Jaguar has takan the wraps off a range-extended two-seater e-supercar capable of a top speed of 205mph and a 0-60mph sprint of 3.4s. Maximum torque is 1180lb ft (1600Nm). All this from a car that releases CO2 at a rate of just 28g/km. Jaguar C-X75 All of that comes from the two 94bhp (70kW) petrol-burning micro-turbines the …
Where do I sign up?
Oh, and is there enough room in there to stuff a supercharged V8 into it instead of all that elastictrickery stuff?
Paris, I'm on the waiting list..
E-Type rump aside, it looks like a Lotus
and the powerplant is pure fiction. There's a definitely a market for high-end hybrid supercars: witness Porsche's 918 concept car that stirred up enough interest to take it into limited production, but without realistic production-ready tech the whole exercise is no different to the 50's nuclear-powered concept cars that never saw production either...
Paint it red and it's a Ferrari.
... paint it pink - that front three-quarter view looks link the PantherMobile
Or at least, if the Panther was chasing parked cars and got shortened a teensy bit
So what's the top speed when the batteries have run out?
Looks like there isn't enough turbine power to max out the motors so I'm guessing performance with batteries offline is somehwhere around 120Mph & 0-60 in 9s?
Stop - and recharge.
My tongue is hanging out and I'm salivating.
(though I'm not 100% convinced by the design of the nose, the rest is damned sexy).
What exactly is the point of adding weight for a little battery that only drives a few miles? Just get over the electric car PR crap and focus on making more efficient combustion engines.
I think the point is
That this is a supercar that does >40mpg. At least it might if they get the technology up and running.
It's not brilliant in the real world, but it does compare very well with other cars of this ilk which manage low 20's at best.
ohhhhhh - got a semi
When the battery runs out ...
... it's going to slow down a bit!
Two 94KW generators are going to struggle with providing power to four 195KW motors, and recharging the battery at the same time.
Still, the sound of turbine engines might actually be even better than a V8 or V12.
Why bother with the battery?
You say the micro-turbines power the car when the battery is empty and go on to say the car will do 560 miles on a tank of petrol, or approx. 90 miles/litre. Why bother with the extra weight of the battery if you can get that sort of mileage?
Though I am a little confused as to how two 70 kW power sources are supposed to supply four 145kW motors. I suspect the 0-60 figure is not quite so impressive in this mode of operation.
"Though I am a little confused as to how two 70 kW power sources are supposed to supply four 145kW motors"
They clearly can't - at least in full. Clearly any such car on turbin alone will "only" get 140kW, but I suspect that will be enough to get the things to maybe 120-130mph on a flat road, which is way faster than the UK speed limit. Anybody thinking they can run at 150mph for hours on end on a cross-continental journey is going to be disappointed. However, just how many times is this even possible. Even on the German autobahn's there are lots of controlled sections, there is other traffic not to mention the sheer insanity of passing trucks and cars with a closing speed of 80Mph or not.,
No, the sensible way to view this is that the batteries will act as a reserviour for relatively short periods of acceleration. It is not a Le Mans racer.
Re: Why bother with the battery?
Because the motors don't draw the full 290kW all the time.
In this mode you're using the battery as a booster to provide extra power in short bursts --- i.e., when you put your foot down. When you lift your foot again, the load drops and the battery recharges. This means that you can use a much smaller engine than you'd normally need, as you only need to generate average power, not peak power. Plus you get efficiency benefits, as since the engine's not connected directly to the wheels you're not crippling it by forcing it to run at a range of revs: the engine gets to run at the speed it wants to run at, regardless of how fast the car's moving.
The point of all this is that you end up with a car that behaves like an electric car, with the simplified transmission and awesome torque that you get with such things, but with the range of a fuel-based car. It's something I've been waiting for for ages.
milage actually sucks
Please recheck your arithmetic 560/60 = 9.33mi/l, or 6.66 L/100Km - about the same as my 4cyl Corolla on the highway.
De ja vue?
Is it me or does it bear an uncanny resembalance to the XJ220?
