DIY Electric Car Forums banner
840K views 2K replies 238 participants last post by  kennybobby 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
Hello,
I was wondering if I could just add an alternator to an ev and get a range extender. The alternator seems like a good idea, even an industrial one, now... I have no knowledge in this area whatsoever, so would anyone enlighten me?

{Note From The Administrators:
This has now become the official thread for all questions relating to using alternators/generators WITHOUT AN EXTERNAL POWER SOURCE. Call it free energy/perpetual motion/ over-unity or whatever you will. If you have a question about a series hybrid or range extender (with an ICE engine) then feel free to ask start a new thread, if you want to know about the other kind then please read this thread and the wiki first before asking questions. Cheers, mattW}
 
#35 · (Edited)
Once one side of the magnet reaches the attractive force of the coil, the other side will be repelled along while the attractive force is encouraged along by the next coil. Currently motors and generators are based on switching of current from brushes or alternating magnets, but remember that in my design the motion is created from a rotating magnetic field set up in the generation coils. You have to kind of rethink how electric motors work in general to grasp this.. I'm not trying to cheat physics, I'm just working with it instead of seeing it as some undauntable foe. Physics can be friendly! And physics says that magnets are a source of a constant amount of force that happens to affect the movement of electrons when it moves, also that magnets themselves can move when spurred by a movement of electrons. Draw on a circuit is movement of electrons, and if those electrons happen to be moving in a forward-spinning pattern, those magnets just might spin to match it. I respect the work of the great minds that have brought electric motors so far, but nowhere in the tomes of the ancients is it written in stone that a motor has to use switching DC brushes or some kind of timed alternating current.
 
#37 ·
Re: alternator as a range extender attachment?

The same applies in Physics taught in America, and is a good point. I just didn't think that that point was important for the analogy. I wasn't trying to create a full picture of how magentism compares to gravity, but just enough to show that magnetism isn't special, and that all the special things that momono had attributed to magnetism were also possessed by gravity.

As for your English. There are not apologies necessary. Your English is fine. It's much better than any of my foreign languages.

Now for the moving magnets that were mentioned earlier... In regards to switching the elctric field to switch the magnetic field, motors already do this. If it is to be accopmlished by physically turning the magnet, then that will take energy.
 
#38 · (Edited)
Energy = force * trajectory (vectors). constant force produces ZERO energy, if there isnt any movement on some trajectory. If you will push to the solid wall, you will give no energy to the wall. But if you wil pull the car and makes it move, you will give some kinetic energy to the movement of the car. This is important. Magnet doesnt radiate any energy, it is like a spring. It can pull or push something, byt it is imposible to create ANY machine that would be using magnets to constant energy production as it is impossible with springs. forget that magnet is any-way diffrent from springs, it is essentilly not.
If what you guys are saying about motors and magnets is true, then electric motors shouldn't exist to begin with. It works because the electromagnets are constantly re-springing that spring. The only real difference is the application of force - so far, the mechanical consensus has been that repulsion and fast switching motion is what generates electricity, but I don't think that's what Faraday was saying necessarily, just some random set of beliefs that sprang up in the translation loss. I was brought up to understand that a magnet moves electrons in the coil, and the movement of those electrons itself is electricity. I made my coiling design reflect this - instinctively, to 'catch' the greatest possible fluid movement of electrons from the magnets, which would be spinning forward - it's a happy coincidence, though, that this may be just what is needed to reduce the magnetic drag created by the actual generation of electricity, and maybe even turn it around. This is the generator I've drawn up after a life of looking at rivers and seashells and clouds, where things spin and keep spinning, transforming even, because they literally go with the 'flow'. Once again, the problem with what you call 'perpetual' motion isn't any natural allowance or disallowance of the thing, it's the human-so-far maladaptation of a myopic and 2-dimensional thought process to something as strange and wonderful as magnets. Someone said the 'M' word (magic? oh nose!) earlier, and y'know, really it's just a word. We're monkeys swapping new vocabulary basically. The essential difference I can see is that this ingrown scientific mind as it's developed itself is severely out of tune with the phenomenal mystery of the Universe around it. It's a far cry from that original thinking-creature that left the forests for whatever reason, or even from the ancient Greeks who understood that the world had its physical orders and makeups which were inseparable from the spiritual or intelligent ones (the 'golden mean' was called as such because it was effectively a deity)... From that point to this I can't really call it progress necessarily, but I can say that everything happens for a reason and science too will 'grow into itself' from this current gawky adolescent.

