Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Kentucky Man Builds Bourbon Powered Car

Posted by samzenpus on from the drink-to-drive dept.

autospa writes "With fuel prices rising like crazy, a man from Kentucky came up with a solution to high gas prices. 62-year-old Mickey Nilsson, of Bardstown, Kentucky, made a bourbon-powered junk car. He got the idea from the movie Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. Nilsson said that his inspiration came from a character played by Dick Van Dyke in the classic Disney movie."

125 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. Use caution. by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2

    There's a good chance the state will come after you for some sort of a fuel tax if you're doing something like this. :)

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    1. Re:Use caution. by imric · · Score: 1

      During inspection / emissions testing, maybe?

      --
      Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
    2. Re:Use caution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's a good chance the state will come after you for some sort of a fuel tax if you're doing something like this. :)

      On top of the liquor tax he'll already be paying? Politicians wouldn't dare...

    3. Re:Use caution. by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 2

      Trust me the excise tax on the alcohol is higher than the fuel tax would be.

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    4. Re:Use caution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember here in Australia back in the 80's a man made a car that ran on water was on the 6 o'clock news, a week later he was found dead. Nothing more was said.

    5. Re:Use caution. by CapOblivious2010 · · Score: 2

      I remember here in Australia back in the 80's a man made a car that ran on water was on the 6 o'clock news, a week later he was found dead. Nothing more was said.

      Oh please... really?

      Maybe he died of terminal stupidity... or embarassment at having pulled off such a scam (though it's the news people who really ought to be embarassed)

      Look, if it was really possible to power a car with water (or even get the infamous "100 MPG" you hear about occasionally) the auto companies would do it. Everyone seems to forget that even if the oil companies were all in cahoots to suppress such technology, the CAR companies (in a couple dozen countries all over the world) wouldn't give a damn what the oil companies wanted... they'd jump on such technologies in a heartbeat.

      Now if you had a headline like "Toyota announces new 100MPG car that runs on water; all Toyota employees found dead the next day" maybe I'd be interested.

    6. Re:Use caution. by scottrocket · · Score: 1

      Maybe he dripped water onto calcium carbide, burned the resultant acetylene gas, & the illuminati overreacted. Sounds like a good story for The Mythbusters. ;)

    7. Re:Use caution. by Khyber · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Look, if it was really possible to power a car with water (or even get the infamous "100 MPG" you hear about occasionally"

      Someone doesn't pay attention to SAE supermileage events where high school kids and university students build cars that drop 1,000 MPG (Yes THOUSAND) on a *REGULAR* basis.

      I think the current record is over three thousand MPG.

      I know sunlight hurts but it pays to step outside now and then.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    8. Re:Use caution. by Jbcarpen · · Score: 1

      That's powered by burning combustibles too. They just heat water instead of gasses to transfer the power to the pistons.

      --
      GENERATION 667: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation
    9. Re:Use caution. by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 1

      I can see this being imposed on all cars, while the gas taxes remain in place too.

      --
      SSC
    10. Re:Use caution. by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should read those news articles a little more closely and see how horrifically impractical those cars are. They have no luggage space, hold only (occasionally two) people, can only go at very slow speeds (around 25 - 30 mph), and don't go for very long.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    11. Re:Use caution. by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 1

      Do such hyper-mileage cars meet safety and other regulatory standards? Can they travel at highway speeds, and if so, do they maintain their high mileage at those speeds? Do they have some sort of exotic construction (materials, etc.) that would be difficult to mass produce?

      --
      SSC
    12. Re:Use caution. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should actually compete like my brother did last year.

      Proving you now jack. You've never even seen the vehicles.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    13. Re:Use caution. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Yes.
      Yes and yes thanks to great aerodynamic design and light weight.
      Nope, most of it is either fiberglass or carbon/plastic composites, with the heaviest parts being frame, batteries, and solar panels. Hell I think one car had all four wheels lighter than a single car battery.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    14. Re:Use caution. by dailyloadmaster · · Score: 1

      http://www.thedailyload.com/2011/04/kentucky-man-invents-car-that-runs-on-bourbon/ The Original story is at TheDailyLoad.com and says nothing about Disney.

