Unfortunately he passed away a few years ago. His company still exists and the technology is in use for power plants suitable for use in the less developed part of the world.
@@6killer426 NO, Ted Pritchard never submitted any of his engines to independent third-party laboratory testing. Teds estimates are extremely vague and pure speculative... he also claimed it could run on a variety of fuels but all of his demonstrations were using Kerosene.
@@SorrowAvenue The Pritchard Steam Car Company was an investment scam, Ted Pritchard imbezzled most of the investments leaving the company to file for bankruptcy. Australian taxpayers were defrauded of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
@KrazeeCain You'd probably be interested in having a look at the Cyclone Steam Engine. They signed a contract with Rathyeon to build their 100 HP, 850 ft lb engine back in April, have contracts with a few other smaller companies and are planning on expanding their factory. I think electric cars will have their place but I think that steam is the future. We'll never see an excavator, semi or a mining truck run on electric and if you want those to run clean then steam is the way to go.
During the 2nd Fuel Crisis in 1979 there was renewed interest in Pritchard's steam car, but he was running out of money by this stage. The cause was taken up by Today Tonight in Brisbane, who started a public appeal. But the money was donated in the belief that Pritchard would move his operation to Queensland, while Pritchard believed the money would be better spent staying in Melbourne. So the whole deal fell through.
My father, Gavin Bell, helped the Pritchards do their patent drawings and I can remember riding in the Falcon, and a Stanley Steamer that they had around Caulfield. They had a flash boiler that would develop working pressure very quickly. A pity it never took off. Peter Bell.
a real pity - I have tracked down the owners of the patents and am approaching them to sound out if they would be interested in licencing them for vehicle use again - just so brilliant to see a way out of oil..
+Simon Hosking *You won't find any legitimate automobile manufacturers interested in steam propulsion... especially considering a modern car is 400-500% more fuel efficient than Teds antiquated design.*
yes but most of them are fuckwits - the planet could do with a little humility - I'm sure there'd be plenty of private people quite happy to honor teds designs and take them to another level
@wilhelm sallsten *The disadvantage is higher production and maintenance costs along with higher fuel consumption, lower performance and higher emissions.* *The Pritchard Steam Car company went bankrupt without ever producing a single car... he left with the cash and left investors holding the bag...*
@kdc43 It had a "flash" steam generator (boiler). If you turned the ignition as you got into the car, by the time you had done up your seat belt and looked in the mirror it had a full head of steam. Because steam engines develop maximum torque at 0 revs, no gear box is needed.
Steam trucks had so much torque they churned up roads. Stanley steamers had flash boilers, so no delay. Steam has come a long way, smaller version can be used as range extenders in electric hybrids.
WHY ARE WE NOT FUNDING THIS!? With today's advancements in materials and machining and computer control and stuffs - I would totally buy a steam car. Everything is possible!
+I967 Steam cars have been obsolete for a 100 years now.. You cant apply modern design and technology to a system that is fundamentally less efficient by the existing laws of thermodynamics. No, its not... you cannot defy the laws of physics
I would love to see a steam car too, but it's difficult to make a steam car with similar performance to an internal combustion car. Though it's possible in theory, in practice it will take a lot of work. Developing internal combustion engines is simpler since the technology is mature and already works well.
The patented boiler does not use an accumulator, steam chest or 'pressure' cylinder but rather is a 'flash' boiler. Irt is rather a 'steam generator'. If the mechanical power of the engine is not needed, the small and highly efficient steam generator can be used directly to produce either wet or dry steam, and thus deliver sterilizing, distillation, process heat, hot water and space heating depending on how the steam/water circuit is configured.
*Ted Pritchard is the kind of bogan that reinforces all of the those negative stereotypes about Australians being criminals and degenerate alcoholics.*
I do need to take the time to look up that stuff. So far the only thing I haven't figured out is how too keep it useable in the winter time and a rapid heat system, but I have some ideas.
@KrazeeCain jax is right, about steam engines not doing, 'recirc'... when you look at the videos of steam transport trucks, there's always a big steam cloud pouring out. in places with free water available in large amounts -everywhere-, they can be used like that, but take ten minutes to toss the hose into a river, fill the tank, stow the hose before going again, makes delivery times rise lots. with 50%+ condensing, that will mean a tiny tank can last days, but condensers are heavy too.