Okay, that was a rant and a half. But really we're into those levels of thought-pattern-alteration already, so balls to the wall as they say. Back to the tech -

I've tooled my design a little more as well - I'll be building a 'pancake' style housing out of clear acrylic, except the hub won't be attached to any type of bearing surface but rather free-floating in the chamber with about 1/8 in. of space on all sides, sealed with a vaccuum pump connected to an automatic pressure gauge to ensure as little friction as possible. With strong neodymium magnets, this could theoretically be made very small (say 7-8in diameter), and spin very fast (as it needs to). There wouldn't be any connection to the front wheels or any moving piston whatsoever, just a self-enclosed hub spinning freely in space, suspended by the (rotating!) electromagnetic fields from all sides, according to the draw from the system. It would work I think kind of like a limited reverb effect... And the vaccuum pump could be used for your brakes and other stuff.
 
#41 · (Edited)
I was talking about permanent magnets which are favorite "magical" substance in majority of over unity machines. Electric motor works, because you are pumping energy to the motor by electic current that is transformed to non-static magnetic field that produces force that drives the motor. The fact that there is non-static magnetic field is essential, thats the reason you cannot replace those electric magnets with permanent ones - motor made only with permanent magnets will never ever work. Static magnetic field does not make electrons move (this is what you dont understand), only non-static field does it. Spring also dont push things away all the time.... If you want to create non-static magnetic field, you have to either move permanetn magnets (dynamo) or use elecromagnets that you will switch on and off. Both of this costs you energy that is at least the same as energy of those electrons you make move.
 
#42 · (Edited)
Yes, exactly. Nothing magical about it, unless you want to call it that. Permanent magnet hub, static electromagnetic stator. Same deal as always, except the driving force, instead of a switching current, is a coil geometry that reproduces the effect of a moving electromagnetic field even though the coils are physically fixed in place. The permanent magnet hub spins to reflect this and keep the electricity moving.. Again nothing out of reality, nothing pseudo, just another way to skin a cat...
 
#48 · (Edited)
First of all, I am really glad there are people like you who do not trust common authoritties like scientics and work hard to prove they are wrong. It works like insurance for events like conspiracy etc and it is generally right thing until they lie, which is not your case. However, youtube and internet are full of lies about over unity stuff which I am really mad about. When there is some video to prove it, it is always so untrustworthy it proves nothing.

Back to your post: if magnets are non-magical, as you agree, how is it possible it is the only thing that can create perpetuum mobile (=something that creates energy from nothing) as you claim? Why springs cannot do that? Will you please show us your clever way of making what you just descibed, or will you be secretive as everybody else working on overunity stuff? I would really like see how you tricked energy presevation principle, something nobody else have ever done.

Walkeer! Did you say the "M" word again? I'm sorry it's my fault, I started with the "M" word on page two, post #14.:D(I'm actually sitting here with tears running down my face from laughing on that)
momono! So nothing out of reality right? Just a clever way of wrapping wire around this thing. What is this now? I got lost a little.Is this a motor that won't need power or a generator that self excites? I can't wait to see the momono effect in action! Barna:)
Sorry but I really down see what you mean by the "M" word.
 
