over Mazda ;-) 

   But yes I'd love to see a Jaguar with the stunning style the XKE had  in 1961 and a small turbine APU  charging a smaller sized battery 

Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter)
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) UltraDork
1/24/23 1:58 p.m.
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
alfadriver said:
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
 

The biggest problem is large quantities H2 plus atmospheric levels of oxygen is explosive. 

And that's different than any HC fuel, how?  Well, other than H2 having less energy than HC fuels, which is why HC fuels are used for thermobaric bombs....  

we all already know I'm the dumbest guy in the room

Correct, the adults are talking. There are already MASSIVE amounts of H2 out there used in industry, it is not a problem that doesn't already have a solution.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:00 p.m.
tuna55 said:

No a turbine doesn't make sense. You need diameter to make it efficient.

 

I drive an electric car. I want my next people mover to be electric. I don't ever want to deal with an ICE for daily driving duties ever again. I don't want to ever have to replace a catalytic converter, replace a fuel pump, replace a timing belt, motor mounts, torque converter or clutch ever again.

 

But I think the prediction of the demise of the ICE is overblown, despite proposals and legislation seemingly to the contrary.

 

I do not believe the driving cause is the grid, or precious metals, or anything like that. I believe that a large enough population will simply want an ICE. They might get more expensive and more difficult to find gasoline for, but I do not think any of us will live in a world where they cannot be purchased and driven on the road.

Tuna. 

 I don't think you understood where I was going.  
  That's the trouble with the internet. I I explain every detail it gets too long and if I don't ••••••. 

    There are small light even cheap turbines  out there.   As someone else has pointed out they are not fuel sensitive. the Navy is using Biofuels.   Don't need coolant.  Are efficient in that unlike an ICE engine don't have 1 stroke in 4 being a power stroke.   They are continuously rotating. 
      Down side, they prefer steady state, which is exactly what you want in a generator power unit.  
  The one proposed by Jaguar  made 68 hp and only weighed 77 pounds.  
     Now we can have lite battery units that only go 50-70 miles on a plug in charge.  But with a small tank of fuel can reach 500 miles. 
     The battery driving an electric motor can give the needed torque and acceleration a Turbine lacks.  
     

rslifkin
rslifkin UberDork
1/24/23 2:04 p.m.
frenchyd said:

Tuna. 

 I don't think you understood where I was going.  
  That's the trouble with the internet. I I explain every detail it gets too long and if I don't ••••••. 

    There are small light even cheap turbines  out there.   As someone else has pointed out they are not fuel sensitive. the Navy is using Biofuels.   Don't need coolant.  Are efficient in that unlike an ICE engine don't have 1 stroke in 4 being a power stroke.   They are continuously rotating. 
      Down side, they prefer steady state, which is exactly what you want in a generator power unit.  
  The one proposed by Jaguar  made 68 hp and only weighed 77 pounds.  
     Now we can have lite battery units that only go 50-70 miles on a plug in charge.  But with a small tank of fuel can reach 500 miles. 
     The battery driving an electric motor can give the needed torque and acceleration a Turbine lacks.  
     

It would work, but it's a question of whether it can be made efficient enough (and emissions and noise concerns solved cost effectively enough) to make it practical. 

Opti
Opti SuperDork
1/24/23 2:17 p.m.

In reply to Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) :

Transporting Hydrogen is kind of a pain in the ass. On a large scale its transported in pipelines, not much political capital in those these days. In a tanker you have to liquefy it and keep it super cold.

There is a bunch of hydrogen used a year, related to something like gasoline, its not even on the same planet. 

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:19 p.m.

In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :

The Hindenburg didn't explode, it just burned. Heck, it didn't even combust like it was mixed with air. 
 

H2 make a terrible fuel for an ICE. 

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:22 p.m.

In reply to frenchyd :

Cheap is very relative. I'd wager a 70hp ice is considerable cheaper. More so when you factor in emissions. 

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Dork
1/24/23 2:25 p.m.

Plus there is that synthetic gasoline that Porsche is working on which they claim will produce less emissions than evs. The question will how expensive it will be ofcourse.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:27 p.m.

