3 ms·

This is not the same thing as from the article, or even a gas engine, but it reminds me of this project. I never found out what became of this: http://www.nytim

This is not the same thing as from the article, or even a gas engine, but it reminds me of this project. I never found out what became of this: http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/19/science/putting-a-darwinian-spin-on-the-diesel-engine.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/19/science/putting-a-darwinia... >Dr. Senecal's test engine consumed 15 percent less fuel than a standard engine while producing one-third as much nitric oxide and half the soot.

Cthulhu_ 11y ago
> I never found out what became of this That's a common pattern in new (combustion) engine designs; there's a lot of them being published every year, but almost none of them actually end up being mass-produced and they dwindle into silence or as just demonstration models. Why? I don't know; the media only seems to focus on the invention and potential, not the failure (or if I were to put on my tin foil hat, the disappearance under mysterious circumstances). The only nonstandard engine that (AFAIK) ever got some leverage was the rotary wankel engine, and even that was (iirc) in just one car model.
- semi-extrinsic 11y ago
  Mazda RX7 and RX8 had wankel engines. Nice cars, but higher maintenance than with normal engines. I think the main reason for the pattern you observe is that what's optimal and what's cost effective in a car is highly non-intuitive. Take front-wheel drive, for instance. Mechanically more complex than RWD, but (apparently) worth it due to the space savings inside the car. Or take water-methanol injection: well-understood tech that's been in use since WW2, can save fuel and reduce NOx emissions significantly, or give higher power output. But it requires changes to all the fuelling infrastructure, and that makes it essentially a non-starter outside of racing cars.

3 ms·

This is not the same thing as from the article, or even a gas engine, but it reminds me of this project. I never found out what became of this: http://www.nytim

by Houshalter 11y ago

Cthulhu_ 11y ago
> I never found out what became of this That's a common pattern in new (combustion) engine designs; there's a lot of them being published every year, but almost none of them actually end up being mass-produced and they dwindle into silence or as just demonstration models. Why? I don't know; the media only seems to focus on the invention and potential, not the failure (or if I were to put on my tin foil hat, the disappearance under mysterious circumstances). The only nonstandard engine that (AFAIK) ever got some leverage was the rotary wankel engine, and even that was (iirc) in just one car model.
- semi-extrinsic 11y ago
  Mazda RX7 and RX8 had wankel engines. Nice cars, but higher maintenance than with normal engines. I think the main reason for the pattern you observe is that what's optimal and what's cost effective in a car is highly non-intuitive. Take front-wheel drive, for instance. Mechanically more complex than RWD, but (apparently) worth it due to the space savings inside the car. Or take water-methanol injection: well-understood tech that's been in use since WW2, can save fuel and reduce NOx emissions significantly, or give higher power output. But it requires changes to all the fuelling infrastructure, and that makes it essentially a non-starter outside of racing cars.