#43 ·
Walkeer! Did you say the "M" word again? I'm sorry it's my fault, I started with the "M" word on page two, post #14.:D(I'm actually sitting here with tears running down my face from laughing on that)
momono! So nothing out of reality right? Just a clever way of wrapping wire around this thing. What is this now? I got lost a little.Is this a motor that won't need power or a generator that self excites? I can't wait to see the momono effect in action! Barna:)
 
#44 ·
At the risk of showing my "newbieness", I'll tell you about a story I saw on TV recently about a guy who built an EV and then mounted two alternators mid vehicle that were belt driven off of the driveshaft. This supposedly made it so efficient that it rarely needed additional charging. I'm not saying that is likely, but it does seem like the energy needed to spin an alternator or generator would be minimal compared to what they might produce. To make the question simpler, suppose it wasn't in the drivetrain, but in an otherwise wasted energy source, such as an unpowered axle or braking. Or am I over-imagining what an alternator produces? I'm not proposing perpetual motion, just converting wasted energy. Hmmmmm.
 
#47 ·
At the risk of showing my "newbieness", I'll tell you about a story I saw on TV recently about a guy who built an EV and then mounted two alternators mid vehicle that were belt driven off of the driveshaft. This supposedly made it so efficient that it rarely needed additional charging. I'm not saying that is likely, but it does seem like the energy needed to spin an alternator or generator would be minimal compared to what they might produce. To make the question simpler, suppose it wasn't in the drivetrain, but in an otherwise wasted energy source, such as an unpowered axle or braking. Or am I over-imagining what an alternator produces? I'm not proposing perpetual motion, just converting wasted energy. Hmmmmm.
You mention that this energy coudl come from an unpowered axle. However, even unpowered axles are actually powered by the electric motor. Even axles taht don't have an electric motor on them have wheels that will be turned by the motion of the motor. It is just done indirectly. The motor turns the drive wheel, which moves the vehicle forward, which turns the other wheels. It makes no difference.

The alternator would be a loss on whichever wheel or driveshaft it is on. Imagine it is like a brake that is left on on that wheel or driveshaft. It doesn't really matter which wheel a brake is on, it's going to slow down a car and use up more energy.

In short, all movement from the car(assuming we're playing on flat ground) comes from the motor. The motor also overcomes friction and wind resistance and any other forces on the car. The alternator woudl be one of those 'other forces.'

There really is no free lunch.
 
#45 ·
I don't think there is much point talking about it any more until monomo actually builds the thing and proves us wrong or learns about conservation himself. I am guessing that he is a kinaesthetic learner i.e. he learns by doing. So monomo I say build us a prototype and we will patiently await your results!
 
#50 ·
Thanks Manntis!
The closest to what momono is working on in real world application that I know is bifilar winding. Two coils on top of eachother wound in opposite direction. It cancels self inductance of the coil(s).In generator application the coils would have to be terminated separately for it to be any use and i'm not sure what advantage it would have.In other application it can protect sensetive components in circuits. Barna:)
 
#52 ·
Since I drive an electric car (one I built myself) I often get asked about this topic. In fact, almost on a daily basis. I've heard everything from windmills on the car, little wind turbines under the car, alternators on the wheels, and my personal favorite - a co-worker of mine insists that a 5th wheel called a "drop wheel" is the way to go... hahaha

Of course, it is all non-sense. I get so tired of arguing with people that sometimes I just say, "oh.. good idea." and leave it at that.

However, I have thought of many ways of explaining why this doesn't work. If one just one of these ways of looking at it helps somebody understand, then I feel I have contributed something.

