Why not just use gas?

[n2zon]

Originally Posted by RVtravelz

X2…. I suspect it’s that way on purpose.

I suspect one of his points might have been that the levels of complexity for modern gas and diesel engines are just not that very different. In fact, it seems quite possible gas engines are more complicated on the average.

[Big-Foot]

Originally Posted by hohenwald48

And the point of your posting a BTU content chart is ?

When it comes to internal combustion engines - it takes “X” amount of energy to do “Y” amount of work in “Z” amount of time.
Energy is the product of heat.
Heat is measured in BTU.

You “can” do the same amount of work with gas as you do with diesel, but it is going to cost you a greater volume of fuel and probably more time.

So the economics based on the value of heat alone are clear.

———— on another note ————

Never say Never. Because Never can be a very long time
Battery technology is getting better and less expensive day by day. The use of batteries for electric propulsion alone will be with us to one degree or another for a very long time. Ultra and Super Capacitors will be folded into the mix and will exponentially reduce our time to charge back up.
Resistance to Electric Propulsion for our daily use vehicles appears to be futile. I suspect that fuel will remain available for our “legacy” vehicles, but will most likely be taxed more and more heavily until that pain is no longer bearable.
————
Have some great holidays gang!
Christmas for us here...

[bill_delong]

Originally Posted by RM Art

Guestimate #'s [round number$]...

Gasoline Engine - Initial cost: $5,000

Diesel Engine - Initial cost: $30,000

Gasoline Engine - Annual maintenance cost: $250

Diesel Engine - Annual maintenance cost: $2,500

Gasoline Engine - Rebuild cost: $3,500

Diesel Engine - Rebuild cost: $20,000

Again I mention... Big bad diesels for big bad loads. / Not so big bad gassers for not so big bad loads. Match the engine to needs apparent. The bigger you go the more cost you incur. Simple as that!

I was almost suckered into getting a DP myself, but none were available and I had to "settle" for a gasser MH which isn't nearly as bad as the DP Fanboi's have claimed.

I am a full timer and I spend roughly 3-5 hours a week driving my RV which is 5/168 = 3% for the inconvenience of slightly louder engine compartment.

I couldn't be happier with the $100K+ I saved on the gasser for the up front cost. I had planned to upgrade to a DP down the road, but the more time I spend with the gasser, I just don't see how a DP is worth it when the depreciation is far greater on the DP.

[bross]

Originally Posted by bill_delong

I was almost suckered into getting a DP myself, but none were available and I had to "settle" for a gasser MH which isn't nearly as bad as the DP Fanboi's have claimed.

I am a full timer and I spend roughly 3-5 hours a week driving my RV which is 5/168 = 3% for the inconvenience of slightly louder engine compartment.

I couldn't be happier with the $100K+ I saved on the gasser for the up front cost. I had planned to upgrade to a DP down the road, but the more time I spend with the gasser, I just don't see how a DP is worth it when the depreciation is far greater on the DP.

Where do you spend your time? We really liked our F-53 based Canyon Star toy hauler...





as our prime reason for owning an RV is to haul our two motorcycles to warmer places so we can escape our Canadian winters and keep riding. But living out west and traversing the coast and rocky mountains regularly, sometimes a couple times a day got real old, real fast.

Had we lived in the middle of the country, or out east, we'd still own that RV, but living where we do, no way.

[Jaxon]

Originally Posted by bross

I don't think pure electric will ever be viable for RVs. As a daily commuter, sure electric can work.

I would think a better solution for RVs, especially large class As, would be a diesel / electric hybrid. Small, efficient diesel engine to power the electric motors and charge batteries. It's been working for decades to power trains. Zero range anxiety, uses existing infrastructure, no waiting to charge...

The whole going pure electric is politically driven, it's nothing to do with being "better". But this isn't the forum for *that* discussion.

.
Well actually, as the technology develops, electric RV's will too - heck, there's even a small electric plane that's been developed ('tho I wouldn't want to be the test pilot on that!).

Never underestimate the advancement of technology! The move to solar/electric power is as a result of the realization that oil is a finite resource - we have huge pockets of oil being sucked dry.

We'd better have a plan "B" working for when that happens or it becomes too expensive to pump anymore.

