>ITT: WAT R&D Come ye automotive engineers of the future.

>>13837241
what about looping the exhaust through a charcoal filter and an intercooler and back into the intake, would that work? it would keep emissions down and save some weight

File: image.jpg (130KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1500x1000px

>>13837241
I still want to see a manuél CVT.

Just a sliding gear selector where you can choose from infinite gear ratios.

>>13837263
I would actually want this.

>>13837269
What the fuck am I looking at

>>13837272
Hell if i know, some anon posted it as a series of pictures a while back. Maybe he was drunk because he never explained it, i just turned it into a gif.

>>13837272
Man who the fuck knows, it possibly starts off as a dynamite driven engine then gets weird.

File: next_level_performance.jpg (21KB, 437x369px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 437x369px

This shit could actually work. The problem is obviously the heat, but it could be intercooled.

Don't give me that "this would be the same as plugging an extension cord into itself" shit because it's not the same.

File: why not.jpg (83KB, 756x529px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 756x529px

>>13837241

>>13837306
wankel 2.0?

>>13837306
I guess in theory it's possible. Where would the excess air go though? You intake air, combust it, then send it back through. But you are still taking in air via the intake. The engine can only hold so much of it. So if you take in air, and reuse the air that's already been taken in, and are taking in more air it would just stop working after 2 or 3 cycles.

>>13837291
Exhaust gases wouldn't burn like normal air.

File: Untitled.png (9KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 640x400px

>>13837263
Here's an idea of what a shift gate would look like.

I think getting into neutral would require a lockout, so you don't go out of gear when moving for the lowest possible ratio. Neutral would have to let the stick disconnect from the continuously variable mechanism, and move into the mechanism for selecting forward or reverse gear. Reverse could technically have up to as high of a ratio as forward, since the transmission control is the same as forward, but that might be hazardous.

>>13837359
Why do we even bother with clutches? When I shift on a mountain bike it just werks.

Why can't we have that in cars?

>>13837359
Good work. We're goin 50/50 on this, right?

>patent pending

>>13837384
I don't see it working, there would have to be some way to get to the exact ratio you want without under or overshooting in a sketchy situation like high speed twisties, and you have to be moving the stick all the time for maximum effectiveness while accelerating, unlike a regular manual where you get a break between shifts allowing you to do more steering with both hands.

>>13837379
Because your legs can start from 0 RPM, an engine can't.

>>13837359
It's just a second throttle.

>>13837437
Yes, separating the forward/reverse control from the ratio control would work well, but then you have 4 pedals so you better know how to heel-toe.

>>13837404
>Because your legs can start from 0 RPM, an engine can't.

Electric motors can

>>13837263
I think this would work best if the majority of the time it was in automatic mode where it picked the best ratio for you. Then have a manual mode with a standard gear shift that changes the ratio to pre selected positions for each gear.

>>13838498
Honestly you could hook the shifter to the ECU and essentially "L" would seek the highest possible ratio (Redline) for as long as possible. While H would provide the lowest possible ratio.
You would still be able to floor it in H and have it seek redline just like a Better overdrive kick-down.

Having the end user in direct control of the ratios would be a very bad idea.

>>13838537
>Having the end user in direct control of the ratios would be a very bad idea.

If you did it like >>13837359 and had the ability to select from infinite ratios sure, i was suggesting a few pre select ratios just like a modern 5 speed.

>>13837306
Wouldn't the square have to be rounded like the triangle so you can get against the wall for compression?

>no exhaust
>only intake except for the bottom of the housing

>>13838537
>Having the end user in direct control of the ratios would be a very bad idea

It's like you hate fun.

It would be cool if it were smooth so when you git gud at it, you could accelerate hard while sliding the thing and stay in the perfect rev range the entire time.

But 5 or 6 default ones where you get a little "click" or something wouldn't be a bad idea for the normies.

>>13837359
The problem with this is what you said: you need to be in a low ratio to go into neutral. This makes emergency maneuvers like going into neutral if your throttle gets stuck hard/dangerous. Instead, what if you could go into neutral by pulling the stick up? Pulling it up would disengage the forward CVT and allow you to move it sideways and back in to put it in reverse.

>>13838573
I can see what you mean, as finesse would be of key. However things like, Hurst shifters that only move one gear per release handle pull exist because sometimes in the heat of things with all that adrenaline, finesse is just not possible, but such a thing would be impossible because it would be impossible to determine where the ratchet would be on a shifter that doesn't have seperate gears. Maybe have the ability for the user to set ratchet points so they can slam it and have it stop where they want it to? Just an idea.

>>13838573
>It would be cool if it were smooth so when you git gud at it, you could accelerate hard while sliding the thing and stay in the perfect rev range the entire time.

Except a computer would be better at this than a human driver could ever be. Maybe you could make some argument for track use, but for straight acceleration the computer will always be better.

I'd be more apt to set it up so the gas pedal controls the gear ratio, maybe with a dial on the console to control "aggressiveness" (what RPM the engine holds at).

>>13838850
>maybe with a dial on the console to control "aggressiveness"
So essentially like an auto with a "sport mode" but in variable form?

>>13838870
Pretty much, Assuming an automatic's drive mode can be selected on the fly. I'd want to be able to adjust the engine speed even with the gas pedal down.

>>13838475
Cars with electric motors dont have a gearbox

>>13839631
mostly because they haven't made one strong enough yet

>>13839649
Do you seriously think the issue is weak transmissions? What do you semis and drag racing cars use?

An automatic that works like automatics in racing games do. Never drops out of the power band unless you're sitting still.

>>13839679
Dunno if even one of those things could take 600+ Nm from a dead stop, which is what killed the prototypes on the Tesla.

>>13839699
There are manual transmissions that can handle well over 600 N*m (450 ft*lbs). These are modified or built versions of factory transmissions as well, not custom designed. I don't know how tesla could fuck up making a strong gearbox.

File: Snapchat-7798598740310207586.jpg (439KB, 1080x1776px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 1080x1776px

Drew this one up myself.

>>13839699
If they couldn't, they would explode every time they do an uphill start. Do you have any idea how much torque trucks have?

>>13839768
The turbos in the direct exhaust injection just compress the exhaust even more after it comes out of the engine.

>>13839699
>from a dead stop
lol tesla can't even implement a lowpass filter. the apple of cars for sure, for sure

File: 45997.gif (37KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 300x300px

Here we go, one for throttle, one for CVT ratio.

>>13840081
You still need to steer, are you going to put that on a swivel mount or something?

>>13840081

It would be for your feet!

>>13840099
It just replaces the shifter, you autist.

>>13840115
Did you work at Nintendo in the 90's by any chance?

>>13840099
>he can't steer with one hand
ayy lmao