Still wouldn't say no (to either)
Squash the F-Type lights out a bit and graft on a set of comically fashionable MASSEEV hegzorts instead of the twin circular set up and the F-Type style has been brought forward (and away from cloning an Aston Martin too).
Mind you, there's also a likeness back a few more years...
All good stuff!
Not really into cars...
But that looks stunning.
Efficiency / low emissions...
I presume that a lot of the efficiency and low emissions come from the petrol driven generators being able to run at a steady rate, not having to rev up an down madly to keep up with a driver's requirements?
Now *that's* what I'm talking about!
Yes, it's a concept car, yes, it'll be eye-wateringly expensive if it ever does get to production, but holy crap, that's one stunning implementation of a series hybrid eco-car.
Practicality vs Tesla
Surely this concept is hugely preferable to a Tesla given the bad experiences that some of the testers have had on even quite modest trips with running out of battery charge.
Of course this thing is hugely heavier (probably), faster (at least on top speed) and is undoubtedly going to cost a lot more than the Tesla, but if it can be made to work, then you could even imagine using this on a long journey. The turbines no doubt cost a lot, but then so do the batteries in a Tesla.
There is also, of course, not comparison between the range under electric power and that of the fuel tank. The latter is simply a convenience issue for most people of how frequently you have to fill up (I don't see this thing crossing trackless deserts). The range of a purely electric car is a completely different issue as with contentional batteries you are in for a very long wait of many hourse before you can set off again, and that's assuming you can find a suitable high-power electric supply.
Excellent work. Light spirit burning turbines have got to be the most future-proof power plants at the moment. Just wondering though as they can't be all that heavy, why they have evidently chosen to mount them behind the seats. The nose with that huge air intake looks a more obvious position.
All that and turbines too?
Are they going to make it? When can I buy one?
I'll even clear my boxful of winning lottery tickets and collection of signed photographs of Satan's skiing holiday out of my unobtanium garage to make room for it.
That's beautiful. They should make it.
It must have crossed their minds.
The steering wheel's on the wrong side.
Given the power deficit from the generators, it can obviously only sustain its top speed for a very limited period of time. However, in normal use, they will adequately keep the Li-Ion batteries topped up so that full power is available for acceleration.
The limited top-end endurance may make this a poor choice of track car, but as a shit-on-all-comers road car it would be something else.
Let's hope the turbines produce a sound more akin to a Vulcan than a Dyson...
For the confused, 4 x 195kW is only the peak output
as you may have noticed, you don't drive your car absolutely flat-out all the time: you only need big gobs of power when accelerating. The rest of the time you cruise along using very little.
This drivetrain is pretty much identical to that used in the Chevy Volt, but with turbines instead of the Volt's reciprocating engine.
Beautiful - I want RHD please!
Micro turbine generators - very good idea
Don't want to spoil anyone's day (honest, I don't), but Jaguar Concept Cars have a habit of never seeing the light of day. You will *occasionally* find a shape or curve on a future production model, but everything else is just vapourware.
(yes, yes, I know - it's only a "concept". But by the same token, I can come up with a concept car that runs on carrot juice and does 300mph. Doesn't mean it will make it into production)
Now that's what I'm torqueing about
From the outset, it looks like Jaguar are putting another, expensive complication in by getting rid of mechanical tranmission - but that's not the case.
The truth of the matter is, when you drive your bog-standard Astra/Golf/Fiesta/Porsche Carrera, your engine is continually changing revs as you try to charge through dying seconds of greent traffic light, and typically have to slow down because the bugger's changed red at the last minute.
Now, the efficiency and torque of all combustion engines drastically change with RPM (revs) - which means it spends most of its time operating suboptimally (for fuel efficiency or maximum torque). This is inescapable with mechnical transmission, due to discrete gearing and a physical connection - the clutch.
With electric tranmission however, there's nothing to stop engines turning over at constant RPM - for maximum effiency, or maximum torque - whilst the speed of the car changes. Which is why, even without the batteries, the generators make a lot of sense.
That is why competition cars have so many gears. Gas flow through the engine is different at different engine speeds. Optimum valve timings at one speed may be very inefficient at others. Designing an engine that will run at a single specified rpm makes it very efficient at that speed.