[RM Art]

Originally Posted by RVtravelz

X2…. I suspect it’s that way on purpose.

I suspect you suspect correctly. Read his last paragraph - on his post #160.

Different brains flow on different energy paths... yours and mine are pathed such as we've spent years [decades] building them into following; as result from their upbringing during youthful years and their pre determined "genetic" origination and orientation.

Injuneer's purposefully somewhat garbled retrodict was relatively easily understandable by me. Not so much by others.

Then there's Timothy Leary: "You're only as young as the last time you changed your mind." and... "Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition." Think about it!

[WagonMaster]

Originally Posted by Jaxon

.
Well actually, as the technology develops, electric RV's will too - heck, there's even a small electric plane that's been developed ('tho I wouldn't want to be the test pilot on that!).

Never underestimate the advancement of technology! The move to solar/electric power is as a result of the realization that oil is a finite resource - we have huge pockets of oil being sucked dry.

We'd better have a plan "B" working for when that happens or it becomes too expensive to pump anymore.

I can't see total electric vehicles becoming a reality. I do think something will come along, because technology is amazing.

As far as oil being finite....there are huge reserves of crude in the Montana region that would dwarf all of the middle eastern oil reserves. We're not going to run out of oil. Electric vehicles for the majority of folks that live in the city and just use their vehicle for running around town are perfect. So, I would think that if the Government would just concentrate on the small commuter electric vehicle market we could be better off for the environment. Big trucks, light duty pickups, farmers, etc., should be allowed to use these diesel vehicles without all of the problem causing crap they throw on them.
There is a practical solution to air pollution that can be developed without taking a shotgun approach to the problem. Of course, all IMO.

[R_2ndWind]

Originally Posted by Old-Biscuit

I love the smell of diesel in the morning

[picker]

Originally Posted by Conchasjim

Zapp, I don't understand this, "Rolling Coal" bull$hit. What's the purpose? What does it prove? Looks like a poorly tuned engine with an idiot for a driver to me.

It's a bubba thing.........used on protesters he doesn't like.

[trikebubble]

Originally Posted by bross

Where do you spend your time? We really liked our F-53 based Canyon Star toy hauler...





as our prime reason for owning an RV is to haul our two motorcycles to warmer places so we can escape our Canadian winters and keep riding. But living out west and traversing the coast and rocky mountains regularly, sometimes a couple times a day got real old, real fast.

Had we lived in the middle of the country, or out east, we'd still own that RV, but living where we do, no way.

Good looking biker models there. That's a for sure.

[bill_delong]

Originally Posted by bross

Where do you spend your time? We really liked our F-53 based Canyon Star toy hauler...

as our prime reason for owning an RV is to haul our two motorcycles to warmer places so we can escape our Canadian winters and keep riding. But living out west and traversing the coast and rocky mountains regularly, sometimes a couple times a day got real old, real fast.

Had we lived in the middle of the country, or out east, we'd still own that RV, but living where we do, no way.

That's a nice setup!

We just started full time about 8 weeks ago from Texas and currently are in Arkansas so we've had our fair share climbing some mountain passes pulling our Chevy Colorado Z71 without a hint of temp nor brake issues, though our M&G Air Brakes allow us to stop faster than if we weren't flat towing anything behind our V-10 gasser, ha!

Our plan is to hit Florida by Christmas and then take I-10 to SoCal for the remainder of winter, then continue to chase 70° up the west coast after that. Eventually we'll hit all 50 states, with Texas being our home base for medical appointments, etc.

In the meantime, I will continue to weigh the pro's and con's but so far Gas is the clear winner based on my personal observations when you factor the cost savings.... if money were no object, then yes I'd probably go the Diesel route.

For those interested in electric options, here's some companies to keep a close eye on:
https://www.greenbiz.com/article/8-e...ies-watch-2020

Which makes me question how long these electric systems can go off the grid?
Will they come with a generator that requires fuel?
I've got a range of 500 miles per tank on my V10, what will be the range on the e-RV's?

[RM Art]

Sandia Nat Labs: Battery Tech improvements take time to accomplish... read on for insight to research.

BTW - One of my organizations had CRADA with Sandia. Company of mine is planning to enact another CRADA in near future. Neither of my CRADA have to do with batteries. That said, I do keep up on many of Sandia's projects. Previously, my company sponsored and I co-chaired day long scientist and engineer meeting at one of Sandia's main facilities, Livermore CA.