    15. Re:Use caution. by Totenglocke · · Score: 2

      Ooh, ooh, I know this one! This is where I make up an unprovable claim that makes me look cooler than you to "prove" a point too instead of using actual facts! Sadly for you, I'm too old to play that game, so I'll just leave you to your fantasies where a 30 mph vehicle that holds one person and no cargo is "practical".

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    16. Re:Use caution. by Anon8---) · · Score: 1

      Look, if it was really possible to power a car with water (or even get the infamous "100 MPG" you hear about occasionally) the auto companies would do it.

      I think you're mistaking the auto companies with trustworthy companies - oh wait that's right. There are no trustworthy companies.
      They will squeeze as much revenue out of the current market and move on.

      Never underestimate human greed (or stupidity).

    17. Re:Use caution. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      http://students.sae.org/competitions/supermileage/results/2010.pdf

      Milwaukee is where my brother attends.

      And that was a car built with very little aerodynamic consideration. It was brute efficiency and power transmission to get that 700+ MPG at 55MPH. Had tey bothered with aerodynamics, they'd have probably pushed 90MPG.

      Unprovable claims. Such laughable stuff. Go to one and go see for yourself. Half of these over-100MPG beasts are just that, ugly blocky bricks.

      They still kick the ass of anything coming out of any major car manufacturer as far as fuel economy goes.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    18. Re:Use caution. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Ugh, crappy keyboard likes to ignore double strokes.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    19. Re:Use caution. by kubernet3s · · Score: 1

      ...which is why if they could get people to buy cars that they can drive for free, they would. Higher fuel prices mean more people taking the bus.

    20. Re:Use caution. by Zeek40 · · Score: 1

      On potable alcohol, yes it is, but on de-natured alcohol it's not. If you're not drinking it, there's no reason not to use de-natured alcohol.

    21. Re:Use caution. by Zeek40 · · Score: 1

      If you just add "only has two wheels" to your vehicle description, you're talking about a mo-ped, which plenty of people use to get around college campuses, or similar 'short-commute' regions. Just because a car isn't a schoolbus doesn't mean it's useless.

    22. Re:Use caution. by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, not sure I agree. Let's do the math. Brewing beer with malted barley with grain purchased in bulk, you might get the cost down to $2 of grain per gallon of beer at 5%. To burn it as a fuel you would then have to distill it close to dry, as water doesn't burn and boiling the water sucks the heat out of the combustion process to pay the latent heat of evaporation of the water (one reason alcohol flames in "flambe" aren't that "hot"). If we distill to 100% that requires 20 gallons of beer, or $40, not a big win there, and even if I'm off by a factor of four in price buying malted barley a freight car at a time one still isn't close (see below). Corn may be cheaper, but again you have the problem of making a mash at 5-10% and then having to make 10-20x as much as you end up with as distilled alcohol. Even cheap bourbon is more expensive than gasoline per gallon, (and note, we haven't talked about the energy costs and cost of water or the need to make a profit).

      Potatoes are indeed cheaper in bulk, but they would have to be 10x cheaper than barley to break even with gasoline. In order for your numbers to be correct, $2 worth of potatoes (call it a very generous five pounds at anything like retail proces) would have to make 20 gallons of 5% alcohol pre-distillation. This is impossible. Five pounds of straight up fermentable sugar won't quite make five gallons of 5% alcohol -- a standard brew from malt sugars is six pounds for five gallons. You'd need at least twenty four pounds of pure sugar to make twenty gallons of 5% alcohol to distill to 1 gallon of 100% alcohol, plus enough energy to distill it (and a distillery that functioned without losses). Sugar in bulk costs roughly $30 for 50 pounds, so this comes out to be at least $12 for a gallon of sugar-derived ethanol independent of the source of the sugar. Of course "YMMV" if you are content to distill to only 150 proof or can get your engine to run as a steam engine at 100 proof, but the energy content of the product would be much lower (see below) so you'll have to make more to drive the same distance in the end.

      If potatoes 100% ferment as efficiently as pure sugar (doubtful -- I'm guessing that they are only 2/3 to 3/4 fermentable) that is still 24 pounds of potatoes. Looking on the web for wholesale prices for potatoes, 50 pound boxes are roughly $20-25/pound (and if they are only 75% fermentable you are no better off than you are fermenting refined or unrefined sugar) which actually makes sense. If potato sugars were much cheaper than cane or corn or beet sugars, we'd get our sugar from potatoes. That means a gallon of pure alcohol derived from potatoes (or from sugar, or from...) under best-case assumptions would cost at least $10. No matter how you cut it, that's a dead loss compared to straight up gasoline prices, and you'd have to drop costs by a factor of three to have a realistic chance of breaking even.