Just for laughs I read a lot of the comments. As the intelligent folks here point out, a steam engine (no matter how much technology you throw at it) is not as efficient, safe or practical as a modern ICE. Yes, Mr Pritchard put a steam engine in a Falcon. And he made all kinds of efforts to have it put into production, but an internet search finds nothing that shows there was an improvement over ICE engines available when Mr Pritchard was working on his engines. There is no conspiracy by the automobile makers or oil companies to prevent production of a steam powered car. You may think the Big 3 have squashed the development of steam power, but actually they have researched it and it just does not prove to be better than ICE. If steam powered cars were such a good idea you can bet any of the Japanese companies would have put it to use, as would the car companies in India and China. Many high tech companies and research universities have tried to develop a modern, efficient, safe, and low maintenance steam engine for cars, but they have yet to produce anything equal or better than modern ICE. I admire Mr Pritchard's efforts and those of others exploring engine technology, but what we need most is a big improvement in battery technology, because electric motors are the future of transport power, not ICE or steam. And thanks to paulaus for posting this video....led to some interesting research. 👍
Battery-powered electric propulsion might not be the ultimate solution. As long as lithium is used, it is not recycled properly and its useful life cannot be extended. Bolivia and Argentina concentrate (supply) 91% of the world demand for this mineral. And producing it at the pace that would be needed would destroy the ecosystems of those countries.
@@IRNoahBody Steam may seem simple to understand for those with limited education... but it is far more complex and has several inherent efficiency disadvantages that most people don't have any clue about.
@KrazeeCain Most steam engine designs do not recirc their steam just like when they were new. And ofcourse theres heating the boiler of water. I am designing steam engine setup myself and a few of the main problems I've ust about solved is A compact boiler Another way of rapidly heating the water Reusing spent steam which helps out a small boiler and increases mpg like the return line in most automotive fuel systems. I tried PepsiRefresh under Project Steampunk to no avail.
I see arguments about efficiency going on, but wouldn't steam have an edge simply because there's a more complete burn of the fuel? Obviously you need good insulation too, but I know we've come a long way in that department also.
It has more to do with heat loss not complete burning of the fuel air mixture... Even if you could achieve 99.9% complete combustion of the air-fuel mixture...? The steam engine will always lose more heat in the Carnot cycle... so it will always be less fuel efficient than a typical ICE or gas turbine.
The real doktorbimmer I don't know much about steam engines, but tell me if someone's already done this: run the steam exhaust over a heat exchanger for the water going into the boiler. Or maybe a steam bubbler into a main unpressurized tank
Nabre Labre Its called an Feedwater Heater or Injection Water Preheater... they have been around for a couple hundred years. There is also exhaust flue gas heat exchangers such as the 'Green's' "economizer" Both preheaters and economizers are most effective on and typically found on large stationary powerplants due to their large size, weight and extra expense.
The real doktorbimmer The theoretical efficiency of the steam engine (Rankine cycle) is greater than that of the petrol/diesel cycle (otto). This is why steam engines are used in power stations today, however you have a point in that small reciprocating steam engines used in steam cars usually have a lower efficiency than ICE's (about 5-10% less). Even so, who would care as the price of steam fuel is much lower than that of petrol (plus you can use pretty much any fuel you like) and thus the operating costs would be lower.
Chali Chaligha WRONG.... you just got an 'F' sir.... We compare all HEAT ENGINES by using the CARNOT CYCLE FORMULA. The steam engine can NEVER be as thermally fuel efficient as an ICE... NEVER.
@Phi1point62 Thank You for sharing that with me, I've heard of cyclone before, but haven't checked on them for a while. Good to hear that they're making progress. If they offered it as a crate engine, I'd almost certainly buy one. (as long as the price is reasonable) You're spot on with electrics, they're best suited for small cars in urban environments. I think everyone is making a mistake by trying to find one single replacement. ICE's, EV's, and Steam all have their place.
+Autistic Boy *_The Second Law of Thermodynamics_** is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it.*
*Steam engines are **_LESS_** environmentally friendly... because they waste more fuel and have a much larger carbon footprint than internal combustion cars.*
@@doktorbimmerFuel burnt in a furnace is more efficient than a running ICE all day long. The inefficiency comes with the second process of heating the water to get the steam before the work occurs
York motor museum in Western Australia has a steam car but not this one. Last time i saw it it looked like a beach buggy with a large radiator to recover the water. Its has been a while since I saw it so might pay to check with them if they still have it.
After Ted Pritchard embezzled all of the investments his company filed bankruptcy and both cars were seized and sold for scrap metal to repay creditors.
Idk the amount of land you need to feed a horse is more than you need to grow biofuel to do the same work, mainly because a horse consumes energy if it's in the stable doing nothing
The steam engine does not produce Co2. It's powered using hot water in a boiler. Unless you believe that water, a natural element found in the wild, is somehow detrimental to our environment, your comment doesn't prove anything. But sure, go buy a horse-drawn carriage. Let us know how that's working out for you. Most of us are already passed the 19th century.
look up the doble steam car it was the furthest advanced steam car using a flash boiler technology , it was ready to run on a cold day in less than 30 seconds...look it up on jay lenos page ... amazing machine
+WoodenTreeMan Well you would be very wrong sir, The Doble produced a very unimpressive 150 horsepower and barely got much over 8 MPG.. Even a piece of shit Hyundai Elantra would "blow the doors off" the Doble up a steep highway grade and get 400% better fuel mileage.. There is a good reason why these dinosaurs were obsolete on arrival... steam cars were already obsolete by 1925.
