Ford GT returns as hybrid!

[388cube_edxr8]

Originally Posted by flappist

As opposed to the internal combustion engine which stayed basically the same for almost a century..........

Agreed there, but remember, one is practical and one is a step backwards.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 388cube_edxr8

Agreed there, but remember, one is practical and one is a step backwards.

So, if a hybrid is faster and more efficient how is it a step backwards?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by 388cube_edxr8

Agreed there, but remember, one is practical and one is a step backwards.

Could you please explain your comment further in context of this concept by Ford or the Porsche 918 which is a similar technology being utilised?

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by 04redxr8

I suck at remembering to charge my phone, never mind a damn car.

they'll just have to add a sexy woman's voice that says "Don't forget to charge me up!"

[Velociraptor82]

Those imaged ARE the GR1 concept with a little photchopping. Typical media reporting at its best.

(claimed) Ford GT




Shelby GR-1 Concept

[irlewy86]

New home for the Miami engine huh? Wouldn't that cause a 180 in the Australian Auto scene. An aussie developed V8 mixing it with a 458, R8, Lambo et.al

[388cube_edxr8]

Originally Posted by flappist

So, if a hybrid is faster and more efficient how is it a step backwards?

If it's faster and more efficient I have no issue with it at all. I'm not 100% on how the GR1 is supposed to work but the Porsche 918 is different to most hybrids, in that it uses regenerative braking to store power in a flywheel, and retrieve it later.

As long as there are no batteries, there is no problem. Battery technology hasn't been developed to the point where they are a viable alternative to petrol. Yes the power and torque figures are impressive, but charging for 8 hours for 2 hours driving is, simply, a step backwards, at lease practicality wise.

I saw in a doco somewhere that only around 12% of the potential energy in a tank of petrol is actually used to make the car move. Now remember that you need several hundred kilograms of batteries to store the same amount of energy as even a small tank of petrol. The figures are similar for alcohol or biodiesel. Surely we would be better off spending our time and resources working on more efficient ways to burn renewable fuels, as opposed to producing batteries that even after 100+ years of development are still largely useless in anything larger than a children's toy. In fairness, petrol hasn't come that far either, but is still leaps and bounds ahead of battery technology. Hydrogen is still an efficient way to store electricity, the only problem is that there are no servos that sell it, and everyone has a powerpoint at home.

That being said, I have no issues with electrically assisted cars that use a KERS style system with an electric flywheel for regenerative braking. No batteries, no problem.

As usual, happy to be corrected on any of my points.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 388cube_edxr8

If it's faster and more efficient I have no issue with it at all. I'm not 100% on how the GR1 is supposed to work but the Porsche 918 is different to most hybrids, in that it uses regenerative braking to store power in a flywheel, and retrieve it later.

As long as there are no batteries, there is no problem. Battery technology hasn't been developed to the point where they are a viable alternative to petrol. Yes the power and torque figures are impressive, but charging for 8 hours for 2 hours driving is, simply, a step backwards, at lease practicality wise.

I saw in a doco somewhere that only around 12% of the potential energy in a tank of petrol is actually used to make the car move. Now remember that you need several hundred kilograms of batteries to store the same amount of energy as even a small tank of petrol. The figures are similar for alcohol or biodiesel. Surely we would be better off spending our time and resources working on more efficient ways to burn renewable fuels, as opposed to producing batteries that even after 100+ years of development are still largely useless in anything larger than a children's toy. In fairness, petrol hasn't come that far either, but is still leaps and bounds ahead of battery technology. Hydrogen is still an efficient way to store electricity, the only problem is that there are no servos that sell it, and everyone has a powerpoint at home.

That being said, I have no issues with electrically assisted cars that use a KERS style system with an electric flywheel for regenerative braking. No batteries, no problem.

As usual, happy to be corrected on any of my points.

And once it took millions of litres of oil to produce the energy of 500 grams of Uranium.

Two points on the batteries.

1) The battery technology is evolving at an almost exponential rate or do you not remember when a mobile phone had a total of 20 minutes talk time or 4 hours on stand by between recharges.

2) Disconnect the battery from you car and try and make it go.

A hybrid supercar is not a fully sick Prius in the same way that a coyote GT-E is not a LPG Taxi..........

[darkside]

looks very aston martin db9ish to me ,can't say i hate it and if they can get a good grumble out of a vacume cleaner motor i will be hooked ...doc