      Finally, you need between 1.6 (ethanol) and 2.1 (methanol) gallons of alcohol to match the energy content of a gallon of gasoline, so you LOSE another factor of around 2.

      Overall, burning alcohols derived from food sugars or starches in cars is a stupid idea as long as gasoline is available. Perhaps one does marginally better with oils and diesel, although since people started burning vegetable oil as diesel the cost of vegetable oils has more than doubled so where it was a borderline break even proposition in 2005 it is now a total loss. Various companies (including oil companies) are investing hundreds of millions of dollars in developing new plants that can produce oils or sugars at sufficiently high energy density and low cost to be worth growing in bulk and refining into alcohols or biodiesel, but wikipedia suggests that we are five to ten years away from success here (barring skyrocketing prices for gasoline or real diesel) and even if it were break even now it would still take 5-10 years to develop cultivation of anywhere nearly enough land area to supply any reasonable fraction of global demand.

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    23. Re:Use caution. by CapOblivious2010 · · Score: 1

      "Look, if it was really possible to power a car with water (or even get the infamous "100 MPG" you hear about occasionally"

      Someone doesn't pay attention to SAE supermileage events where high school kids and university students build cars that drop 1,000 MPG (Yes THOUSAND) on a *REGULAR* basis.

      OK, I'll believe that sight-unseen if you can answer one question: Why hasn't ANY actual car company built a production car that gets even a fraction of your 1000MPG? OK, maybe the American car companies are being paid off by "Big Oil"... but the Japanese car companies? And the Korean companies? And the German, French, Italian, and Swedish car companies?

      Look, new car companies appear all the time... they'd give anything to get an edge on the competition... and a (practical) car that got even 80 MPG would be a HUGE advantage - especially with gas pushing $4 / gallon (actually, a lot more in many places)... if it's so easy that high school kids can do it, why doesn't a real car company do it?

  2. I think it's safe to say by Deathnerd · · Score: 5, Funny

    That the driver is also bourbon powered.
    Also, I'm from Kentucky and this does not surprise me at all.

    1. Re:I think it's safe to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Could be fun watching drivers fill up at "versatile fuel stations" in Kentucky. Although if you're in line, you might be waiting awhile.

    2. Re:I think it's safe to say by jrminter · · Score: 1

      Great way to verify fuel quality :).

    3. Re:I think it's safe to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do I recall correctly that Homer fantasized about filling up and talkingt to an ethanol powered car: "One for you. One for me. One for you. One for me."?

    4. Re:I think it's safe to say by JustOK · · Score: 5, Funny

      Also, I'm from Kentucky and this does not surprise me at all.

      Why would being from Kentucky surprise you?

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    5. Re:I think it's safe to say by JustOK · · Score: 1

      Even in North Middletown, KY?

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    6. Re:I think it's safe to say by igny · · Score: 1

      I bet that a 12y aged bourbon to 1y aged is the same as #95 to #87 gasoline. Does it matter if the bourbon came from the same barrel or it was blended? Are the fuel stations hiring tasters now?

      --
      In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
    7. Re:I think it's safe to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's selection bias.

    8. Re:I think it's safe to say by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Could be fun watching drivers fill up at "versatile fuel stations" in Kentucky. Although if you're in line, you might be waiting awhile.

      That's okay. Folks will just queue up with a gallon left in the tank and a straw...

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    9. Re:I think it's safe to say by taustin · · Score: 1

      Pure ethanol is higher octane than gasoline, and requires engine adjustments (mostly timing, but changing the compression ratio can also help) to avoid pinging.
      Despite that, it only has about 2/3 as much energy stored in it as gasoline, by volume (methanol is about 1/2), which requires reworking the fuel and ignition systems. That, however, is pure ethanol. Bourbon is typical about 80 proof, which is not combustible. For anything like a car engine, you need a minimum of about 160 proof (which is lower octane than pure, and requires less adjustment). Below that, and it simply won't burn in an engine.