WoodenTreeMan Yup and could go over 1,000 miles ... with a electric boiler system of today's technology if only they weren't so complicated... there only true fault sadly
+Autistic Boy *Unfortunately public education produces functionally illiterate imbeciles like you that think that the Rankine cycle can achieve higher efficiency...*
The real doktorbimmer True, but you'd have that anyway. I was just contemplating improving on heating of the water. Using a turbines seem to be the way to go, as with certain large ships and fueled power plants.
PacificCircle1 Yes but the problem with the efficiency is also related to scale, you can reach the thermal fuel efficiency of an ICE with a steam turbine, but only when you are dealing with systems in the 100,000 to 1 million horsepower and greater size range. Its not even cost effective unless you are burning a cheap fuel source like coal or nuclear... All new ship are Diesel... why? because even at 100,000 horsepower a Diesel is significantly more fuel efficeint than any available steam turbine. Now if we jump back to the automobile engine with an average output between 100-200 hp with the steam turbine you are looking at less than half the fuel efficiency of a typical gasoline fueled Otto engine, the is just no way to compete with the thermal fuel efficiency of the ICEs.
PacificCircle1 Nuclear powered ships are a very unique in terms of fuel efficiency... considering that an atomic ship reactor can operate up to 20 years or more without refueling there is much less demand for thermal efficiency. I'm not a specialist in nuclear engineering but from the data I have seen it appears that thermal fuel efficiency is very low especially for the systems like the ones found in submarines that are realitively small scale and that are closed secondary cooling circuits. A termendous amount of heat energy is wasted through these types of secondary condensers as they must maintain vacuum and not vent any water vapor or gasses.
The statement made at about the 1:30 mark about a boiler being a more efficient use of fuel isn’t exactly true. Though you can have more complete combustion the heat transfer from the flame to the exhaust gasses to the boiler itself and finally to the water constitutes great losses in energy. Hence why it takes so long for a steam engine to start from dead cold.
External combustion Rankine Cycle engines are inherently much less efficient than internal combustion engines. This was discovered by Nikola Carnot in 1824.
If they brought back the Doble design with electric batteries to heat the water for steam and today's computer controls , you could run the car for 2 or 3 years and never charge it or add water. Todays carbon fibers and light weight plastics could make a re-designed Doble weigh less than 1500 pounds.
Poy Ester but cost how much also you would only make enough power as to boil the water the batteries would die quickly the boiler wouldnt be able to recharge the batteries at the same rate they are heating the water
@barghandi The boiler still uses fuel and and the steam power plant was thirstier than an IC engine for the same performance. The newly launched cyclone steam engine looks promising but it's still at the start of it's development
Cyclone Steam Technologies was a fruadulent investment scam that left its investors penniless. Harry Scholl is a crook that embezzled all the money into building a luxury yacht... powered by Diesel engines!
This makes me wish I was a machinist and an engineer. I wouldn't only have a steam car, I'd have a steam powder home supplemented by solar and hydrogen.
if they managed to make a fully closed no loss water circuit these could be really good..they already pollute less than most cars..I wonder how many kw heat output the burner was? I've got a petrol camping stove that produce 2,5kw and it runs for something like 6 hours on half a litre of petrol..if they used something like that with some serious insulation that could be an extremely efficient steam generator
Steam is LESS efficient and creates MORE pollution.. that is exactly why they are no longer used for cars.. that, and the fact that they are more expensive to build and operate..
+Autistic Boy *Yes, thank you for proving to us all you are completely ignorant of the SECOND LAW of THERMODYNAMICS... listen kid, maybe you should stick to something you actually understand instead of making yourself look like a fool!*
+Autistic Boy *I would ask you to provide some evidence to prove your foolish theory is true... but I already know that no such evidence exists... so I won't bother*
Frank James Well, I've never seen a car fueled by Nuclear or Geothermal... Internal combustion engines have a far higher practical and theoretically efficiency than steam... Steam is LESS efficient than ICE's.. much, much less on the scale of an automobile.
Frank James Nikolaus Carnot proved that the internal combustion heat engine was more efficient have steam... decades before ICE's were even invented. He also calculated that steam could never reach the same efficiency as internal combustion..
I am sure I saw this car in the early 70's. It ran on steam and powered by LPG gas. if this is Melbourne, then I did see the car. It was on show but can't remember where. I think it was at the Melbourne Exhibition Building. I was so impressed about the conversion that I even tried to do it myself on an AP6 Valiant after the 70's oil scare. Is the car still around?
After Ted Pritchard embezzled all the money from his investors the company filed bankruptcy. Creditors seized both cars, neither car ran and they were sold for scrap.