  1. One way of looking at the tires and the street is that it is completely analagous to two gears connected by a chain, or two pulleys connected with a belt. Imagine an upside down bycicle only the tires are pulleys and they are connected with a belt. Now, put a generator on one wheel and a motor on the other. Will it work? Most people will realize right away why this won't work. But for some reason, a car seems different. But the street that you are driving on is essentially doing the same job as the belt or chain in this setup.
  2. Another problem people have is they don't realize the amount of power required to move the car, vs. the amount of power generated by an alternator. Most people with any automotive skills know that an alternator isn't very hard to spin. What they don't realize is that the alternator isn't really producing that much power. In fact, it is less than 1% of the power neccessary to move an electric car. So sure, it would only drag down the car by about 1% but it would also only generate 1% or less of what the car needs to move. In order to get any real power generation you'd need like 100 alternators. Then tell me how much drag there would be on the car.
  3. On the same token as point #2, tiny wind turbines would create even less than 1% of the power needed. Probably closer to 0.01% of the power needed to move. However, they would create closer to 1% drag on the car, causing a net energy loss.
  4. Sometimes people say, "No.. I don't mean perpetual energy, it doesn't have to generate more power than it uses. Just some of it, making the system more efficient." Unfortunately, this doesn't hold water either. Even if the generator produced "some" power, that power has to come from somewhere. Where is it going to come from?
  5. All forms of energy obey the same laws. That energy can be magnetic, electrical, mechanical, thermal, etc.. Compare the problem to a different kind of energy. For example, lets imagine it from a mechanical perspective. Lets say we add a belt to the back tire (where the generator would go) and have that belt move the front tires. It is a perfect analogy to the generator question, only we're looking at a different form of energy. In this method, the flaw is obvious.
Sometimes people also confuse it with hybrids and their regenerative breaking and the fact that the ICE charges the batteries. But in that case all of the energy is coming from gasoline. You are converting gasoline to electricity. But if you have no gasoline, where is that energy going to come from? In this case, you are wanting to convert electricity to electricity.. why?
 
#53 ·
hi , i was reffering about a hybrid car which had this idea on it. the car was a hybrid toyota supra which is using in each wheel some kind of alternators if you want. this was used for the braking of the car to charge , not the batteries but some cappasitors which in turn charge the batteries .... of cource there is an ecu controlling this. i am not a sciencist but the idea to me sounds not that hard. electronics is not my sector but i m learning ... sometimes all you need is the idea. (if you like more info search about the race on the 15 , 16 joul endurance race , tokashi .i have this in a magazine)and thanks for the infos!
 
#54 · (Edited)
Perpetual Motion aka 200 amp alt on EV at 200 watts per mile as puurposed by post # 44

I am getting in on this discussion late. But for what it is worth...the argument here so far has been mostly theoretical… let’s put numbers on ONE simple idea.
Using a CAR alternator to provide full time battery charge.
AKA will the addition of a car alternator FULLY recharge the batteries or directly power the EV Drive Motor ?? with enough Wattage to need no other outside source of poer or recharge ??

I have seen power usage figures of 160 to 200 Watts per mile thrown around a lot.
AN EXTREMELY good car Alternator is rated at peak 250 amps, and will put out a continuous 175 Amps in one hour.
Converting to similar terms as :
Watts = Volts x Amps…….Amps = Watts / Volts …Watts per mile / Volts = Amps per mile
Assuming 12 volt system since cheap Car Alternator is 12v

Usage:
……@ a 200 Watts-per mile usage rate if you drive on the interstate for one hour at 70 mph you have used 14,000 Watts or 1,167 Amps @ 12v.
…….200 watts per mile x 70 miles = 14,000 Watts
......14,000w / 12v = 1,167a

Battery Recharge/Replacement Rate:
…….Rating on Car Alternator is in Amps per hour
…….Alternator output is 175 amps or 2,100 Watts in one hour

total Usage vs total Replacement:
Driving 70 miles per hour for one hour and we generate 2,100 Watts and use 14,000 Watts
As a range extender:
....Per Mile: generate 30 Watts and use 200 Watts
30w / 200w = 15% ….you get a 15 % increase in range.

