Hmmm... I wonder what we could mount this jet engine to...
I don't know anything about the Sinclair C5. I had never even heard of the machine until today, but here is what I have figured out: three wheels, 12 volt electric power, about 15 miles per hour. Looks a bit odd, and not very comfortable. But, judging from the specifications, I don't think it was intended for long-distance travel anyway. I know what you're thinking: why not mount a jet engine on it, right? Yeah, thought so.
That is exactly what one man decided to do: replace the electric drive system with a jet turbine engine, instantly raising the top speed of the machine from 15 miles per hour to 100. Street legal? I hope not! But, it just goes to show you what an enterprising person can do with enough time on his hands and a big enough helmet. What's next? How about a jet engine tricycle... or a Radio Flyer? Too cool! Remember, jet engines can run on many different fuels; but somehow I don't think that makes this vehicle green. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic: green jet powered tricycles are neither green nor jets. Discuss.
[Source: Jet Power via Visor Down]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Phil L. 3:51PM (6/13/2007)
Used Sinclair's regularly show up in the eBay list on http://www.evfinder.com . I recommend this list for keeping up on what's really out there - available today - in the EV world.
I'll start things off - by cutting to the chase with an executive discussion summary:
- Jets (and, by extension, turbines) are good engines for aircraft; bad engines for cars. Enough said.
- Someone with escessive time, money, and access to an old jet engine doesn't necessarily have a better idea. Beware of such people.
- That said, it looks like a lot of fun. I like to hang out with people who have extra time, money, energy and creativity. I avoid investing money in their projects.
- Transportation as entertainment is rarely green. It's also rarely good transportation.
- A.brien will be along shortly to tell us it's a conspiracy and unlimited hydrogen will solve all our problems. Almost as entertaining as lithous over on AutoBlog...
Please, no flames. All in fun!
Reply
Tony Belding 6:15PM (6/13/2007)
I think the Sinclair C5 is the spiritual ancestor of the Segway.
Reply
Hun Boon 7:55PM (6/13/2007)
It is 20 years ahead of its time.
I watched a documentary on it, and apparently one of the reasons for its failure was because it's marketed as a viable personal transportation tool, instead of a toy.
20 years on, this lesson seems just as relevant for the Segway. Call it a toy instead, and it suddenly makes more sense.
Hun Boon
http://starbamboo.wordpress.com/
Reply
George Krpan 9:56PM (6/13/2007)
http://www.microcarmuseum.com/tour/sinclair-c5.html
A little background on the Sinclair from the Microcar Museum.
Take the tour, you'll be amazed what you see.
We need cars like these again.
http://www.microcarmuseum.com/tour/messerschmittkr201.html
Reply
Tim 10:07AM (6/14/2007)
Phil L. – What’s takes less energy; shaking up or spinning a coke can? Feel free to try this experiment at home. You know… “A body in motion tends to stay in motion…” and that is why your arm gets tired while shaking the can.
Transmitting linear thrust in to rotational movement is a very complicated and energy wasting endeavor. Each part adds weight and friction. Friction changes kinetic energy into wasted thermal energy and causes wear and premature failure. Weight that is not payload is wasted efficiency. ICEs with all their moving parts and complicated transmissions are hugely inefficient, but they work better than turbines within a WIDE power band. Now, electric motors are MUCH better than ICEs because they have full torque from 0-full RPM without the related wastes of the ICE.
Jets are for thrust and turbines are for turning shafts for mechanical power. Both work best at constant speeds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine Now, the turbine is a terrible auto engine because of it very narrow power band but they make fantastic gensets because they are so efficient (power to weight ratio) within their narrow power band. That and the fact that they only have 1 moving part is why airliners use them for onboard power. Add a recuporator to recapture and reuse thermal energy and foil bearings so you don't need oil for lubrication and you now have a near perfect multi-fuel genset for use onboard rolling stock. Small turbines are great for series electrics like the e-Flex where the onboard electrical storage can smooth out power spikes during acceleration. GM knows this too as they experimented with them for the EV-1 before killing the cars. http://www.autoworld.com/news/GMC/Series_Hybrid.htm Talk about multi-fuel. Electronics can automatically sense whatever is in the tank and change the porting for optimal combustion. The high combustion temps and recuperation will lower exhaust pollution. The only thing better would be onboard hydrogen production, but that’s science fiction, right?
Reply
Phil L. 7:44AM (6/15/2007)
Yes, on-board hydrogen production - that doesn't simply use more energy than it can supply - is still science fiction.
Disagree?
Supply evidence! Said evidence should be both replicable by independent researchers and subject to peer review. 'Secret formulas' and magic in someone's garage don't count.
Yes, turbines can be good for steady-state applications (aircraft merely being the most common example of that application). Turbines do show some promise in some series hybrid applications.
Back to the original topic at hand: The Sinclair is a really neat solution to a specific problem (local, low-speed, single-person transport). I wish more cities were friendly to this sort of transportation.
Reply
Phil L. 7:48AM (6/15/2007)
Yes, on-board hydrogen production - that doesn't simply use more energy than it can supply - is still science fiction.
Disagree?
Supply evidence! Said evidence should be both replicable by independent researchers and subject to peer review. 'Secret formulas' and magic in someone's garage don't count.
Yes, turbines can be good for steady-state applications (aircraft merely being the most common example of that application). Turbines do show some promise in some series hybrid applications.
Back to the original topic at hand: The Sinclair is a really neat solution to a specific problem (local, low-speed, single-person transport). I wish more cities were friendly to this sort of transportation.
Reply
len simpson 11:05PM (6/19/2007)
in the late 60,s USAF,since the unit was already mounted on an equipment trailer, we,d remove the turned up exhaust stack, get a firm grip on the steering tongue while seated up front----and go racing!
Reply