In reply to tuna55 :

Back to why a turbine.  They've been around for well over a 100 years. The Titanic was driven by a steam turbines 
      The latest super aircraft carrier uses  steam turbines.   OK let's not use nuclear power, just yet  ( maybe fusion someday if••••)   The Navy is using biofuels in their jets.   So-   Peanut butter, cooking oil etc. ? As is well known turbines aren't fussy about fuel.  
     Connect That  to a generator sending electricity to a battery. Drive the vehicle with an electric motor a small light battery will give 50-70 miles of plug in range before the turbine fires up and gets  you another 500 miles of range.  Pull into that switch grass station and fill up your tank with  denatured ethanol.     Or if peanut butter is on sale, peanut butter.  ( just because I like saying peanut butter) Heck  if they ever figure out how to deal with Hydrogen  we can burn that. 
       
  I've got to say I love ICE  because it's based on steam engines which are fascinating to watch.  The idea of those parts flying around at 20,000 rpm  in a Formula  1 engine just tickles  the Rube Goldbergness  in me. If one stroke in 4 is a power stroke and peak power is when the crankshaft is 90 degrees to the direction of the piston movement. Is my math wrong when a 100 horsepower  4 cylinder engine makes at that point    Over 1000 horsepower?  
    I don't care. Rube Goldberg.  Ya just gotta love it.  

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:39 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver :

Re- Calculate it with  volume efficiency's of millions.  And more than a century of development.
  I think a really big run of turbines is 20 at a time?  
     While I love the stop start return stop start return of a piston. Going up and down a cylinder.  Watching valves dance to the tune played by the camshaft. Sparks magically  appearing at the right moment which has to vary based on what the throttle pedal is telling it.  Oh, and then we have water pumps and oil pumps  and gears chains or belts,  flywheel to retain motion. Plus fuel. A certain kind of fuel. The engine is more efficient with higher octane fuel but then the cost of fuel goes up offsetting the efficency.  
  Plus a way to put the right amount of fuel in.   Webers are beautiful, real artistic  but not cheap.  Nor is EFI. And now we are talking about development.  Carbs? Well they are cheaper but then•••••• 

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:43 p.m.
alfadriver said:

In reply to frenchyd :

Cheap is very relative. I'd wager a 70hp ice is considerable cheaper. More so when you factor in emissions. 

Ignoring the fact that the mustached Corporal tried very hard to develop  just that fuel a while back and in the past 80 years it hasn't happened yet. 
You still are talking about basically a High tech steam engine.   With all its inefficiencies. 

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:50 p.m.
rslifkin said:
frenchyd said:

Tuna. 

 I don't think you understood where I was going.  
  That's the trouble with the internet. I I explain every detail it gets too long and if I don't ••••••. 

    There are small light even cheap turbines  out there.   As someone else has pointed out they are not fuel sensitive. the Navy is using Biofuels.   Don't need coolant.  Are efficient in that unlike an ICE engine don't have 1 stroke in 4 being a power stroke.   They are continuously rotating. 
      Down side, they prefer steady state, which is exactly what you want in a generator power unit.  
  The one proposed by Jaguar  made 68 hp and only weighed 77 pounds.  
     Now we can have lite battery units that only go 50-70 miles on a plug in charge.  But with a small tank of fuel can reach 500 miles. 
     The battery driving an electric motor can give the needed torque and acceleration a Turbine lacks.  
     

It would work, but it's a question of whether it can be made efficient enough (and emissions and noise concerns solved cost effectively enough) to make it practical. 

Great points.   Driving a fixed RPM generator helps a lot.  On or off at peak efficency. 
   Regarding noise and pollution.  If not used for thrust the waste of a turbine could be captured and reused.  Just like they do on submarines.  And those submarines are really really really  quiet.   I mean you can hear a fish fart a mile away but you can't hear a submarine when it's right behind you.  
 Please ask me how I know.  Please?   

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 2:52 p.m.
alfadriver said:

In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :

The Hindenburg didn't explode, it just burned. Heck, it didn't even combust like it was mixed with air. 
 

H2 make a terrible fuel for an ICE. 

I happen to agree but if they get it working it will work on a turbine too!  