Sandia Labs News Release - December 2, 2021 8:12 am

New testing method yields pathway to better, longer-lasting batteries
LIVERMORE, Calif.

Using a microscopic method for measuring electrical potential, a team of scientists at Sandia National Laboratories may have discovered how to make a longer-lasting, more efficient battery.

The team of Elliot Fuller, Josh Sugar and Alec Talin detailed their findings in an article published Oct. 19 in American Chemical Society Energy Letters.

“One of the challenges with solid-state batteries is that at the boundaries between different parts of the battery — a cathode and a layer of ion-conducting electrolyte, let’s say — something interferes with the flow of electrons,” Talin said.

Team at Sandia National Laboratories used Kelvin probe force microscopy to locate places where electron flows get stuck, potentially leading to engineering longer-lasting, more efficient batteries.

Solid-state batteries employ solid electrolytes instead of electrochemical gels and liquids and generally power small electronics. Most researchers suspected that there was a loss of voltage or electrical potential at interfaces within the battery, but not which interface was responsible for most of the impedance in the battery. The team started work five years ago to get some clarity.

“There were two main motivations for this. The first was fundamental: we want to have good models for batteries that we can use to develop better materials,” Talin explained. “The second thing was to figure out how we can engineer the interfaces to make them less impeding. In our case, it really has to do a lot with how fast lithium ions can move in the Si anode used in the study.”

They turned to Kelvin probe force microscopy, which measures electrical potential on a surface, and while using instruments in new ways is certainly not something Sandia is unaccustomed to, what the team did next no one had ever done, Talin said.

“The voltage between battery electrodes is relatively straightforward for researchers to calculate and measure,” Fuller said. “However, where that voltage drops within the battery layers has remained a mystery. It’s critical to understand where the voltage drops, as it is intimately tied to the performance-limiting resistances. Kelvin probe force microscopy is a technique that finally enabled us to measure where these drops are occurring.”

“This technique has been used for many years to measure local voltage, with people using it on parts of a battery. It was difficult to interpret because it was not a full functioning battery,” Talin continued. “We cut the battery in half longitudinally, with the elements stacked like a layer cake. You can still charge it and discharge it, so we did this measurement over the entire battery.”

The team found that a large part of the electrical potential of the battery was getting lost at the boundary between the electrolyte and the anode (negative) terminal.

“Most people thought the biggest change was going to happen at the interface between the cathode (positive) and electrolyte,” he added. “Understanding the measurements took a lot of time. We wanted to validate the data by measuring where the lithium ions were at different states during charging.”

To accomplish this, the team worked with researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology Center for Neutron Research using a technique called neutron depth profiling that can measure where lithium ions are at a particular moment. Now that NDP has confirmed the Kelvin probe force microscopy data, the team is looking to apply this methodology to a host of technologies that will benefit the nation.

“We’re going to use this technique to look at other batteries as well as other solid-state electrical systems, like the electrochemical random access memory invented at Sandia,” Talin said. “This will allow us to develop devices that operate like we would like them to operate.”

The work was done in collaboration with NIST, Naval Research Labs, University of Maryland College Park and Brown University. It was sponsored through Sandia’s Laboratory Directed Research and Development Lithium Battery Grand Challenge and the Nanostructures for Electrical Energy Storage Energy Frontiers Research Center as well as the Platforms core program, both led by the University of Maryland and sponsored by the DOE Office of Basic Energy Sciences.
________________________________________
Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory operated by National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration. Sandia Labs has major research and development responsibilities in nuclear deterrence, global security, defense, energy technologies and economic competitiveness, with main facilities in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Livermore, California.

[HenryH001]

I use the transporter from the Starship Enterprise to get beamed wherever I go. It’s a lot more expensive however it’s much faster.

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted by n2zon

I suspect one of his points might have been that the levels of complexity for modern gas and diesel engines are just not that very different. In fact, it seems quite possible gas engines are more complicated on the average.

Possible, I guess. The complexity isn't really the problem, it's the cost. For the price of a bad exhaust filter-or the result of a few ounces of water in the fuel tank-I can put a rebuilt engine in a gasser!