@@SorrowAvenue *Steam cars run on petroleum and are horrible gas guzzlers.* *If Big Oil companies had any control over what cars are made?* *We would all be driving steam cars.*
One thing I've thought about, might already exist, could you heat the cylinders instead of a boiler tank, then inject water into the cylinder where it becomes steam? I suppose the hurdles to overcome would be a high temperature lubricant inside the cylinder, and keeping the engine hot enough while spraying water in for long periods
The cylinder would hopefully be hot enough to flash steam a tiny amount of water. Doesn't water expand something like 1700 times when it evaporates? Inject a drop in mist form. I'm gonna try and build a junky little engine and try it out
that's another thing I was thinking about, could you put salt in the boiler provided its at least lined with a material that doesn't rust or corrode in the presence of salt. The water will boil faster and the salt will not evaporate
doktorbimmer Well you obviously have not read or seen the history and documentation of the Doble steam cars and lorries of the early 1920s till early 1930s . They have had fuel efficiencies equal to todays large trucks and mini vans as well as very low emissions due to there mono tube boilers. Check them out as they were the best steam cars ever built even today.
"They have had fuel efficiencies equal to todays large trucks" I am familar with the Dobles.. they are highly regarded and fine machines for ther time but I have never seen a steam motor vehicle even come close to a modern Otto or Diesel cycle engine in fuel efficiency... it seems highly doubtful. Do you have any BSFC or MPGE data to back this up? Cheers!
Early and modern steam is the boss, But thanks to improvements with internal combustion, A wood gasifier could yet prove to carve our futures, Especially when all sorts of trash, Scraps, Or woods can be easily transformed into a burnable gaseous fuel with a gasifier. But early steam is a great backup because they cant be stopped dead with an EMP....
@NearAbbeyRoad Whites Serpollets and Dobles had flash boilers though most prefer the term monotube steam generator. Stanleys are vertical fire tube and take quite a while to warm up. Google Jay Lenos garage
the reason that steam never took off in the modern world is not because it wasn't efficient enough or it was too efficient nor that gas was too cheap at the time or its a government conspiracy its because steam is inconvenient. really its a hassle to work with theirs wait times and things you have to do before start up and after start up. you have to constantly put oil into it so it can lubricate its self and you have to make sure not to hydro lock the block and you have to blast the scale out of the pipes. its just too inconvenient where as gas is relatively more convenient. also why electric cars are not dominating the market. recharge times are too long and that makes them inconvenient. once charge times equal that of gas fillups electric cars will be more convenient and then they will dominate the market. ps i like steam but electric is just the future and its futile to focus on the past
+Anthony Gelardi *Its all about efficiency, the simple fact remains that steam is much less efficient than ICEs. One of the fundamental concepts here is that there is always a loss when you convert energy or matter from one state to another, steam is deeply flawed by higher conversion losses.* *Electric motors are very efficient in conversion loss but batteries unfortunately are also severely limited in range and efficiency. Although there are more EVs made now than ever, they actually have a lower market share than they did a hundred years ago.*
*I'm still here boy... the only thing that is no around anymore is steam cars... because they are not efficient enough to compete with internal combustion cars.*
*Autistic boy is one of those "Google" engineers that doesn't have a clue about thermodynamics or engine efficiency... which is why he continuously make erroneous statements and then contradicts himself... good job, maybe we will nominated you for the "Pretchard Award" for outstanding automotive failures in history **_Hahahaha!_*
@felderup I know that, but I was refering to the anime movie where everything is steam powered. the fashion movement kinda derived from the neo-victorian style of dress from the movie
@kdc43 Pritchard's Steam Car would generate steam to a sufficient pressure in less than a minute, which back then was pretty much the standard amount of time you'd warm up your ICE car for. Anybody know if there is any museum in Australia that has the Pritchard car or engine on display?
@cocacola443 the reason its possible to get high efficiancys is the fact that IC's waste heat big time even in the dead of winter with the heat blowing full blast thousands of btu's are exscaping unused, but steam engines can recycle heat using low temp waste heat to preheat boiler air and or feed water from the condensore this is the secret of steam engines
@@rallycobra5738 like the Model T the Pritchard only made 20 horsepower, it could only breifly sprint above 30mph before running out of steam pressure.
There is always the freeze problem in cold countries. Antifreeze is not compatible with steam engines. I noticed that steam cars would be an advantage only in tropical countries.
@NearAbbeyRoad The last Sentinels ran on pneumatic tyres and could cruise at 60mph. Fast, great load carriers, but taxation changes and the need for a 2 man crew killed them. Last batch went to Argentina in the 1950's. Enginon seem to have done nothing for the last 5 years or so. No Bristol Frighteners fly anywhere in the world now. Candians managed to bust up theirs, the English crashed their museum one, and the one in NZ is taxi only. If you have 100K I know of a flyable one for sale
I want a car powerd by steam, its a great idea! and surely its a good way of using, disposing of sump oil / vegtible oil, you could run it on almost anything!
@@michaelkupchik3974 A modern Diesel car is closer to 800% more efficient than the Pritchard.. The U.S. EPA tested steam cars in 1971 and found they actually produced more exhaust pollution than the internal combustion cars tested.