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 3:02 p.m.
VolvoHeretic said:

I predict that the battery electric changeover is going to be pushed out another decade at least if not two. There is no way that battery infrastructure will be ready in only 12 years.

It won't be a battery issue.  We just are using great big batteries now because the only real objection that has any validity at all is Range.

 The solution of big batteries speaks to all those who wanted a 454 to commute to work with.  Trade size of battery ( and resulting range)   For cubic inches  or a bigger diesel engine to roll coal with  

  . 
 

Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter)
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) UltraDork
1/24/23 3:09 p.m.
Opti said:

There is a bunch of hydrogen used a year, related to something like gasoline, its not even on the same planet. 

I have to do some math but it's not as far off as you would think. Most of the world's fertilizer is made with steam reformed hydrogen as feedstock and it's a critical component to refining as well. 

Opti
Opti SuperDork
1/24/23 3:28 p.m.

In reply to Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) :

 

 

Not really. We use about 10 million tons of hydrogen a YEAR in the US. We use over a million tons a DAY of gasoline.

 

From a logistical and production standpoint these two things are different planets.

 

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/24/23 3:55 p.m.

How about a hydrogen fueled turbojet powered semi truck? I'd like to see one on the interstate.

 

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/24/23 4:06 p.m.
Opti said:

In reply to Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) :

 

 

Not really. We use about 10 tons of hydrogen a YEAR in the US. We use over a million tons a DAY of gasoline.

 

From a logistical and production standpoint these two things are different planets.

 

"With approximately 10 million metric tons (MMT) hydrogen currently produced in the United States each year, the primary demand for hydrogen today is for petroleum refining and ammonia production."

 Energy.gov: Hydrogen Production

thatsnowinnebago
thatsnowinnebago GRM+ Memberand UberDork
1/24/23 4:09 p.m.

Big, heavy vehicle with a turbine engine you say? I think we already solved for that: 

Opti
Opti SuperDork
1/24/23 4:36 p.m.

In reply to VolvoHeretic :

Yes thats what I meant to type, so I edited it. The point still stands.

Im having problems posting from my phone and I missed it on the transfer from notes to forum.

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/24/23 4:42 p.m.

In reply to Opti :

No problem, I can barely type using a keyboard.

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 4:59 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver :

Oops my fault. The turbine made 94 horsepower and weighed 77 pounds. 
   While there are no doubt 94 horsepower ICE  engines I doubt you'll get them functional ( radiator etc ) for 77 pounds.  
    With regard to price points?   Much of that depends on volume.  A start from scratch design the turbine would be simple blades on a shaft.
     Rather than Block , head, pistons, rings pins valves camshaft crankshaft  flywheel, water, pump, oil pump etc etc 

   Noise 

Opti
Opti SuperDork
1/24/23 5:08 p.m.
frenchyd said:

In reply to alfadriver :

Oops my fault. The turbine made 94 horsepower and weighed 77 pounds. 
   While there are no doubt 94 horsepower ICE  engines I doubt you'll get them functional ( radiator etc ) for 77 pounds.  
    With regard to price points?   Much of that depends on volume.  A start from scratch design the turbine would be simple blades on a shaft. Rather than pistons, rings pins valves camshaft crankshaft  flywheel etc etc 

Are you sure you know what a turbine engine is? Seems awfully close to Plato describing humans as featherless bipeds.

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 5:13 p.m.

In reply to frenchyd :

As I've pointed out, for cars, weight is less of an issue than in an airplane.  

But feel free to assume you are right.  Doesn't matter to me- but just noticing how many gas turbines are used on the road makes me think, well.... I'll let you make that conclusion.

 

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 5:49 p.m.
alfadriver said:

In reply to frenchyd :

As I've pointed out, for cars, weight is less of an issue than in an airplane.  

But feel free to assume you are right.  Doesn't matter to me- but just noticing how many gas turbines are used on the road makes me think, well.... I'll let you make that conclusion.