      While this vehicle may well have bourbon involved in its fuel, what it runs on, primarily, is bullshit (as presented in the article). Given that he claims to have shot at the guys (and, thus, did so on camera) from American Pickers, and nobody else has ever mentioned that, I'm pretty sure this guy is just a bullshit artist enjoying his 15 minutes. On the other hand, it might actually be some kind of investment scam.

      Can anybody find any actual account of Nissan "showcasing" this thing "a few weeks ago"? Google can't, and my Google-Fu is pretty good.

    10. Re:I think it's safe to say by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Pure ethanol is higher octane than gasoline, and requires engine adjustments (mostly timing, but changing the compression ratio can also help) to avoid pinging.

      Just more evidence that computer management systems in cars does no good. Now my Chevy is doing denial of service

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    11. Re:I think it's safe to say by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      I'm frequently surprised to find I live in Kentucky.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    12. Re:I think it's safe to say by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      You may have a condition known as Alzheimer's.

      --
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
    13. Re:I think it's safe to say by Zcar · · Score: 1

      My GF boards a horse in North Middletown, KY (actually, just north of North Middletown).

    14. Re:I think it's safe to say by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      So the horse is from Kentucky?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    15. Re:I think it's safe to say by BillDaCatt · · Score: 1

      The source of the article was from a website called The Daily Load and is in the same vein as The Onion or The Daily Mash, all of its articles are completely made up.

      Here is a post from the site stating their surprise that anyone took them seriously. http://www.thedailyload.com/bourbon-powered-car-a-hoax/

      The Daily Load is a satire news site that has the line “because the real news sucks” right in it’s header, yet this story caught fire and was reposted around the internet, eventually picked up by legitimate news sources.

    16. Re:I think it's safe to say by T-ice · · Score: 1

      How's the mileage on the horse? And can he pass emissions?

  3. Unfortunately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    He keeps using up the fuel before he can drive with it.

  4. Wow by codepunk · · Score: 1

    Man powers car on ethanol, forgive me if I am less than impressed.

    --


    Got Code?
    1. Re:Wow by InfoJunkie777 · · Score: 1

      Man powers car on ethanol, forgive me if I am less than impressed.

      Dirty ethanol at that. Perhaps it will get some badly-needed funds for KY.

      --
      Don't explain computers to laymen. Simpler to explain sex to a virgin. -- Robert A. Heinlein
  5. Neat...but... by Zantac69 · · Score: 2

    ...bourbon is much more expensive than petrol - even at european prices.

    --
    1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    1. Re:Neat...but... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2

      "Neat"? Come on, sir. It's wizard. It's smashing. It's keen.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    2. Re:Neat...but... by brusk · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, it had better be neat. If it were on the rocks that would make the engine much less efficient.

      --
      .sig withheld by request
    3. Re:Neat...but... by chill · · Score: 1

      No, no. The bourbon must be served neat, as opposed to on the rocks, diluted with water or with soda.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    4. Re:Neat...but... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      ...bourbon is much more expensive than petrol - even at european prices.

      Moohshine?

    5. Re:Neat...but... by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    6. Re:Neat...but... by I_Lost_My_Puppy · · Score: 1


      Whooosh! yourself.


      He replied to the joke with another joke and you completely failed to comprehend.

    7. Re:Neat...but... by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Son, humour is a complicated thing - and it's not funny at all when you have to explain it.
       
      Didn't the easter bunny bring you any eggs?

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    8. Re:Neat...but... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Moonshine is great for cleaning carburetors, or getting old paint off paintbrushes, but you really wouldn't want to drink the stuff. Most of it is about as "nice" as PGA, but I bet it would run an old car fine (I know the moonshiners in my area used to use it as a boost fuel in the old hot rods they used to smuggle shine) but I don't know how well it would run on anything modern.

      But if you were making something to actually consume as opposed for peeling paint or running a 70s Dart I'd suggest a little Muscadine Wine as it is a great way to enjoy a lazy afternoon and IMHO beats most grape wines hands down. You just have to be careful during the fermenting, as when one of those bottles blow you'll have a kitchen that smells like Muscadine for...oh about three years or so, as my grandma found out when grandpa put the lid on a little too tight on a batch.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    9. Re:Neat...but... by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

      That's only if you use the 'store bought' kind. The guy has a 'stil', so he probably makes his own from potato peelings, brewers yeast, and dead flies.

