E-bike mileage & PAS levels.

I didn't realize the energy density of these batteries. Thanks for the study, I had no idea there is so much available energy stored in them.

Side question, do you power them up from the coal fired plant down the road? Just asking out of curiosity.
Power plants get every watt of energy possible to extract. That mazda skyactiv or the volvo turbo compound are the highest efficiency motive engines. Both those systems are fickle and expensive.

The average piston engine turn 25% of the heat into mechanical energy. The average natural gas plant turns 50-60% of the heat into mechanical energy.
 
Power plants get every watt of energy possible to extract. That mazda skyactiv or the volvo turbo compound are the highest efficiency motive engines. Both those systems are fickle and expensive.

The average piston engine turn 25% of the heat into mechanical energy. The average natural gas plant turns 50-60% of the heat into mechanical energy.
I wasn't saying one thing or another. I believe coal fired plants can be made to run quite cleanly.

Also I must say, most of the time it is most efficient to use energy with the least amount of conversion to the required end use.
 
I wonder how much rider input affects range on gas builds. If the engine is running at 4-5k instead of 7-8k it should be burning less fuel, right?
Not always. Fuel economy and the engine itself plays a significant role. Generally, yes, lower rpm means less fuel used, but if you are outside of the engines peak volumetric efficeincy, usually within 90% or greater of the torque peak output, then you can bring the RPM down to a point to take advantage of both.

Example. My VFR1200's engine made peak torque at 8800rpm, but made 90% of peak torque as low as 3800. At 70mph in 6th gear it sat dead on at 4000rpm, and that big heavy sport bike with almost 200hp managed to get 44mpg on level ground.
 
I believe just overall displacement is the biggest factor. How much does it suck and blow.
A small engine running at it's most efficient RPM is almost always going to beat an engine of larger displacement running at it's most efficient RPM.
I suppose it is a matter of required work to be performed as the true test. Like pushing a cargo container ship at 25 knots at 100 rpm.
 
My 1868cc Harley gets better gas mileage than my V Star 1100cc did (actually 1063cc)
Both are V Twins
114 cubic inch & Fuel Injected compared to 65 cubic inch & Carb's
 
I believe just overall displacement is the biggest factor. How much does it suck and blow.
A small engine running at it's most efficient RPM is almost always going to beat an engine of larger displacement running at it's most efficient RPM.
I suppose it is a matter of required work to be performed as the true test. Like pushing a cargo container ship at 25 knots at 100 rpm.
Not entirely. Take the manual transmission C5-C7 Corvettes. over 6L engines and they can get upwards of 30mpg on the highway. There are a lot of factors that go into economy. In the world of heavy trucks you will often find that companies that spec the smallest engines they can to try and get better economy end up worse off because the smaller engines have to work harder to do the same job. Even if they do save fuel, they often pay for it in increased wear and tear on the small engine having to push to its limits more often.
 
The World is FLAT with a CAT!!! Yep tune a Caterpillar 3406e or a C-15 or C-16 thru ecm programming & a few marine hard parts & the OTR diesel truck engines will make 800-1200hp & make 6-8miles per gallon of diesel. No matter what you hook behind it & the mountains it encounters. Stock form they make 450-600hp & usually only make 4-6 miles per gallon.

But you better have a seasoned driver behind the wheel of the truck or they will melt it down.
 
Not entirely. Take the manual transmission C5-C7 Corvettes. over 6L engines and they can get upwards of 30mpg on the highway. There are a lot of factors that go into economy. In the world of heavy trucks you will often find that companies that spec the smallest engines they can to try and get better economy end up worse off because the smaller engines have to work harder to do the same job. Even if they do save fuel, they often pay for it in increased wear and tear on the small engine having to push to its limits more often.
I've been able to coax 20 mpg from my pickup. It's got the 4.3L v6 and a 5spd. I reckon I can get more once I remove the catalytic converter and replace the o2 sensor.
 
Back
Top