"webmonkees" (kayoteq-of-the-forest)
08/24/2013 at 10:30 • Filed to: None
0
2|
"webmonkees" (kayoteq-of-the-forest)
08/24/2013 at 10:30 • Filed to: None | 0
| 2 |
Thinking of alternate engine designs and how they change over time. I had to wonder how the Chrysler turbine would have evolved had it been in production.
Um, no.
The 1956 (approx) Chrysler Turbine.
Sure it looks complex and inefficient to us, but think of how complicated x a typical 1956 motor was. Except for a couple of weird German companies.
And even that simple motor got crazy efficient (HP wise anyway) a few generations down the road.
1956 VW engine. (you are correct, it's using a 1972 pulley and a 1958 doghouse but close enough)
As compared to it's evolved cousins, the Porsche
and Subaru's mutant offspring.
I think we missed out on a good alternative with the turbine.
Just needed about a half-dozen generations and perhaps a major failure or two and it would have really been tweaked.
Forgot the punchline. Now somebody get me a welder and a beetle.
Jayhawk Jake
> webmonkees
08/24/2013 at 10:46 |
|
It's not like turbine technology didn't go anywhere
|
webmonkees
> Jayhawk Jake
08/24/2013 at 12:06 |
|
Agreed. Just not in automotive technology much (I guess turbos could be considered a variant)
other than engineers with a spare car chassis. ;)