+Autistic Boy *There is only one thing you need to learn son **_The Second Law of Thermodynamics_** without this critical knowledge you will be just wasting your time!*
*Ted Pritchard kept that fatal flaw a secret... steam cars have terrible fuel consumption compared to internal combustion engines and the Carnot Formula tells us that he would have been unable to make any significant improvements with such a crude engine design.*
@JaxRhapsody try looking up the lamont boiler, except for a tank on the side, it looks like any other monotube boiler, the lamont has higher efficiency so you can make it tiny. there's also other old tech bits to use. and, what's steampunk have to do with steam power? steampunk is mostly a fashion and artistic movement, not about making steam anything. heck, the last, most famous, steampunk steam vehicle, was an electric motorscooter with a device to make little puffs from the back, art.
+Autistic Boy *I would wish you good luck if you had any chance of succeeding but I already know that it is simply not practical... and it will be less efficient.*
Pritchard's steam cars looked attractive straight after the 1973 fuel crisis, but fuel prices plateaued for a while, and there was no longer any economic advantage in developing them. The last I saw of a Pritchard steam car (the green prototype that looked like an MGB/240Z hybrid) was in Giltrap's Motor Museum at Dreamworld in '86. Ask me about the public appeal on Brisbane television.
@fizzguts Thanks. Is Jay the US TV man with a private collection? I'll have look. I recall as a very young boy the last Sentinel steam trucks. They had solid tyres and went very slow. There was a pipe through the centre of the curved fronted cab with smoke coming out. :) But they carried very heavy loads pulling trailers. Enginon in Germany developed the SteamCell, Steam engine in a PC tower sized box. Could power a small car or the ancillaries in a bus/ruck. Main engine, only traction.
Saab's 1974 steam car had 30 second heat-up time....max, With today's insulation materials you could reduce that to zero in normal operating cycle of a commuter car. Oh and having your maintenance costs cut by 80-90% would make owners a bit more forgiving.
I remember Ted saying once back in the 70s that it took as long to heat as it took to roll a cigarette. With a bit of modern burner tech and insulation materials it could be made extremely fast. I'd be thinking in terms of using stored compressed air to get rolling while the flash steam generator came to temp.
Manintoga Soooo . . . you're saying that modern insulation materials are far superior to asbestos, which was commonly used one-hundred-years ago? I am obviously not as technically advanced as you guys, because the only way I can imagine getting water to boil instantly is to use an immense amount of energy.
Keith Otis Edwards Yes Keith, modern insulation is far beyond asbestos, take for example the insulation developed by NASA for the space shuttle. There is also a thing called 'solid smoke' search that one. A common product for kilns is at about 30mm thick and equivalent to a fire brick for only, I don't know, about a tenth of the weight! With modern burners that have auto ignition a steam generator comes up to pressure in seconds rather than the 3 minutes that Ted had, fuel economy should be better than an internal combustion because there is no transmission sucking 15-20% of the power out, also fuel air ratios can be keep optimal unlike the constantly changing demands of the interanal combustion. In many ways external combustion is far superior, ask any steam enthusiast and they will tell you that the low speed torque leaves internal combustion in their dust, they are also very quiet too, long wearing, low revs. If only the same amount of R&D money and time was thrown at steam and compressed air as has been squandered on I.C.Engines, we'd be worlds better off! Hope this helps, cheers. Oh, check out Jay Leno's Doble, even as primative as it is it still has exhaust air quality as good as modern standards require (mostly).
External combustion steam engines make a lot of sense. I really wish they would made a comeback. I'd buy one if the price was reasonably close to a gas internal combustion engined car.
modern condensing methods would no doubt reduce the water refills, and you could even have an electric boiler that runs on batteries until the steam is up enough to run the engine and generator. than drive forever until you need more water...some day
+Autistic Boy *What about the CONVERSION LOSS... this is a basic fundamental problem that people without formal engineering education seem completely ignorant of... it'is as if these morons think energy is MAGIC or something??? Fucking morons!!*
+Autistic Boy *Some people don't understand the **_Laws of Thermodynamics_** or the **_Conservation of Energy..._** these fuckin morons will believe anything is possible...Lol!!!!*
*You don't need to be an engineer to figure out that if an electric motor is over 90% efficient, why would you use heavy, inefficient batteries to power a steam engine that is less than 20% efficient...*
*It will never happen, because to operate your car on a warm day with a 100% closed system your condenser would need to be larger than the whole car.... not never practical now is it?.*
The Pritchard steam car was one of those novel dream ideas that I read about in Wheels magazine as a youngster; all who commented on it believed it held great potential. Where are the engineers all hiding? Surely Ted was not the last of the great dreamers....
Inherent problems are it's a large pressurized vessel of heated water. Get something wrong with that and it will blow up. Wrong things are scale build up,the production of nitric acid as a by product of the steam process and possible clogging of the valves. It's not many people who want to drive around with a large pressure cooker in front. Even Jay Leno talks about this.