 

Turbines really weren't suitable for road use. Operate more efficiently at one speed Level.     Unless they are used to drive a generator to charge a battery  to drive an electric motor. 
  Since we already have cars like Toyota Prius. The principle is easily understood.  I just think instead of a the Rube Goldberg arrangement that an ICE is. 
    The potential of a turbine efficiency is very attractive. 
  You know I love ICE engines. The more cylinders and valves the better.  
 But I love them precisely because  of  the bizarre nonsense  of them. Piston up stop, piston down stop,   valves dancing to the tune played by the camshaft etc. it's like watching a steam engine.   
  If airlines still flew radial engines,  and propellers.   It would be fun. But not very efficient. 

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 6:05 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver :

Weight doesn't matter on cars? When did Alfa start using cast iron blocks and heads?  Frankly I've never seen a Ferrari  engine made of cast iron. 
   Of course weights  important when efficency matters. 

Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter)
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) UltraDork
1/24/23 6:11 p.m.
Opti said:

In reply to VolvoHeretic :

Yes thats what I meant to type, so I edited it. The point still stands.

Im having problems posting from my phone and I missed it on the transfer from notes to forum.

Its only a single order of magnitude different. I have the global numbers on my work computer the kg of gasoline used in the world isn't quickly googled. Global hydrogen is about 94Mt yearly 

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/24/23 6:33 p.m.

I remember a Cartoons Magazine Krass and Bernie comic strip in a Car Craft magazine back in the 70s where Krass is giving Bernie a ride in his new homemade electric car. It was super fast and Bernie was asking how he got it to go like that. Krass stopped, got out, and showed Bernie the blown v8 engine connected to a generator stuffed sideways in the trunk.

Opti
Opti SuperDork
1/24/23 6:56 p.m.

In reply to Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) :

I didnt do global I did US. I had US at 10 million metric tons annualy and about 370 million metric tons of gasoline.

I did US because largely the rest of the world doesnt care.

Its more than a single order of magnitude. You can make it seem like not a big deal, but in the real world, from a logistical and manufacturing perspective these two things are different planets. Hydrogens use on a large scale is far from solved.

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/24/23 7:10 p.m.

They are going to have to generate the hydrogen locally to the hydrogen filling stations with a combination of solar and wind saving it in local storage tanks. It's going to take a lot and be brand new but at least it will be spread out throughout the country. Other than local plumbing, there won't be any long distance pipelines.

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 7:28 p.m.

In reply to frenchyd :

Not in MD and HD trucks and semis.  We are not talking cars here.  But even then, the cost of weight isn't so much that gas turbines are worth the money.  And gas engines can be very efficient, especially for the cost.

But you keep conceptualizing....

frenchyd
frenchyd GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/24/23 9:13 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver :

True enough.
  Like other Jaguar people I'm concerned about the future of the brand and got distracted. 
 Now back to HD and MD trucks.  Most MD trucks are local and it would be rare for them to get more than 200 miles a day   That's about 4 hours of road time.  With regen braking. Batteries should be fine.  You wouldn't need hybrid except for out off town routes  it was extremely rare for me to approach 300 miles in a day. A lot of my time was spent delivering product and having it checked in. Displaying it and then  facing everything.   
  Those long days were opening of fishing season/ Memorial Day /4tb of July/ Labor Day. and  I'd start at 6:00am and typically not get finished until after 10:00 pm.   Minnesota is a big state.400 miles long but resorts were all within 250 miles of the twin cities. 
     Regular deliveries were closer  to 10 hour days.   
   HD trucks  like Semi's really would benefit from electric drive. Peak torque at zero RPM exactly where it's needed just like a train. 
  OK range would benefit from a hybrid   Pulling 80,000 pounds up Donner pass or the grapevine.   Those are really long pulls I suspect ( guess is more like it) 250 continuance  horsepower is what's called for.   But  a 12 liter diesel and gearbox probably weighs 3500 pounds  plus 5-7000 pounds of fuel.  So that's  the  target weight to beat. 

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter)
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) GRM+ Memberand UberDork
1/24/23 9:40 p.m.
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) said:
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
alfadriver said:
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:
 

The biggest problem is large quantities H2 plus atmospheric levels of oxygen is explosive. 

And that's different than any HC fuel, how?  Well, other than H2 having less energy than HC fuels, which is why HC fuels are used for thermobaric bombs....  

we all already know I'm the dumbest guy in the room

Correct, the adults are talking. There are already MASSIVE amounts of H2 out there used in industry, it is not a problem that doesn't already have a solution.

