Mini SUM-V Produced by Chevy

SUM-V produced by Chevy. Thanks also for the microdiesel work.

Best in Truck Show

There is a better truck/SUV combo than yours coming to the market for 08. Just wait.

The truck will feature a sliding door passenger side cabin that can seat 6 comfortably, with climate control in the back and DVD player with fold-down screen. The driver's side of the screen, visible in the monster rear view, will give camera angles from all parts of the truck, so you can watch your stuff, tailgate, and turn signal all at once.

It should have 10-16" clearance, and use 20" tires standard. It will also come with a metal-rubberized tread that you can put on or take off without rolling your vehicle. The truck will have a ladderback suspension for the rear and a sideways butterfly for the passenger area, making the smoothest ride in a pickup you've ever felt or seen, with more load stability than a sedan.

Lightweight frame technology, suspension, transmission, and an efficient engine should keep the truck's real weight below 3000 pounds, and might even go below 2700.

A small SUV requires 165hp to run well. A long heavy truck can require 300hp to haul. I'd like this truck to be able to haul big loads and also have a great 0-60 and 40-70. It must beat the F-150 in speed and hauling.

I'd give it a diesel engine with the 4-cylinder O-gear engine, potentially with the Otto2 stroke setup. This engine can produce excellent torque and high Hp very efficiently. Assuming that 450cc produces ~85Hp and a CVT keeps performance high, I would equip it with a 340hp ~1.8L engine, or an optional ~1.35L 255hp engine. The truck being superlight will provide a marvelous 0-60 which should beat most performance sedans, and the diesel torque should allow it to haul considerable tons.

The SUV will be tall as well and use large wheels to keep suspension loss low and hi-torque diesel performance translation ratios high. I would put the same ~1.8L or ~1.35L engine in the SUV and weigh it in around 3000 pounds. It would be a long SUV with seating for ~10-12, and have the monster mirror, parking assistance, anti-roll technology, advanced braking systems, multizone climate control, a world of passenger and intra/extravehicle airbags, optional memoryfoam seating, taller cabin, and serious metal and rubber bumpers with flyguards and vertical hold bars for multivehicle collision protection.

I don't expect much call for these monsters, even with a mpg well over 30. Most people don't need this much towing or seating, and the smaller vehicles can produce a fine ride with better numbers.

I could put this on the market for $40K. Either. Let's see how little I could sell it for... could they be placed for 10K? ...

Diesel Facts

Industry standard diesel engines require ~54000 cc/m per Hp, and ~12500 cc/m per lb-ft of torque. 1 Hp = 2540 btu/h. Diesel produces 147kbtu/h.

The $10,000 "1000-series" Car

Inspired by "A Leaner Industrial Complex" , I am planning to make 1000, $10,000 vehicles.

They will come in two series: combustion and electric. Both kinds should be produced.

The cheap combustion engine should be an X4 running on diesel with compression above 25:1. I am going to try to make it a 2.4-stroke model, because that would allow far greater power from a far smaller [read: cheaper] engine, and probably a greater level of fuel efficiency. Also if it can be revved up to 10,000 rpm in the X-fashion and last 750,000 miles or more that would reduce the car's life-maintenance. Adding a torsion-assist would further reduce engine requirement and boost fuel efficiency. It could also be optionally cranked to provide "E-light power". A vortexed supercharger and vacuum appear to be part of the 2.4-stroke system.

Diesel could be replaced with hydrogen from a water splitter in a similarly equipped engine.

A 1-ton car could be pulled here by an 80hp acceleration-tuned diesel engine with a 15hp torsion assist. At ~10krpm using the 2.4-stroke system and 25:1 or greater compression, I would expect the diesel engine to be perhaps 0.4-0.5L. That is *tiny*. It'd get upwards of 90-100mpg. It'd have a 0-60 of probably 4-seconds. [1-ton, 95-hp, accel-tuned CVT & pistons, 10krpm]

The engine would probably account for $7000 of the vehicle. A CVT costs under $800. A tubelike exhaust and sound muffler, possibly coated with Italcement and LEDs,

If there is a water splitting furnace system available, the body could be made from spent coal bound into carbon fiber. Large and partially internalized bumpers attached to a metal and CF frame, around a CF or mesh rubber body should keep the weight low and the strength high, while minimizing cost around the water splitting furnace. This could be the one-ton car.

A small compressor and tank would allow instant-on heat and cool, too. This could be for the $40K model, but the above engine design could be either the $40K or $10K. I cannot decide. I reduce expense $0 by using a 4-stroke over a 2.4-stroke, or by using a gearbox over a CVT, or by using V# over X# engine type. Crappier is not cheaper here. I am planning to new-tool all of the 1000-model's systems. The costs are writing the software for and buying the machine and the material to machine, and assembling it. That means the fewer and more efficient parts, the cheaper and quicker. Designing a more complex or efficient part costs me $0 more, minus time.

