Slashdot Mirror
Steam-Powered Car Breaks Century-Old Speed Record
mcgrew writes "New Scientist reports that a steam-powered car has broken the 1906 record of 204 km/hr (127 mph) for the fastest steam-powered automobile, the Stanley Steamer. The Inspiration made a top speed of 225 kilometres per hour (140 miles per hour) on August 26. 'The car's engine burns liquid petroleum gas to heat water in 12 suitcase-sized boilers, creating steam heated to 400C. The steam then drives a two-stage turbine that spins at 13,000 revolutions per minute to power its wheels.The FIA requires two 1.6-km-long runs to be performed in opposite directions — to cancel out any effect from wind — within 60 minutes.'"
are from two runs of the same vehicle.
They don't ahve to be opposite directions.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Next up...ridiculously large front-wheeled bicycle speed record.
0 = 1 + e^(Alt something)
"to cancel out any effect from wind" - and any slope, otherwise we'd have people dropping cars off cliffs claiming speed records like nobody's business =).
And being based on petroleum gas, at least they should have provided with some sort of performance measurement, such as Miles or Km per gallon or liter?
Slow Down you damn Steam Punks! And stay the hell off my lawn.
Stanley Steamer...you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. *shudder*
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
That seems like cheating. I guess the Stanley Steamer Rocket still retains the record for the fastest piston-powered steam car.
(Interestingly, this article also claims that the Rocket unofficially hit 150mph right before it crashed and was totaled in 1907.)
Bah, electric cars are just glorified golf carts, dontcha know.... ;)
One of my favorite lead-ins to an article about electric cars:
"The one-million-dollar Ferrari Enzo can do zero to 60 in about 3.5 seconds. So can Mike Willmon's 1978 Ford Pinto."
Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
What's it's 60mph to 180mph time? ;)
Since neither the term airplane or helicopter indicate it's power source, I'm going with airplane or helicopter
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Considering the disappointing margin over the old record.... Cleavland Steamer anyone??
I have to agree with the underwhelming nature of only 13MPH faster.
We now have a much better handle on material science and metallurgy. We actually have the capability to model the predicted performance and make design tweaks. We have the ability to machine to tolerances only dreamed about back then. And we have composites and alloys that weren't available.
I realize that it's not a linear scale from a drag standpoint, but our victory could be due only to 1906 measurement error.
Sheldon
Cool, a hybrid! Where can I get the government coupon to purchase one?
NABT (not a boiler technician) but I'd like to know how much pressure the thing generates. I've been around 600 pound and 1200 pound boilers, and learned some of the problems with the high pressure system. (basically, it was shit) I'm curious how much pressure this thing is using, and why and how. 400 degrees really means next to nothing, I don't know why they even put that little detail in the story.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
but can it get my carpets clean any faster?
The fate of the steamers is a cautionary tale for backers of projects like the Tesla.
They were handcrafted for the extremely wealthy.
The total production run for the Stanley was 11,000 cars in 25 years. Stanley Steamer
No matter how you price such a car, you never generate enough cash to remain competitive in R&D - never enough to survive hard times.
According to the article, the car is capable of another 30mph, they just haven't managed to get there yet.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
liquid petroleum gas
Is the fuel a liquid or a gas?
... But, speaking of acceleration, how does the Pinto do going from 60mph to 0?
Doesn't that depend on how solid the wall that it hits is?
So, the modest speed increase required either much better coefficient of drag, smaller frontal area, or much more power.
although i'd be REALLY impressed if someone invents a steam powered aircraft/ helicopter
Apparently both airplanes and helicopters have been powered by steam.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Judging a Ferrari Enzo by only its zero to 60 time is shortchanging the car. Mike Willmon's Pinto is also almost as fast as a fresh off the showroom floor $9,000 motorcycle. The Pinto is also faster than a ten-million-dollar Fabergé Egg thrown by Randy Johnson.
Always undersell and overdeliver. Starting a conversation about electric cars by comparing one to a supercar can only backfire.
I think a steam powered car is more of a Jay Leno thing than a Dave Letterman thing.
Has been for more then 40 years.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Just my guess regarding your 136mph rabbit.
That or you pushed it off a cliff.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Most production sports cars don't weight three tons. On the other hand, bentley makes a 2.5 ton 198 mph car.
You pretty quickly dismiss the suspension as not being a factor. That lake bed isn't exactly as smooth as a billiards table. If you want to keep control of the car and keep going in a straight line, a decent suspension is a good thing to have when your going over 100mph.
I can't help but feel you've missed the point. It runs on *steam* - it's hardly a surprise that this isn't the optimum way to go fast. It's a "because we can" thing.
Furthermore, it's design speed is 170 mph, they just haven't achieved its peak performance yet.
Okay, when someone wins an Olympic medal for the 100 yard dash, do you chime in about how they're not very impressive because you could cover a hundred yards much faster in a Ferrari?