Anytime some refers to themselves as an adult to get credibility, I have to laugh.  
 

Yep the solution for H2 is don't let it mix with O2.  Covered that already.  

VolvoHeretic
VolvoHeretic GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
1/24/23 11:02 p.m.

Prototype 2007 windmill to hydrogen project for 3 tri-fuel pickups. They eventually converted a couple of turbo diesel tractors as well. I can't find any information about how it worked even though it was government funded.

Wind-to-hydrogen plant first in nation

rslifkin
rslifkin UberDork
1/25/23 8:52 a.m.
frenchyd said:

  OK range would benefit from a hybrid   Pulling 80,000 pounds up Donner pass or the grapevine.   Those are really long pulls I suspect ( guess is more like it) 250 continuance  horsepower is what's called for.   But  a 12 liter diesel and gearbox probably weighs 3500 pounds  plus 5-7000 pounds of fuel.  So that's  the  target weight to beat. 

On some of those mountains they can make use of a lot more than 250hp continuously.  Even 400+ hp semis will be running at WOT on a climb like that, just going a bit less slowly than the lower powered trucks. 

As far as weight, yes, if enough weight can be saved (and therefore extra load carried) then it's likely companies would accept a bit of extra cost for a turbine solution.  But there's still the question of how much extra it would cost by the time you make it quiet and emissions compliant. 

Turbine powered trains were done at times, but they died out in favor of conventional diesels.  In the end, the turbines were expensive and burned more fuel (one of the issues was that putting air filters on the intakes to keep them from dying a dust-induced early death hurt efficiency).  And at least some of the turbine setups were more fussy to keep working than a conventional large diesel as well. 

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/25/23 9:23 a.m.

In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :

I still don't understand why you think H2 is more dangerous than all of the other HC's we use.   They all have the exact same risks.  Mix it with the right amount of air, and it will burn really quickly.  Mix it perfectly, and you get an explosion.  And HC's have more energy than H2, which is why they are used for special air bombs than H2.

It's the exact same risk of combustion.  So if we can deal with HC, we can deal with H2.

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/25/23 9:27 a.m.

Back to the original question- big gas V8's are going to be around for a while to satisfy MD and HD vehicle rules that are currently being put into place.  And while a hybrid massive V8 may happen someday, customers are going to need to see a massive benefit of doing that.

New big gas engines are capable of running WOT at stoich all day long without damage.  Pretty amazing progress in engine materials.  And the extra cost for that is not all that high.  If we could update our racing motors with those materials, they would be considerably more robust.  (and by that, I mean our old engines, not the new ones coming out)

rslifkin
rslifkin UberDork
1/25/23 9:40 a.m.
alfadriver said:

Back to the original question- big gas V8's are going to be around for a while to satisfy MD and HD vehicle rules that are currently being put into place.  And while a hybrid massive V8 may happen someday, customers are going to need to see a massive benefit of doing that.

New big gas engines are capable of running WOT at stoich all day long without damage.  Pretty amazing progress in engine materials.  And the extra cost for that is not all that high.  If we could update our racing motors with those materials, they would be considerably more robust.  (and by that, I mean our old engines, not the new ones coming out)

Out of curiosity, what kind of changes are being made to enable this?  Reduced fuel enrichment under heavy load would close the gas vs diesel fuel economy gap a lot in faster boats, for example. 

alfadriver
alfadriver GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
1/25/23 9:54 a.m.

In reply to rslifkin :

On a material basis, the valve seats and the valves as well as the exhaust manifold.  The other contributor is CAD- so the exhaust ports are much better cooled to keep those head temps down, and then the port shapes as well as the manifold shapes are tweaked so that you can move them back and have them light off quickly but far enough back to keep cool enough.  Oh, and the CAD used to make sure the combustion chamber is a good shape to allow a high compression ratio without knocking.  

There have also been some advances in catalyst materials to up the limit for damage- but that's going to go on for some time.  

Our Preferred Partners
rSlO0E4akHb6fsrF2rqin7uwPVz50a9zuImwORUHP7bjj2D9NHHOz2j97FBdZWFF