+myfeelin4you Ted Pritchard's designs were purchased in 2009 by Uniflow Power Limited which does not appear to have had any commercial success with the technology either.
Hi Vicki. I'm afraid he passed away a few years ago. His Son is running a company using similar technology to generate power for remote and underdeveloped areas.
hydrogen is not they way forward. it is an energy storage medium at best, like a chemical battery. you cannot get a decent return of energy density to feedstock required to make it (nowhere near as efficient as the gasoline refining process). not to mention the special handling requirements which makes setting up a network of hydrogen filling stations prohibitively expensive and dangerous.
+Autistic Boy *I feel sorry for the poor fools that actually invested their hard earned money into this hopeless crackpot scheme.... but if they had any knowledge of engineering they would have know better!!!!*
So you are saying his technology was more advanced than the 1925 Doble E Steam Car? I sure would like to know what he developed .. The early 1900's steam engines required high maintance ..
@@sandervanderkammen9230 1931 was the Great Depression almost every business went Bankruspt then Many Farmers lost their Farms and many small busineses lost all .. Plus the Dut Bowl a Huge drought was going on and crops were dying..
@@mikeskidmore6754 Steam cars were rendered completely obsolete in 1914... White Motor Company switched to internal combustion engines in 1915. Stanley went bankrupt in 1926 and Doble continued spending his personal fortune and went bankrupt in 1931.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 So you are saying if Civilzation falls apart and there are no refinereies left to make gasoline .. you would not want a wood burning steam tractor .. Steam Locomotives were used into the 1950's all you need is water and wood or water and coals and some heavy lubricating oil
@cocacola443 Pritchard claimed that the second generation of the motor had a fuel consumption 22.5 MPG (US) when dyno tested at 50 mph, which would've been somewhat better than many vehicles of the time achieved. Look up "popular science pritchard steam" on Google to read the September 1976 article on the engine. Cyclone Power Technologies claims that their steam engine has an efficiency of about 30%.
+Autistic Boy *But if you understood something as simple and basic as the **_Second Law of Thermodynamic????_** You would already know that combustion steam technology is NOT the future.*
+Autistic Boy *Why would you use a less efficient technology based on more expensive and less available renewable sources... If you were going to shift to renewables wouldn't make sense to use the MOST energy efficient technology??? Why spent more to get less and generate more pollution in the end. Combustion steam engines have appallingly massive carbon footprints.*
*Steam technology has always utilized renewable fuels... and that has not made them more energy efficient... which is the reason why steam cars are obsolete.*
fyi; *_Cyclone Power Technologies is a defunct investment scam... it was never able to prove its efficiency claims or that its engines actually worked reliably. Most of the money that was defrauded from its investors was spent on luxury homes and a super yacht._*
Yeah, and Ironically Pritchard Steam Car Company and Cyclone Power Technologies were both notorious investment scams so I wouldn't trust any of those numbers without verifiable, independent third-party testing... which neither company ever produced.
I don't know how 'modern' a steam engine can be made but they were never immediate You were there for ages getting up pressure & when you stopped it all cooled down and youd'e have to go through all the same process again before it was ready to drive back! The best bet would be some type of hybrid but then two powertrains adds to the weight and intrudes on passenger and luggage space.
+Maurice Upton Nothing cutting edge in the engine or boiler design... a 2-3/8" X 2" twin cylinder, double-acting, Uniflow design using 15" diameter steam generator mono-tube coil with electric blower fan and fuel pumps... max pressure 1,400psi Feed pumps and the condenser fan was driven by a second stage rotary vane motor.. similar to a pneumatic air tool motor that ran off the exhaust steam... the condenser lacked any vacuum air pumps... In its peak fuel efficiency mode it produced only 160ft.lbs of torque Horsepower output and fuel consumption is not published... but estimated in the 50hp to 120 hp range with about 11 mpg to 19 mpg with kerosene under ideal conditions... other alternate fuels will produce lower mpg ratings
Me thinks this should be revisted. As in all cases of transportation and power generation, it's not a one size fits all. Unfortunately, the higher up muckity-mucks with all the money make the decisions that benefits them the most. Street cars, cables cars, and other tracked publix transportation dissappeared mostly from US cities in favor of buses made by GM which happened to buy out most of these public rail services and closed them down. Now we are finally getting back to rail.
+Autistic Boy *If you knew anything about steam cars you would know there is nothing cheap about them... using renewable fuels does not make them more fuel efficient... so its is nothing but a big waste of time in the end... Its why steam cars obsolete, remember?*
hmm, it would be perpetual motion, but your forgetting one thing. It will always need water added as its source of fuel, therefore its not perpetual because it will always need something added to keep it moving...
The Pritchard Steam Car Company was a scam, after defrauding its investors the company went bankrupt and both cars were sold for scrap to repay creditors.
I hope you don't mean that the steam engine turns a generator that supplies electricity to heat water to create steam to power the steam engine. Cuz that's what we refer to as perpetual motion. which is impossible.