What impresses me about this accomplishment is that it must have been achieved among a small group of enthusiasts.
With the internal combustion engine, an amateur can draw on a huge pool of professional resources and documented knowledge to build up a high performance vehicle. In fact, very few people, if any are a master of every component on a modern race car - usually your race team will have access to suspension specialists, tire specialists, engine builders, aerodynamic and chassis design guys...
There really can't be that many experts on the automotive uses of steam engines, and a huge amount of new development must have gone into this car - that's something fantastic.
Materials have come a long way... But how much of of an advantage does that give you against the massive loss of experience we must have had over the last 100 years?
I'm a motorcycle racing enthusiast, and even at my amateur level it's amazing how much knowledge is only available through experienced teachers. There are literally more in-depth books about programing in ruby than books about motorcycle chassis engineering and physics.
Acceleration off-the-line is predominantly determined by power-to-weight (given traction). This is how the low-powered Caterhams and Lotus Elises can hang with the "big boys" using that metric.
Top speed, OTOH is dominated by outright power and drag. Mass features little, hence top speed is typically dominated by heavier cars with massive amounts of power.
Incidentally 60-0, and also cornering, should be dominated by mass & traction, but traction itself is influenced strongly by mass, making traction alone the dominant factor (ignoring aero which is increasingly significant at speed) - which is why almost any car with four good tires can pretty much pull the same braking and cornering (skid-pan) figures of around 1G. if you can find published 60mph-0 distances, you'll find they are usually around the 40 metre mark, almost regardless of the car model.
The Powell steam engine and it's associated motor vehicle was far more advanced than the Stanley systems and also more powerful and reliable than the Packards, Duesenbergs, Auburns, etc. of it's day. Powell was devastated by the collapse of the economy in the late 20's and his patents and inventions remain locked away somewhere to this day.
Cars and Parts magazine ran a month's long series on this revolutionary inventor and his motor car in the early 70's.
It was, as I recall, a horizontally opposed, 4 cylinder engine, ran completely silent and exhaust-free, with none of the dire explosion risks the Stanley Bro's systems had.
Worth a read if you can locate the article series.
In 1905, the British Admiralty announced all new ships of the line would be turbine driven.
Babcock & Wilcox built coal fired boilers through the 50's - most of these driving turbines.
By the time of the Stanley record, piston steam was on it's way out for capital ships
Now, some WWII naval ships used piston steam driven pumps for damage control, but it sounds like you're talking about main propulsion.
By "liquid petroleum gas" they probably mean LP, or liquid propane though it could also be liquid butane or a mix of the two. It is significantly cleaner burning than gasoline. Consider that it is used to heat the water and not drive the pistons, you are using significantly less petroleum to move the same size vehicle.
Also, steam is much more efficient in powering a piston than gasoline explosions. Steam expands continuously through the piston stroke, as opposed to just a "bang" and push from the combusting of gasoline or diesel. Exhaust is a lot cleaner as well.
One downside is that, in a fire, you have a BLEVE potential.
While I'm uncertain if this car uses a turbine or traditional steam piston drive, steam turbines are responsible for about 80% of the electricity generated in the world. It is very efficient. Remember, a nuclear plant is just an efficient steam generator which is in turn used to drive a turbine.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
> 140mph...most production sports cars can do that
I've been done for speeding on my motorcycle at that speed. OK, that's a lie...it was 139 (I think the police were being generous, or I'd already slowed somewhat by the time they clocked me).
So, yeah, 140 isn't anything much as speeds go.
Max.
It was called the "Penny-Farthing" because of the ridiculous small wheel and the ridiculous large wheel. The big wheel had no gearing AFAIK, so you had to REALLY lay on the leg-muscles. Now.. lesseee.. I'm not a Brit so which was the "Penny"? I seem to remember UK pennies as bieng quite large and HEAVY! I remember being in London during the 1960s, and the only place that would take my damn pocketful of pennies (my pants were about to fall down) was a slot-machine arcade. Now, presumably all road bicycles are known as Euro-Euros.
.
- aqk
F U
"I was wondering. What does acceleration has to do with top speed?"
It's how you get there.
Hey, if you want to talk motorcycles, the Killacycle does 0-60 in under a second, and there are faster ones than that out there. We're not talking motorcycles; we're talking cars. It doesn't matter how you cut it; 0-60 in 3.5 seconds is *fast* for a car. And for a Pinto? An amateur conversion Pinto? I mean, come on! Pintos aren't exactly optimized for racing. And this conversion used heavy lead-acid batteries to boot, rather than lightweight, higher-power li-ions.
Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
Thanks for a very nice answer. I suppose it must have been a stupid question as someone was kind enough to mod me down.
The steam age never ended because it didn't exist. There was the wood age, the coal age, the current oil age and i'm guessing the next age will either be nuclear, or wood again, depending on how the coming resource wars go.