    10. Re:Neat...but... by Mr.+Beatdown · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

      Whoosh!

      --
      My fellow Americans, let's restore the death penalty for child rapists. Let's do it . . . for the children.
  6. What a waste by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why would you use up perfectly good bourbon on driving somewhere? I mean, this seems about as bright as the bumbling alchemist proudly announcing that he'd found a way to turn gold into lead.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    1. Re:What a waste by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      Agreed. This is even sicker than using corn ethanol - which is completely twisted. At least the corn ethanol isn't barrel aged, FFS.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:What a waste by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't. This is for bourbon that really isn't fit for human consumption anyways.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:What a waste by Viperpete · · Score: 2

      Why would you use up perfectly good bourbon on driving somewhere?

      To get more bourbon.

      --
      loose: not fitting closely or tightly != lose: to suffer the deprivation of
    4. Re:What a waste by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Which is an issue for the people who drink for the flavor.

      Both of them.

      --
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
    5. Re:What a waste by garwain · · Score: 1

      Good question. As long as I have burbon, I don't need to go anywhere.

  7. Re:Weird coincidences by ArcherB · · Score: 2

    I watched Chitty Chitty Bang Bang on TV this morning, for the first time I've seen it since I was a little kid.

    (Powering a car on alcohol is no feat, with modern engines, it requires little more than pouring the alcohol into the gas tank and tweaking timing a bit - if your ecu wont do that for you automatically)

    Well, to be fair, unless it is REALLY strong Bourbon, it won't ignite. It's not like you can just put Jack Daniels in your tank and run it. 80 proof is not strong enough to be flammable.

    I'd still like to see if this would be better if this were something other than an internal combustion engine. Turbine engines can run off just about anything that will burn from natural gas, to gasoline, to Bacardi 151 to kerosene with very little modification if any at all. I still don't understand why we don't use turbine engines in cars. Even if not practical in a standard setup, it should make sense in a hybrid setup. I would love to be able to go to a gas station and say, "Hmmm. What kind of fuel do I want today? Hey, the line for diesel is shorter, I guess I'm getting diesel this week."

    --
    There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  8. The important part by elsJake · · Score: 2

    Bourbon is 40% ABV.
    Anything under 50% doesn't really burn directly , I'm curious what he did to make it run.
    Perhaps using excess engine heat to separate alcohol evaporating it first from the content.

    1. Re:The important part by radicalpi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not all Bourbons are 40% ABV. That's just the minimum. Many are 50+%, but, most are 40-48%, but, TFA states it will run off any Bourbon, so your curiousness still remains.

    2. Re:The important part by Vectronic · · Score: 1

      Bourbon can be anywhere from 80 to 160 proof. I didn't RTFA, but if he's making it himself, then it could be even higher, although not really legal.

    3. Re:The important part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The article said he built it partly out of an old still. So maybe he fires up the still, which evaporates the alcohol, and just uses that? Not sure what he would use to power the still... It's a completely impractical car, but the engineer in me would love to see the design.

    4. Re:The important part by hldn · · Score: 1

      120 proof sounds cooler than 60% ABV.

      bigger numbers = better. america wins again.

      --
      http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    5. Re:The important part by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      He says it runs well on Maker's Mark. I don't have a bottle handy ATM, but ISTR it is 90 proof.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    6. Re:The important part by omfgnosis · · Score: 1

      I wish to subscriber to your newsletter. Please tell me more!

  9. Oblig.. by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2

    One for you and one for me.

    One for you and one for me.

    One for you...

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    1. Re:Oblig.. by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Simpsons and Bugs Bunny in the same "quote". Nice.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  10. What's new in that? by Blackout+for+Hungary · · Score: 1

    Basically the first cars ran on alcohol All older LADA's run fine on vodka, too.

    1. Re:What's new in that? by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      The only way to make a Lada "run fine" is to fit a Cosworth engine. (I speak from experience here).

      However, if you have to drive a Lada, I recommend drinking the Vodka first.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  11. Re:Weird coincidences by sjames · · Score: 1

    While more practical for a hybrid than for direct drive, a turbine engine is still a bit high maintenance and very few auto mechanics are up to the job.