Leather?

A registered and licensed automobile has basic standard inspection requirements. These vehicles can pass any emissions test, and having seat belts and 5mph bumpers should not be a concern. Safety inspection and crash testing are optional. Considering the special bumpers and frame and CF body, videotaping the crash and playing it for prospective buyers or investors should do the trick more than a few green stars.

Major costs for this would be the 3D printer, of which a single unit should cost about $30K, and the electric furnace powered by a water splitter for producing the car bodies, which combined should cost perhaps $30K. From there, costs would be in software programs, materials, and labor. Beyond that is testing, licensing, incorporation, and registration. I am sure Bermuda would not bug you. Using this method and producing 1000 cars annually with a 10% profit per car at a sale level of $40K should produce $4000 profit per car and have materials and repayment taken from the price.

That makes $4 million expected revenue on a regular line of production. That should be enough to employ 80 skilled workers. Can 80 skilled workers produce 1000 cars over [80X2000] 160,000 manhours? Each car should require no more than 160 manhours of work to produce, excluding machine tooling times. How many printers would be required to print all the parts for 1000 cars?

Next: mapping man and machine hours, closer blues of all parts, 1000-model electric vehicle.

Torsion Assist to Vehicles

Hybrid batteries are both expensive and filthy. A similar system can help you build higher peak Hp and recoup energy while traveling downhill and braking. It will actually increase your car's braking ability as well.

The wind up car. Obviously not the primary form of propulsion, but to replace Liion batteries. An adequate winding mechanism can provide numerous additional Hp of power to a car during peak use and could potentially provide the difference in force between idle and peak RPM when traveling at slow speeds.

Having a crank-charging vehicle would also be an interesting concept. If you could turn a nut on your car using a crank to fuel it up instead of having to put gasoline in it, we would have far stronger and healthier Americans.

The SUM-V Sport Utility MiniVan

There are several major drawbacks to using an SUV. They are enormously large, heavy, and suffer from very poor fuel efficiency ratings. However, they have a lot of room and can travel on uneven terrains.

To bypass the drawbacks of the SUV, I propose the SUM-V. It would be a minivan designed vehicle with suicide doors instead of sliders and a suitably sized engine.

The SUM-V would have a butterfly suspension like passenger cars instead of the ladderback as on trucks and SUVs. This would improve the vehicle's handling and comfort, allowing lighter shocks, reducing weight, and not requiring such a burden on the engine. The minivan style can also enjoy lower suspension than a standard SUV, giving it yet better handling and turning capabilities and ignoring the infrequently used offroading status.

I would give the vehicle a pair of rollbars and a double-hulled style roof and exterior, but otherwise make the center of gravity very low. It would be equipped with a CVT to provide more torque and power per engine cc.

Depending on technology and options, I could equip the SUM-V with an X-firing hydrogen engine producing around 200BHp to provide 150-180Hp on the road. At an estimated 7.1BHp/cc, this would require an almost 30cc engine.

It could also be equipped with a supercharged X-firing petroleum injection engine providing a similar amount of power. Since the engine would redline at such high levels and reach model compression rates, it could likely be only a 1-2 liter contraption when coupled with the CVT.

I could also fit it with a standard clean diesel V6 at probably a 3 liter level. Or an uncharged petroleum engine at 4 liters and they would all produce about 200BHp within their spin ranges.

The SUM-V should not look like a minivan. Miniven are for mothers and teenagers. The hood should advance like a car's hood, and be wide and flattish. The wheels could be slightly accented or sheer, as could the full trunk. The exhaust should be suitable for the engine to breathe without bottleneck and be treated with the Italian cement coating catalytic converter to reduce pollution [in the case of petroleum/carbon fuel].

[Hmm. Do the carbon stems from post-exhaust fill the atmosphere and in their low-energy state seek to bond with otherwise high-energy particles, reducing the energy level of those otherwise stable bits? This could be the chemical representation of a depression of energy, where it has been turned into motion.]

This vehicle would have all of the advantages of the SUV, but be far superior in efficiency and it's equal in comfort and usability.

GOAL!

Tires And Exhausts

"I'd like to see non-compressed air tires. Tires are always in danger of going flat, when that is not a good reason to stop driving. We should build tires filled with a biodegradeable elastic substance that will function partially as a shock, and improve shocks for a finer ride. They can be retreaded if necessary around a centerpieced sufficient tire. No one wants a flat tire.

I would also like to see wider exhausts for petrocarbon fuelled vehicles. It seems that a 'custom' exhaust can improve horsepower by a considerable level. These things are just shaped in the factory. Install larger exhausts standard to provide more powerful cars."

[All further articles pertaining to vehicles and transit before pure science will be shifted to this website from Billy Bunkie The Science Junkie.]