But the main thing it is cheap, even at half of what being claimed. Who don’t want to use it but of course at decent range and speed (this only a start, longer range and power in future maybe). At least the masses will go for it, don’t want to talk about the rich (they can afford to fuel their passion).

The best thing is it’s simpler, much simpler than Electric or Hydrogen car. It might be exact reason it’s being ignored by the big corporations R & D, more exotic more fund they get etc. On sinister note, towkey minyak might be behind car manufacturers move (they might belong to same towkey).

It will blows you away. literally.

It could be highly possible to own the car and the air compressor without breaking the bank. What’s interesting is that it expels cold water and air, and quoting from the narrator of that video (vaguely), “If everybody used it in a hot state like California, the ambient temperature will drop making it cool and comfortable”

but if batteries involve in the chain of energy transfer, or external non renwable energy, or fossil fuel to power the generator or compressor, – its still produce byproduct from its source, even nuclear energy,

if automotive = passion, no one will opt this type of motor,

beside quest for effiency of the internal combustion engine,low emission, and power regeneration.

probally the real world of automotive issue is internal combustion is that it fail to convert the wasted heat energy into some kind potential energy that might be reuse to propell the car …………is beneficial,

Light = low cost = lots of cars on the road = traffic in India!

2. The range is too short, not practical.

3. Is it safe? “Tissue box on the wheel”. How about head on collision test?

the power you need to compress the air is more than the power to drive the car. saying no polution is just a marketing cheat.

when you compress the air, you also produce heat, which is wasted energy.

Carmakers that spend billions on RnD believe batteries and fuel cells are the way to go…Versus one frenchman and TATA – who’s right?

It’s like two motorcycles joined together.

The amount of energy needed to move it in the first place is much less than your typical 1ton car.

Definitely feasable. And much safer than a motorcycle.

If you use petrol to power an engine to compress air, you’d multiply the energy loss. Besides, internal combustion petrol engines are notoriously inefficient.

farghmee said,
January 8, 2008 @ 9:29 am

interesting

but how reliable the system will be? i think those designers may have the answers for my enquiry, but let us share the inticipated will-be-problem.

*efficiency of the engine.
should be more efficient than an otto cycle engine

*cost of getting compressed air.
big question mark. You could always buy your own compressor and then calculate the electricity cost. I’m sure someone can calculate how much it hp to run a compressor at a certain CFM@pressure

*space to put the compressed air tank.

run smaller tanks at higher pressure…as I stated above. But you will need a special compressor…the fiber tanks that I have will hold 3800-4500psi and very light.

last but not least,
*performance of the engine.

Its difficult to compare to an internal combustion engine. Most ICE runs at 600+ psi internal pressure. This air engine will probably operate at lower pressures. Technically, you could run a normal 2 stroke ICE engine with high pressure compressed air, although its not as efficient.

But with 330kg to push around, it wont need a big “engine”. Besides, they are more efficient to start with. This thing is 1/2 the weight of a kancil.

but how reliable the system will be? i think those designers may have the answers for my enquiry, but let us share the inticipated will-be-problem.
*efficiency of the engine.
*cost of getting compressed air.
*space to put the compressed air tank.
last but not least,
*performance of the engine.

i hope it is not a Perpetual Motion Machine (PMM) that deviates from Laws of Thermodynamics