  12. Shill journalism by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

    This is just an advert for "Maker's Mark" whiskey. The copy blurbs on about how the car runs best on it.

    Yet another product who's value mostly lies in the psychological profile built up by it's advertising.

    1. Re:Shill journalism by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Yet another product who's value mostly lies in the psychological profile built up by it's advertising.

      I don't believe I've ever seen an ad for Maker's Mark. I've seen them for Jack Daniels and Jim Beam - but not Maker's Mark.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Shill journalism by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      They bought the side of a whole building near my office (in the UK) ... my initial instinct was that it's a product like Grey Goose, thought up just to meet a price point. It's a little older than that though.

      I still think it has an element of the price being an important part of it's brand value, but at least it isn't just gussied up grain alcohol.

    3. Re:Shill journalism by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      I don't believe I've ever seen an ad for Maker's Mark.

      I've seen billboards for Maker's.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    4. Re:Shill journalism by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      It's a premium product, and they charge accordingly. Beats the crap out of Jack Daniels. And it's been around a long time, though perhaps not in the UK. 1.75 L will run you just under $50 in the US, for price comparison.

    5. Re:Shill journalism by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      It's a premium product, and they charge accordingly. Beats the crap out of Jack Daniels. And it's been around a long time, though perhaps not in the UK. 1.75 L will run you just under $50 in the US, for price comparison.

      Up until recently Maker's Mark was a single-product company - and they've been around for over a century.

      It's funny that this came up now, because (a week or so ago) I bought a bottle of their new-ish "premium" Makers 46 bourbon for the first time. I think it's my favorite bourbon; but I haven't tried any of the true premium ($100/bottle) bourbons.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    6. Re:Shill journalism by yotto · · Score: 1

      I have seen ads for Maker's Mark, and I've also had the pleasure of drinking it. It is a fine bourbon. Not the best, but far, far from the worst.

      And it's assuredly good enough to not want to cater to the crowd that will be impressed by it working just as well as gasoline.

      --
      Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
    7. Re:Shill journalism by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the recommendation - I'll definitely keep my eyes open for that.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    8. Re:Shill journalism by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      The article may be a shill (didn't read), but Maker's is definitely not an advertising-driven product. It's the best bourbon (and possibly the best whisky of any kind) in its price range, IMHO.

    9. Re:Shill journalism by omfgnosis · · Score: 1

      Bulleit is usually priced similarly, and also great.

  13. Bourbon by Alphathon · · Score: 1

    Until I read the comments I thought they meant the other type of Bourbon :/.

  14. Re:Weird coincidences by wagnerrp · · Score: 2

    Turbine engines run at high power, but low torque. The need significant gearing to be useful for automotive operation, and even then, do not spool quickly enough to have acceptable acceleration. Turbines would work fine as a generator in an electric vehicle, but in a hybrid where the engine remains attached to the drive train, you have every bit the same problem.

    Turbines are very compact, and due to their high combustion temperatures, can run on nearly anything. For thermal efficiency, turbines benefit greatly from scale, meaning a small turbine will not be. A small diesel generator is going to operate considerably more efficient than a small turbine. It's a tradeoff whether you have a small, light engine, or a more efficient one.

  15. Re:Weird coincidences by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 2

    The problem with turbines is not high maintenance, but their slow response to changes in power level. Direct drive is basically out. On hybrids, where the turbine can run at its optimal point of operation, it might be more feasible.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  16. Hold the phone... by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    From TFA:

    "A consumer version of the Nilsson concept car was showcased a couple of weeks ago by Japanese automaker Nissan which set the official debut for 2014. At this point the name used for the car is the Nissan Nilsson, but several names are taken into consideration like the Nissan Alky, the Lush or the Inebriator."

    I'm starting to think this is a joke article now.

    1. Re:Hold the phone... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      You mean you didn't suspect anything after reading this:

      "Them two knuckleheads from that TV show American Pickers (Mike Wolfe and Frank Fritz) stopped by here trying to steal from me. Offering me $200 for my old still. Said I had no use for it since making moonshine was illegal. After that smart-mouthed remark, I shot at em," declared Nilsson.

      Since when does anyone in Kentucky care about moonshine being illegal?