Deleted
And I've traveled at 640mph in a Boing 777. What's your point?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
... support of the porn industry
I am very sucseptible to "let's have another drink"
I think it also has to do with the minimum amount of remaining car that you time to get that 0-60 speed. For example, if you rear-ended a 1978 Pinto and only the car from the front seats forward accelerated away, does that count toward the record?
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
I was attempting ot highlight that 140mph is not a high speed by saying that I've travelled that speed on my own personal transportation vehicle, *and* I have documentation to prove it.
What's *your* point?
Max.
Drag only increases by the square.
FRA: STFU GTFO
http://www.newlaunches.com/archives/british_steam_car_plans_for_170_mph_at_bonneville.php
Apparently that I'm about 4.2667 times studlier than you.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
LOL. Well, that could well be true irrespective of vehicle.
Anyway, I have also traveled on Boing 777 - though I'm not sure if that particular vehicle is has a noteworthy top speed compared to other airliners. Does it?
Try factoring in the number of passengers or top acceleration - I'd expect the bike to win then, or at least it to be very close.
Max.
>'The car's engine burns liquid petroleum gas to heat water
Ummm....i thought the whole concept of steam powered vehicles, was to get away from using oil or gas to power the sob?
I would have thought because the engine gets super hot from the friction that it could have been used to recylce the heat through to
change water into steam, but I am uncertain how much oil is used to convert water to steam....especially if it is just at the start, where you need to start the cycle, however, I am not really looking far, I have not RTA.
ps - If the amount of fuel used to steam to water is almost = to what we use in cars today, I guess we have made no progress then...!
Papa Schimmelhorn's Stanley Steamer could.
I agree that the skid-pad 1G mark is reserved for particularly sporty vehicles, whether you're discussing a Ferrari, BMW M-series model, Chevrolet Corvette, or Dodge Viper.
But I think you're singling out American sedans for poor handling unfairly. A Toyota Camry handles like a boat, too, and Toyota doesn't invest the money in a better suspension because 400,000 Americans each year clearly don't mind its wallowy driving characteristics very much. Volkswagens sold in America tend to drive better than equivalent domestic or Asian vehicles, but you pay at least a $3,000 premium for the improvement and very clearly most of us don't care enough or can't afford to spend the extra money.
A Pinto is relatively small and light, just about 2400 pounds, with plenty of room under the hood, and rear wheel drive. Its styling is the polar opposite of the Enzo's "sex on wheels", but even ignoring electric conversions many tuners would swap the stock engine with a big V8 and deliver tremendous straight line acceleration.
This is a student project at Southampton university using a technology that hasn't been in widespread use in well over 50 years. I realize steam turbines are in wide use in ships and power plants, but I assume the engineering challenges are significantly different when you're trying to build a fast steam-driven automobile. It seems like a nice achievement to me.
Now if BMW or Honda made a steam car run on the Bonneville Salt Flats and only got 140 mph, then it would be embarrassing.
A Pinto is relatively small and light, just about 2400 pounds,
And the Enzo is 3,000 pounds, but with a massive 500lb engine and a bunch of other heavy performance-designed components. And the Pinto that they're talking about is *lead-acid* based. PbA cells have ~1/4th the energy density of automotive-style li-ions, and a small fraction the power density as well; they're used because they're dirt cheap. The fact is, is this is a cheapo conversion and it can accelerate as fast as a million dollar supercar. Try to get that kind of performance out of a Pinto using gasoline on that kind of budget.
Dear Lord: I don't want to go back to college, so please help me be sexy. Amen.
2400lb is not light.
1200lb is light.
Hell, my 5-door car capable of fitting 4 adults and all their sporting equipment for a National competition only weighs 2400lb.
Mike Willmon's budget was about $30K to convert his Pinto into an electric dragster. You could easily add a twin turbo kit, a bit of nitrous, and a bunch of driveline parts to a vintage Camaro or Chevelle and stay way under that number, and run 10s or 11s in the quarter mile. Mike expects 12s out of his Pinto.
... 26 grand and any vintage Chevy can do 9 seconds in the 1/4 mile. If you want to save a significant chunk of the budget and simply find a gas package with slightly better perfomance than Mike ... http://nelsonracingengines.com/pricesheets/chevy/dailydriver/na/dds_454bbc_na.pdf ... 12 grand for 625HP, plenty to beat the Pinto.
Here's a drop in package I found in two minutes of googling... http://nelsonracingengines.com/pricesheets/chevy/dailydriver/tt/dds_355_tt.pdf
My original point was that accellerating as fast as a million dollar supercar isn't a big deal. Straight line acceleration isn't what you are buying for $1,000,000.00. Anybody with $30K can embarass a Ferrari stoplight to stoplight. I'll bet the Pinto also has better windsheild wipers than a 60 foot Yacht and is oranger than a 2 billion dollar stealth bomber.
The Brits who made Thrust 2 (record 633MPH) & Thrust SSC (record MACH 1.070 763MPH) are doing it again - they're aiming for 1000MPH time with Bloodhound SSC