This afternoon, I was lying around in traffic, and suddenly a thought hit me. How come no one has come up with a design for a jet-turbine powered car? Now, I don’t mean that the car would be propelled by the actual exhaust of the jet, but instead it would be set up somewhat like a turboprop engine - the turbine would drive the wheels and the exhaust would be vented elsewhere. Now, I’m aware that the amount of horsepower produced (and the cost) would be insane, but why wouldn’t this be possible?
If I recall, didn’t Chrysler try equipping cars with turbines in the sixties?
If anyone remembers, please tell.
“They” have come up with it. Several times, in numerous variations.
The primary reason, above and beyond all else, is cost and complexity. All things considered, the current IC engine technology yields a relatively small, simple, reliable, inexpensive package that is reasonably efficient. There are few drivers (no pun intended) to replace it with something larger, much more complicated, possibly less reliable, much more expensive, and not as efficient.
For more information on the Chrysler Turbine car, see:
They were also really popular in drag racing in the early '60s…until one threw a turbine blade that penetrated 12 inches of concrete and asphalt :eek:. All the sanctioning bodies banned them shortly thereafter.
Gas turbines have been developed by just about every auto manufacturer, due to the excelent torque, power, and efficiency the turbine can produce. And, by the way, they’re nod complex at all…basically they’re just two fans and a torch.
The reason the turbine never caught on as a viable power plant is turbo lag.
In a turbocharged engine, when you stomp on the gas, the engine is uncharged. The rate of exhaust flow has to hit the turbo’s turbine blades to spin it up, transferring the rpms to the compressor via the turbo shaft. The engine now has a modest amount of boost to force-feed the engine more air/fuel ratio than it can inhale on its own to produce more power, and therefore more exhaust, and therefore more boost.
The larger the turbo, the larger the lag.
The gas turbine is essentialy a giant turbo, with many seconds of turbo lag…utterly unacceptable for stop and go city traffic.
However…
New developments are being made to power vehicles not directly by the turbine’s turboshaft, but via a turbine/electric set-up.
You want to accelerate? Electric motors attached to the wheels draw power from the batteries/capacitors/magnetic-
flywheels, which are constantly being topped of by a generator being powered by a constant-rpm turbine.
Why?
I think Anthracite nailed it down. There is no need to. With Internal Combustion engines soooo cheap and producing more HP/L and becoming more effecient and enviromentlly friendly, IMHO it would be a tough sell for any manufacturer to move towards Turbines again.
(sidenote)
I seem to recall a TV show on the Chrysler Turbine Car several years ago. One possible “selling” feature of the turbine was that it could run on darn near anything. It wouldn’t need a highly refined and expensive product like “gasoline”…it could Kerosene and the such. There was a clip when a Chrysler engineer poured in several cups of some perfume (I think Chanel 5) and fired the car up on it. I guess just to prove a point, as I doubt a car running on Chanel#5 would be more economical than one running on gasoline…
-
-
- You can get a jet-powered car, if you want. It’s been done, using reject helicopter engines. New helicopter engines are way to expensive, like into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, but after a specified period of time many parts must be replaced, even if they’re still functional. A salvage light turboshaft engine you can get your paws on for only tens of thousands of dollars (there are aircraft salvage companies online that can get you this kinda stuff if you’re the hardcore D-I-Y type). Show and racing cars have used them too -right off, I remember that for a while Budweiser had a turboshaft-powered Model-T on the event/show circuit.
-
- The reason they don’t make them for cars is that it costs too much to make turbine engines. That’s it, that’s the only reason. Everything else is curable but the price issue isn’t. People that build small vehicles with jet engines use salvaged turbines.
- Abrahms tanks also use a turbine engine, but I have not run a cross any salvage Abrahms tank engines for sale. Wait 30 years or so and check back.
- Helicopter engines are also the “jet” engines that they usually use for unlimited hydroplanes and fat-cat offshore powerboats. In most cases, powerboats also have one or two regular piston engines for slow-speed moving. The fuel economy of low-RPM turbines is so poor that it is advantageous to carry around a couple extra engines for harbor use. - MC