Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #12825
From: rijakits <rijakits@cwpanama.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: EWP
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:02:39 -0500
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 10:44 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EWP

don't see any EWP on cars yet as a means of regular cooling, except racing. I know they sell them aftermarket for that too now, but I don't see any longterm experience yet....
 
You have to remember that auto manufacturers won't spend a penny more than necessary on their cars, and EWP's are going to cost more than the basic pumps that have been used since the dawn of time.  As long as they're working, and cheap, the auto manufacturers have no motivation to improve the product.  The same goes for aviation.  Why do you think we still have the same antiquated Lycosaurs in production?  
 
Cheers,
Rusty (hey, I smell pizza) 
 
 
 
 
Rusty,
 
I know auto manufactures will always try to get away with the cheapest, but they're giving each other one hell of a competitive time, so they still have to get some reliability.
 
What I stated somewhere else on this list about not seeing EWPs on cars yet: I ment I don't see them on regular production cars (yet), so there is not any bigscale record on them. Paul will try to proof me wrong in a moment ( I hope...), as I really would want to learn more about EWPs.
 
But to get to the point, Rusty I believe here we are comparing 2 different things: EWP against the belt
Now if I change the factory WP against a good aftermarket WP, we can start to compare! Meziere against Meziere or something like this....
 
I believe the car manufacturers would use EWPs at least on their highend models and/or show off models, IF there would be any advantage:
The highpowered topend models of any of the car makers struggle with mpg values, a price difference of 150 bucks (or whatever a mass produced EWP would cost) would be cheap to increase mpg even a little bit.
Mazda could use a couple more horses on their RX8 to get back on their initial claim.
These are examples where the price would be secondary to their image.
 
On heavy equipment, 18-wheelers, they definitely would use EWPs if they could make better mpg/power.
I doubt that the price is the real issue. Nearly all new cars run E-Fans today, because these really do bring advantages, even most if not all big rigs run electric fans today ( though I admit I don't know, yet, why my '02 Toyota SUV with a Turbo Diesel still came with a beltdriven fan...)
 
To your Lycosaurus question:
 
Answer is: Absolutely crazy certification costs combined with absurd liability laws. Even if you can improve them, as Superior proofed quite well with their XP Engine series, it still will cost half a fortune to STC any improvement. I am waiting since 12 years on the promises of any of the big magneto makers to bring electronic ignition and variable timing to the masses. However if the manufacturers of the engines don't make the electronic ignition standard equipment, this will keep me waiting a while longer... And they won't do that as long as this involves recertifications and more STCs.
 
Point is, in cars any innovation shows a LOT earlier than in aviation (if it is related in any way, like cars and planes use both piston engines).
Electric Fans are here since what, about 15 years or so? If EWPs would have that much of an advantage they would be here since a while too. Obviously the electric motors hold up - on the other hand IF they fail you still can make it home without the fan, not without the pump (Except on the Cadillac Northstar engines :)).
Car makers still seem to trust the belt more than the electric motor..........
 
Thomas J.
 
"Soorry for the wit" - who finds it offending and/or political.
Just because something is new it doesn't mean it is better than the old and proofen.
I am questioning the proposed advantage of the EWP - Proof me wrong!!
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster