Thank you pipex, I've been waiting for an intelligent comment on this, which is very rewarding discussion-wise.pipex wrote:xpensive, i have a question... the energy density you have calculated considers the fact that only a minimal portion of that energy remains useful after you passed it through the engine due to losses, etc... in the case of the hybrid system I suppose that its efficiency is far better. Maybe the boost button thing is crap to reduce the fuel usage, but the fact that in normal hybrids the ICE can be modified to work in a better operating region maybe this is what provides a real amount of savings, instead of only thinking in terms of energy storage.
Well, I guess you are right that they have a problem. But to meet this urban cycle regulation you keep mentioning, its not really doing that any way because if it is using huge energy storage and using for example an external power source (which is likely to be energy from coal-fired powerplants) then they are not really achieving anything, there simply shifting the CO2 emmisions from the automobil to the powerplant.autogyro wrote:The Ferrari system is not just partly about marketing strategy.
The main reason is an almost desperate attempt to meet the urban cycle regulations on CO2 output without lossing credibility.
The Ferrari hybrid systems are not being developed just to harvest energy under braking, they have to do far more than this.
To achieve an electric only capability to meet the urban cycle, Ferrari is fitting sufficient battery storage to achieve a decent range under electric only power. Whether this is charged from a power souce external to their cars or from the powerful ic engine out of Town is irelevent so long as the car meets the urban regulations. The hybrid label and the connection with their Kers systems, is simply being used here as a side issue and a smoke screen, just as the delays by Fota on Kers were. Ferrari is not going to advertise 'electric cars' is it.
They have a major problem that can only get worse.
Thanks xpensive. So I guess from a stand alone point they beat a IC engine which losses about 60-65% energy I think so just from engine losses alone. But like you say the entire drivelin is part of the equation and for the amount extra mass a car has to carry for the electric motor, I'm not so sure its such a great option. And particularly on a ferrari which is never really going to be optimised to be its most efficient under normal driving conditions, its just a bit of a wank really, isn't it?xpensive wrote:A guesstimate from the top of my head would be 85-90%, but as I said earler, you have to calculate the entire chain, batteries don't get hot for free you know.
+1. Please.Ciro Pabón wrote:autogyro, xpensive, please, interchange the opinions you have about each other by PM.
Well since we are comparing apples to apples then I have yet to see an electric car with in a few second of a top fuel car in the 1/4.autogyro wrote:So the 599 set a new record for elephants, so what.
I have seen a 1972 Datsun converted to full electric that is faster on a quarter mile.