Additionally:
A car Alternator will consume power from the Drive Motor at:
1 Hp per 25 amps from the Drive motor or 7 HP total for the 175 Amp alternator we are using.
And since the current draw is GREATLY higher than the rated output, you would need to install a device to limit current draw to 175 amps as the needed output of 1, 190 amps would fry the Alternator post haste. An isolator would do it.

Mostly when OEM type manufacturers talk of using an Alternator to increase Range they mean, Regen Braking.

editted to add: Most Car Alternators available from Retail Auto Parts Stores will not deliver 175 Amps continuous, the one I have used as example is a AfterMarket one for street rods, and is HIGH PERFORMANCE. A regular alternator would extend range by only 13w/ 200w = 7%.

Later edited to add: I didn't write a conclusion and it lead to great confusion:
the initial idea was to use your EV Drive Motor’s excess torque to power a normal car Alternator, that will in turn act as a 1. magically power the entire EV for de-facto perpetual motion or 2. Act as a range extender.
Performance calculations suggest:
1. as a magic wand to power the entire battery pack. NO it will not. Grossly inadequate.
2. Yes it will extend range BUT only by a paltry 15%. So for a normal range of 100 miles you get extended range of 15 miles. That 15 % goes down in the face of Power consumed from the Ev's Drive motor.
Conclusion:
A car Alternator fails to provide the needed outcome.
 
#55 ·
Hi!
There is no such thing as 200W per mile. There is 200W HOURS per mile.
Wich is the same amount of energy as 12KW for a minute. 200 watts will move a 10 oz.(280gramm) model aeroplane at 70MPH not a 2000+ pound car. To save us all a little time let me just jump to the end of your post
(superChuck_A11) Titled: Additionally , where you answer the question:
A car alternator will consume power from the drive motor at:1 horse power per 25 amps ! 25amps at 12 volts is 300 watts. 1 horsepower is 746 watts. So for every horsepower worth of electricity produced we take 2.5 horsepower away from the traction system.....how exactly is that gonna extend the range? (I really don't expect an answer) This post is okay in the "free energy" section but I saw it posted elswhere where people bought into it and I don't think that is right.It is not my intent to be mean but lets do some research and keep stuff where it belongs Thanks! Barna:)
 
#56 · (Edited)
Hi!There is no such thing as 200W per mile.
There is 200W HOURS per mile.
Your correct that is Watt - Hour.

As I understand it The Watts per mile is a calculated actual fuel mileage, the fuel being Electricity which is measured in Watts.
Using Watts per mile as an expression of Fuel Mileage gets us closer to familiar Automotive Engineering terms (miles per gallon is mpg not m/g) Apples to Apples Terminology.
I believe the process is to
Step 1 drive the EV for one hour or more and then measure remaining battery voltage.
Step 2 Then Translating battery voltage remaining in the Battery Pack into Watts used for xxx miles of travel.
Step 3 Then simple division into Watts per mile.

Fuel Usage for a 200 Watts per mile EV:
The 200 Watts per mile is a common figure I have seen from current Ev operators. If this is incorrect could anyone supply a correct Watts per mile ??
At 200 Watts per hour usage rate if you drive on the interstate for one hour at 70 mph you travel 70 miles so,
(200 watts per hour x 70 miles) for 1 hour = 14,000 Watts TOTAL fuel usage.

I really don't see where this is calculated incorrectly. Maybe you can show me where it is off ??

i editted this after thinking about it at work.
I have 2 posts with the same basic calculation as a base.
In the example above a pertual motion machine is the desired output. With no additional input of watts as being driven, with he EXCESS Torque characteristics drinving a normal Car or bus stlye alternator
the example on the other thread is really about a hybird. An EV fitted with an on-board (diesle ) consuming GenSet.

So really what we need to know is::::::::Is 200 Watts per Mile not a number Real EV owners are getting ??

Could someone post their way of calculating the Watts per mile from remaining battery Voltage??
.
 