Hmm, very interesting! I wonder what would happen if development of steam cars continued with modern technology. It's actually quite difficult to make a steam car with efficiencies on par with internal combustion engines, but modern technology might be able to achieve high efficiencies while preserving other advantages of steam engines.
+#420: Weedle Its actually a lot more than "quite difficult" The Carnot Cycle formula tells us its also impossible to match the efficiency of internal combustion.. steam is an inferior working fluid and offers poor thermal efficiency. The only advantage steam cars offered was a way to start the engine without hand cranking which was very difficult and often caused injury or death. But after Charles Kettering invented the electric starter motor the steam cars became obsolete overnight. Cheers!
Dang, I didn't know that about hand cranked cars! Guess the electric starter's another one of those inventions that's kinda inconspicuous until you realize what it would be like without it. Yeah, I agree, a steam engine's not going to surpass an internal combustion engine in terms of thermal efficiency. There are already diesel engines in cars/trucks getting 40%+ efficiency. But the steam engine has other advantages like flex fuel, low emissions, high torque, etc. that might be worth going for. Efficiency's still one of the major issues, though maybe with today's tech, steam engines can achieve the boiler temps/pressures necessary for good efficiency. They won't get to 40% efficiency, but they might at least be close enough to a gasoline Otto cycle engine that their other advantages would be viable.
+#420: Weedle Yes, indeed.. hand cranking was very difficult for anyone that did not possess significant physical strength, it required a certain degree of skill and none of this could protect you from being severely injured. We definitely take the starter for granted today. Absolutely.. there is no practical engine design that can come close with the Diesel.. it is supreme in terms of thermal efficiency.. It too is Flex-fuel capable, low emission and high torque.. its also low cost and low maintenance. The steam cars has not be commercially viable in over 100 years.. and unfortunately there has been no changes that will alter its obsolete status.. I will admit its an interesting topic to discuss though, I often wondered about steam making a come back somehow... but when you look at the facts and the engineering problems you soon learn to dismiss these thoughts as more fantasy than reality. Cheers!
I agree, there's no engine that can match a diesel in terms of efficiency. The big ones in ships are over 50% efficient, better than any other simple cycle. But honestly, I don't think the steam car is entirely obsolete. A lot of its problems are still solvable. I did some calculations with steam tables, and steam engines should be able to get around 30% efficiency with easily achievable conditions (
#420: Weedle I see where you're coming from, but you will find no legitimate automotive engineers looking to produce a commercially viable, real world design that will agree with you. Looking at the formulas and existing tables it may appear possible, theoretically... but an efficient vacuum condenser, steam-to-air heat exchanger for a 150 -200 hp engine suitable for an automobile? Will also be the size of a typical automobile.. The only steam engines that are currently practical (and still cannot match ICEs) are in +100,000 hp scale or larger and almost exclusively use a large body of water as a thermal sink... 2nd, 3rd and even 4th pass cycles may be practical in a multi-megawatt power station where the extra cost can be spread out of 40 years this is simply not practical with cars. Actually the truth is, the remaining applications that use steam are continuing to shrink, their days are numbered.. The Carnot formula tells us that steam is near to reaching its practical limits.. while ICEs have a much higher practical and theoretical Carnot efficiency limits... this is a serious roadblock for steam which has no possible solution.
Uniflow Power Ltd is an unlisted public company based in Perth, Western Australia, dedicated to commercialising a new renewable energy technology, the Uniflow Generator, a simple, small-scale biomass fuelled steam engine. youtube clip of functioning engine title is Uniflow4TH-cam.mov
Ford would like to say the model T burned more fuel than it really did. Maybe it wasn't so bad, but Ford wouldn't look so great if it was just a little lower mpg than comparable cars have today. I guess we would have to ask somebody with a T.
TheusZeusDeus, Because ICEs are more efficient than steam... and in the case of small scale power units like automobile they can be twice as efficient! The most efficient practical heat engines in existance (and in service) are Diesel engines which have higher single cycle thermal fuel efficiency than any steam engine know to exist , steam powerplant or automobiles
Funny I always thought Fords are all steam powered.
Probably the only funny comment on this video in the 11 years since I posted it.
They are! When the steam comes out they stop working.
Unfortunately he passed away a few years ago. His company still exists and the technology is in use for power plants suitable for use in the less developed part of the world.
Rest in peace. Good on him for trying. There was nothing wrong with this car. We clearly have a societal problem.
@@SorrowAvenue exactly we have a society full of Antifa fascists who think that they can force Bolshevism on the rest of us because they voted for it.
Does anyone have stats on the actual fuel mileage of this vehicle and what fuel it used.
@@6killer426 NO, Ted Pritchard never submitted any of his engines to independent third-party laboratory testing.
Teds estimates are extremely vague and pure speculative... he also claimed it could run on a variety of fuels but all of his demonstrations were using Kerosene.