      The "I shot them", on the other hand, while believable, just makes you wish he was a better shot, or less into sampling the wares.

  17. Rich Uncle Pennybags! by gabebillings · · Score: 4, Funny

    That dude is driving a full-sized version of the race car from Monopoly.

    1. Re:Rich Uncle Pennybags! by twebb72 · · Score: 1

      That dude is driving a full-sized version of the race car from Monopoly.

      And he's totally loaded!

  18. Want some rhy? 'Course you do! by MaxBooger · · Score: 1

    Want some rhy? 'Course you do!

    Here's to us!

    Who's like us?

    Damn few!

    And they're all dead!

    1. Re:Want some rhy? 'Course you do! by meyekul · · Score: 1

      This guy drinks so much, even his plants are potted!

  19. My math may be off, but... by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

    My math may be off, but burning $100+/gal bourbon in place of $3.00-4.00/gal gasoline doesn't seem to add up.

    1. Re:My math may be off, but... by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Once you've drunk some, the math will become a lot less important.

    2. Re:My math may be off, but... by spidey3 · · Score: 1

      Yes -- and I wonder about the energy used producing that bourbon. I'm willing to be that this baby is not carbon-neutral...

  20. Not cool. by carpefishus · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's alcohol abuse.

    --
    Facts take all of the premium out of arm waving - T. Reynolds
  21. Re:Weird coincidences by Sene · · Score: 1

    Someone featured a thing called a wave disk engine that resembles a turbine in some way :) That was planned to be the future in hybrid vehicles.

  22. In related news... by MalHavoc · · Score: 1

    A Kentucky man drove off the road and flattened a Krystal shortly after gassing himself up, as well.

  23. Yawn by mysidia · · Score: 1

    Wake me up, when you have directions for making a urine-powered car.

    Bourbon is more expensive per BTU than gasoline. And there is a Federal excise tax that applies to distilled liquors such as bourbon. The current rate is $13.50 per proof gallon

    So at approximately 50% ABV, you pay $6.75 per gallon just in taxes to the feds. Probably a couple more $$, so the producer can actually earn some money?

    1. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > Wake me up, when you have directions for making a urine-powered car

      They tried, but Budweiser doesn't have enough alcohol content to burn.

  24. It's not april fools anymore by Layth · · Score: 1

    So why are we still looking at april fools articles?
    Submitter is a subtard

  25. Justified by android.dreamer · · Score: 2

    I hope I get to see this car on the show "Justified"!

  26. Re:Waste of good alcohol by Wumpus · · Score: 4, Funny

    What a waste! I'd be interested if it was "Kentucky man builds Budwiesier powered car" Now that is something we can afford to use a fuel source instead of a drink

    Oh please - not the old "water powered car" hoax again...

  27. Re:Weird coincidences by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 1

    Mandatory nit-pick: Turbines are also internal combustion engines.

    Also, it's been done, although at a larger scale -- the Union Pacific Railroad used to have these beauties, which they liked for exactly the flex-fuel reason you mention. They could run on ultra-cheap heavy diesel oil.

    They weren't especially efficient users of energy, however -- turbines are great at full power, but at low power loads, they still use almost as much fuel per unit time as at full power.

    In a modern hybrid application, where there's a large battery to store energy, it may well work better.

    --
    2*3*3*3*3*11*251
  28. Jack Daniels? by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

    Is Jack Daniels Old No. 7 the Premium fuel?

    1. Re:Jack Daniels? by meyekul · · Score: 1

      Is Jack Daniels Old No. 7 the Premium fuel?

      Jack Daniels is Tennessee whiskey, not bourbon, and any drunk from Kentucky will fight you over that. Old No. 7 isn't exactly premium anyway, try Gentleman Jack or something next time. Jim Beam is probably the most common bourbon, but you'll want something more like Maker's Mark if you're going premium.

    2. Re:Jack Daniels? by omfgnosis · · Score: 1

      Every Tennessee whiskey meets the standards necessary to be called a bourbon; the use of the label "Tennessee whiskey" is a marketing gimmick, nothing more.

  29. Credit where Credit is Due! by eak125 · · Score: 1

    Am I the ONLY one that is pissed off that this movie is being credited to Disney?!!? The movie is a United Artists production filmed in the UK. Disney had NOTHING to do with it's production, filming or casting at all.