#57 · (Edited)
There is only one definition of WATT under the SI units, it is a measurement of power....equal to one joule of energy per second. It measures a rate of energy use or production.

Do not confuse instantaneous watt (not a recognised unit) with watt hour. Watts multiplied by a period of time equals energy. 1 volt of potential difference is applied to a resistive load of 1 ohm and a current of 1 ampere flows, then 1 watt of power is dissipated.
Or watts is equal to amps times volts. The electrical measurement is truly instantaneous (as is a DC voltage or current measurement). So the power in one second is one Joule leading to the conversion of 1 Watt hour being 3600 Joules

Madmac
 
#58 ·
There is only one definition of WATT under the SI units, it is a measurement of power....equal to one joule of energy per second. It measures a rate of energy use or production.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_differenceDo not confuse watt with watt hour. Watts multiplied by a period of time equals energy. 1 volt of potential difference is applied to a resistive load of 1 ohm and a current of 1 ampere flows, then 1 watt of power is dissipated.
Or watts is equal to amps times volts. The electrical measurement is truly instantaneous (as is a DC voltage or current measurement). So the power in one second is one Joule leading to the conversion of 1 Watt hour being 3600 Joules

Madmac
 
#59 ·
There is only one definition of WATT under the SI units, it is a measurement of power....equal to one joule of energy per second. It measures a rate of energy use or production.

Do not confuse watt with watt hour. Watts multiplied by a period of time equals energy. 1 volt of potential difference is applied to a resistive load of 1 ohm and a current of 1 ampere flows, then 1 watt of power is dissipated.
Or watts is equal to amps times volts. The electrical measurement is truly instantaneous (as is a DC voltage or current measurement). So the power in one second is one Joule leading to the conversion of 1 Watt hour being 3600 Joules

Madmac
Just for giggles could you please tell me how many Amps in one Kilogram ??? please ????
 
#61 ·
One thing you forgot Superchuck. The amount of energy needed isn't just the energy to move the car, but also the enrgy to spin the alternator. It is creating drag on the motor just like the rolling resistance and aero forces. Once you add that in, you will see that you are just then going to subtract it out to have no net gain. And once you factor in the inefficiencies involved in getting the electricity from the battery to the motor to the alternator to the battery, then you are actually wasting electricity.

It's like dangling a leg off the side of a canoe into the water. It changes how much work is needed to propel it. taking a figure in a book about how much energy it takes to move a canoe along is no longer valid once you do that.

Bill
 
#62 ·
You can't have watts per hour because watts is an instantaneous measurement of power. A 50W light globe uses 50W of power all the time, every instantaneous measure of time will show 50W. You can have a W or kW per mph since it takes a certain amount of power to maintain a particular speed, energy is actually power x time measured in Watts x hours or Wh. Do you get the distinction?

Lets try your example again using more accurate numbers, it takes about 18kW from the batteries to maintain constant 60mph in a normal car. If we have a 36kWh pack then we will be able to maintain that speed for two hours (time=energy/power). That will give us an efficiency of 300Wh/mile. Lets say we add an 10 12V alternators that puts out 150A to recharge our 120V battery pack. Those 10 alternators will deliver 18kW of power back to the batteries which should be enough to keep on rolling right?

Well the problem is those alternators are going to draw their power from the motor (either directly or indirectly via the road and wheels). Lets say you have some of the worlds best alternators that are amazingly 95% efficient at recovering energy. That means that in order to produce 18kW for the batteries these alternators are going to draw about 19kW from the motor. That is in addition to the 18kW that is used to power the car. So in total you have 18kW going into the batteries (from the alternators) and 27kW coming out of them. So it now takes 19kW to travel the same speed and the same battery pack will only last 1hr 53 minutes and only get 114 miles instead of 120. That is using statistics that are optimised for this to work (i.e. a near perfect alternator). So you lose 6 miles of range because of the world best alternators that I made up.