You can get a more efficient vehicle if you control the vehicle speed by variable transmission alone. If you can also iron out the variable power requirements of the vehicle (by electrical accumulators for instance). you only need a motor to supply the average power requirement which would be orders of magnitude smaller than that required to be able to supply the maximum power required.
Essentially this is electric transmission with power smoothing.
Could I have the bill please?
It appears that both my wife and I have just come.
Interesting how someone seems to have gone through this comments thread and downvoted everyone who says they want one.
Still, it's a life eh?
I noticed that
Maybe they work for BMW.
You know that employee that really knows how to make their employee's feel valued. So valued they walked up and down the production line key'ing cars when they sacked them all with one days notice.
Or could it be somebody that works for mercedes-benz that caring company that gets all their cars built in South Africa.
Or maybe just some twat that doesn't fink before they do somefink!!
Must be pretty sad to downmark comments like that
Remeber the Deltics
This kind of idea is not too new, there used to be railway locos that were diesel - electric for just the same reasons, keeping the revs constant for efficency and oodles of torque for accelerating. We used them a lot on the East Coast mineline before electrification I think. I think also that the 125 HSTs were diesel - lectric too, great locos!
Love the idea of using micro-turbines to drive the gennies and it might not be too expensive to impliment as some would think. There are quite a few model aircraft turbine engines out there nowdays, it doen't take a great leap to see some of these designs being scaled up to provide generation capabilities for vehicles. I'm actually suprised that I haven't seen this idea before.
As for the bodywork, this is a matter of individual taste - but it's damn sexy!
Be interested to see what Clarkson and his merry men make of this ...8-)
Straight Diesel Electric
I think you mean Deltics.
Both Deltics and HSTs are straight Diesel Electrics.
Case 1) 2 x Napier D18/25 connected to 2 DC generators which drive 6 traction motors with various amouts of field weakening to go faster, they were basically full power from about 30 to 100 when they throttled off. When built were worlds most powerful Diesel loco.
Case 2) 2 power cars, each with a 2250bhp engine (Was Paxman Valenta V12s now a mix of MTU and newer Paxman 12VP185) driving an alternator, I don't think they use field weakening. But they can get to nearly 150mph when derestricted, also in Guiness records for speed.
Like all UK Diesel Electrics (except the Hayabusa experiment) they are straight Diesel Electric using electricity for transmission. They use field weakening as a sort of gearing to allow the motors to rev faster, (look up back EMF)
I concede to an expert
I hope there is a red button under a yellow & black striped flip-up cap...
...for the afterburners!
One of those photos...
...makes it look a bit like 'Max' out of Flight of the Navigator.
mpg / battery questions
@Keith Williams: I work it out as about 42mpg which, whilst not that good in terms of really efficient cars is about twice what you would expect from a car with similar performance (and obviously weight - jags are not built with sublety in mind).
RE: "Why have a battery at all" type questions: I see teh argument with regards to long trips but if you can manage your daily commute in under 60ish miles then you would just be using battery and so would never need to burn the old fossils - I assume you can charge the battery from the mains but even if you can't then it would be trivial for Jag to make it so you can.
RE: Jag never build the concepts: Sadly that is true. However assuming the technology is actually acheivable rather than just pie in the sky wishful thinging then soon you could end up with an affordable family car that performs well, runs solely on mains power for the school run but seamlessly can be used for long trips to see Granny or to pop to the country. The technology here seems to my non-expert eyes not much different to what would happen if you added a mains charged battery to one of the diesel electric powerplants that have been running trains for the last 50 years.
However, having seen the pictures of the concept Jag, I to have suffered a "crisis".
Here it is, note that Brush prototypes usually have bird of prey names.
- It's true, the START MENU is coming BACK to Windows 8, hiss sources
- Xmas Round-up Ten top tech toys to interface with a techie’s Christmas stocking
- How UK air traffic control system was caught asleep on the job
- Pic NASA Mars tank Curiosity rolls on old WET PATCH, sighs, sniffs for life signs
- Google embiggens its fat vid pipe Chromecast with TEN new supported apps