    1. Re:Credit where Credit is Due! by MBC1977 · · Score: 1

      In a word: YES.

      --
      Regards,

      MBC1977,
  30. Fake by Arcady13 · · Score: 1

    This story is bullshit.

    http://www.thedailyload.com/2011/04/kentucky-man-invents-car-that-runs-on-bourbon/

    1. Re:Fake by ackatack · · Score: 1

      After following the links through to the original source material, I came to the same conclusion as you. This is totally fake and /. took the bait.

  31. Re:Weird coincidences by Doodlesmcpooh · · Score: 2

    Marine Turbine Technologies got around this problem by having the turbine running full speed the whole time and using a clutch type system to control power delivery. The issue with their motorcycles was the cost as they used turbines from Bell Jet Ranger helicopters and these are still expensive even when they are no longer fit to be used in aircraft.

  32. Wood gas would have been cheaper. by BrookHarty · · Score: 1

    Wood would be cheaper, but not as efficient. Also has a proven track record.

    http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2010/01/wood-gas-cars.html

  33. That's nothing by mapuche · · Score: 1

    My college roomate powered his bycicle with tequila.

  34. Re:Not buying the burbon! by slackzilly · · Score: 1

    He distils Makers Mark?

    --
    - "If one man can create that much hate, you can only imagine how much love we as a togetherness can create."
  35. Old News by Old+Sparky · · Score: 1

    Didn't the band Hayseed Dixie already do this?

  36. Bender's Ancestor by kiehlster · · Score: 1

    So how many greats do you put in front of this grandmother of Bender?

  37. Guys, it's fake by kubernet3s · · Score: 1

    And maybe...5 people have realized this article is from a joke news site? Jesus. If "Nissan Nilsson" and his oddly long quotes about "shooting them two knuckleheads from American Pickers" weren't enough to tip you off, the main page headline "Jack Hanna Fired For Supplying Sheen Tiger Blood" should have been. And this is a really terrible joke news site: it's more like a collation of lame chain emails from your uncle. The hilarious thing is that this has somehow gotten piped to a bunch of actual tech blogs. Eeesh. Stick to the dirty jokes and CGI gifs of fat men dancing, creepy-internet-uncle-Kevin.

  38. In related news by nedlohs · · Score: 1

    President Obama is a Swede.

  39. In other news by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

    In other news: Bourbon prices go up 300%.

    --
    I am not devoid of humor.
  40. At 120 dollars a gallon I don't think so. by REALMAN · · Score: 1

    A fifth (of a gallon) is 24 dollars so a gallon is 120 dollars. How is this ingenuity? It looks more like massive FAIL to me.

    --
    - A Frog in a pond utters an azure cry. -
    1. Re:At 120 dollars a gallon I don't think so. by tsm1mt · · Score: 1

      Because you can get a non-consumption license from BATF for next to nothing, and begin brewing your own alcohol fuel from waste products you already have in your home-still. And then you can skip the $24/gal or $120/gal fuel habit, and run it on... moonshine! You can actually get federal subsidies for manufacturing alky-fuel. OTOH, this is nothing new. Alky powered vehicles have been around for ages. You can buy 55gal drums of race alcohol right next to the 112 octane leaded race fuel at your local speed shop. I have a friend running an alcohol injected blown 460 in a mud-rail with good results. Has been for more than a decade.

  41. Some yes, some no. by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 1

    I looked over the Supermileage site, and looked at a number of the supermileage sites of the individual competitors.

    The link you provide (of the contest) has a picture of one-man "uglycarts". The various competitor sites I looked at showed fiberglass, streamline-bodied one-man vehicles.

    I'm having a bit of trouble reconciling the uglycart image with the streamlined carts. I suspect they are built for different competitions; perhaps ones where speed is not a criteria (and thus, streamlining is not a critical factor).

    And a very great deal more trouble finding any competitor in the Supermileage contest that would be considered "street legal". And "street legal" is a major selling point for major car manufacturers.

    I appreciate the ingenuity and effort that goes into building extraordinary vehicles. But they remain curiosities if they may only operate in specialized environments.

  42. Popular at tailgate parties by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    That's really enough to drive a man to drink...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.