In a much more real situation. Typical alternators run at a much lower efficiency of 55% and if you run them off a motor/controller that is only 80% efficient then you can recover 44% of the power it takes to run them. So for the highway example above using more real-world measurements 10 alternators to make up for the 18kW of energy it takes to go down the highway would take 41kW of energy from the batteries meaning the 120 mile range you originally got without the alternators is now 53 miles with them. You threw away 67 miles of range. The efficiency of the system goes from 300Wh/mile to 683Wh per mile. If you use the Department of Energy's method of converting electrical efficiency into mpg you get 273.5mpg without the alternators and 120mpg with them. They do the opposite from what was intended.

AND THAT IS WHY FREE ENERGY DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
#63 ·
Poor guy. He at least deserves an A for effort with his alternator theory.

I have model RC flying wings which are elevon controlled (basically 1 aileron on each wing half). Each are moved by an independent servo, this enables elevator up/down (they move together as one) and moving opposite one another for roll.

Never fails that even some experienced pilots ask me why I didn't try to save weight and use just one servo with a dual arm linked to each elevon....then they think about it for a moment, and go OOoohh, yeah. :D (This setup would provide roll only)
 
#65 ·
I remember when I was a kid I had that game, Daytona USA, a racing game if you don't know. I was very good at it. Once my sister said she wanted to play. I accepted her challenge, knowing full well that I'd give her a sore whopping. When the race started, I took off in the perfect form that I have trained myself to do, putting on a flawless display. My sister, on the other hand, took off in full acceleration, never easing and never using the brake. She hit the wall on every single turn. And by the end of the race, she had LAPPED me, and broken my record. Not having a clue how to play had enabled her to drive faster than I thought possible. The point is, I agree with what some of you are saying in that it seems that those of you that are really smart just throw up your hands and say "it can't be done" because you know better. But I knew damn well that I would beat my sister in that game, too. People also knew that the world was flat. I think that charging your batteries as you drive must be possible, and if it's not, that there's something that can be done to at least improve the current technology. An alternator attached to each of the four wheels that charges one set of batteries while you power the engine with another, and then flick a switch and the opposite happens, perhaps? Maybe this wouldn't work for whatever reason, but the idea is that it's not free energy, though it's just as good. And it's probably going to take creativity, not intelligence (though admittedly it would probably be a lot of both). Hell, how about some pedals in the car for the passengers to keep busy with powering a generator? hehe

Dan
 
#66 ·
I remember when I was a kid I had that game, Daytona USA, a racing game if you don't know. I was very good at it. Once my sister said she wanted to play. I accepted her challenge, knowing full well that I'd give her a sore whopping. When the race started, I took off in the perfect form that I have trained myself to do, putting on a flawless display. My sister, on the other hand, took off in full acceleration, never easing and never using the brake. She hit the wall on every single turn. And by the end of the race, she had LAPPED me, and broken my record. Not having a clue how to play had enabled her to drive faster than I thought possible. The point is, I agree with what some of you are saying in that it seems that those of you that are really smart just throw up your hands and say "it can't be done" because you know better. But I knew damn well that I would beat my sister in that game, too. People also knew that the world was flat.
Dan
The difference being, with a video game if you just wing it and crash there's a reset button. Do the same with a real vehicle and you could have an electrical fire, a runaway, etc. ;)
 
#67 ·
Re: alternator as a range extender attachment?

I quite like the idea of over unity devices , I think if you use magnets stong enough to overcome the drag and bigger guage wire for les resistance with more poles to generate electricity at lower rpm and quick charging batteries or maybe capacitors it might just work if you have the coin to fund it . Who knows one day we wont need batteries , thats wishful thinking .
 
#68 ·
One day we may be able to manipulate Earth's gravity so that we're always coasting downhill. And levitating like a Land Speeder.

Then again, by the time science advances for that to happen, we'll probably already have teleportation. :D

Beam me over Scotty.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top