@@SorrowAvenue The Pritchard Steam Car Company was an investment scam, Ted Pritchard imbezzled most of the investments leaving the company to file for bankruptcy.
Australian taxpayers were defrauded of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
It would be cool if he showed how it worked, I mean I know the basics of how a steam engine works but I would of liked a closer look.
@KrazeeCain You'd probably be interested in having a look at the Cyclone Steam Engine. They signed a contract with Rathyeon to build their 100 HP, 850 ft lb engine back in April, have contracts with a few other smaller companies and are planning on expanding their factory.
I think electric cars will have their place but I think that steam is the future. We'll never see an excavator, semi or a mining truck run on electric and if you want those to run clean then steam is the way to go.
During the 2nd Fuel Crisis in 1979 there was renewed interest in Pritchard's steam car, but he was running out of money by this stage. The cause was taken up by Today Tonight in Brisbane, who started a public appeal. But the money was donated in the belief that Pritchard would move his operation to Queensland, while Pritchard believed the money would be better spent staying in Melbourne. So the whole deal fell through.
My father, Gavin Bell, helped the Pritchards do their patent drawings and I can remember riding in the Falcon, and a Stanley Steamer that they had around Caulfield.
They had a flash boiler that would develop working pressure very quickly. A pity it never took off.
Peter Bell.
a real pity - I have tracked down the owners of the patents and am approaching them to sound out if they would be interested in licencing them for vehicle use again - just so brilliant to see a way out of oil..
+Simon Hosking *You won't find any legitimate automobile manufacturers interested in steam propulsion... especially considering a modern car is 400-500% more fuel efficient than Teds antiquated design.*
yes but most of them are fuckwits - the planet could do with a little humility - I'm sure there'd be plenty of private people quite happy to honor teds designs and take them to another level
+Simon Hosking *Pissing away valuable fuel and hard earned money is not an idea many will agree with you on...*
+Simon Hosking *There is nothing worse for the planet than cars that waste fuel at the obscene rate that steam cars did.*
The advantage of steam? 100% torque from 1 RPM !!!
*From **_Zero_** RPM... torque decreases dramatically as rpm rises, this car produced only 20 hp at best.*
The disadvantage is long startup time.
@wilhelm sallsten *The disadvantage is higher production and maintenance costs along with higher fuel consumption, lower performance and higher emissions.*
*The Pritchard Steam Car company went bankrupt without ever producing a single car... he left with the cash and left investors holding the bag...*
@@wilhelmsallsten7706 So what is the start-up time - I expect 30 seconds perhaps 90 seconds. Flash boiler developed in 1885-ish is instant.
@@AndrewLohmannKent Fuel consumption was horrible... performance when cold terrible.
@kdc43 It had a "flash" steam generator (boiler). If you turned the ignition as you got into the car, by the time you had done up your seat belt and looked in the mirror it had a full head of steam.
Because steam engines develop maximum torque at 0 revs, no gear box is needed.
Steam trucks had so much torque they churned up roads. Stanley steamers had flash boilers, so no delay.
Steam has come a long way, smaller version can be used as range extenders in electric hybrids.
WHY ARE WE NOT FUNDING THIS!? With today's advancements in materials and machining and computer control and stuffs - I would totally buy a steam car. Everything is possible!
+I967 Steam cars have been obsolete for a 100 years now..
You cant apply modern design and technology to a system that is fundamentally less efficient by the existing laws of thermodynamics.
No, its not... you cannot defy the laws of physics
+The real doktorbimmer yes you can, because we live in a simulated and the laws can be hacked.
+I967
The steam era is obsolete for a reason. We are not funding it because it would be a huge waste of money.
I would love to see a steam car too, but it's difficult to make a steam car with similar performance to an internal combustion car. Though it's possible in theory, in practice it will take a lot of work. Developing internal combustion engines is simpler since the technology is mature and already works well.
I967 none of you want a steam car they died for a reason. You had to wait for them to heat up to drive them it's not a turn key and go.
The patented boiler does not use an accumulator, steam chest or 'pressure' cylinder but rather is a 'flash' boiler. Irt is rather a 'steam generator'. If the mechanical power of the engine is not needed, the small and highly efficient steam generator can be used directly to produce either wet or dry steam, and thus deliver sterilizing, distillation, process heat, hot water and space heating depending on how the steam/water circuit is configured.
Pure Clever Aussie Engineering. :)
Steam cars existed far before the Aussies ever got to it. The Doble was one of the most notable steam cars of it's time.
*Ted Pritchard is the kind of bogan that reinforces all of the those negative stereotypes about Australians being criminals and degenerate alcoholics.*
I do need to take the time to look up that stuff. So far the only thing I haven't figured out is how too keep it useable in the winter time and a rapid heat system, but I have some ideas.
sir iwant know that how can i make that Engine plzzzzz can you tell me
@KrazeeCain jax is right, about steam engines not doing, 'recirc'... when you look at the videos of steam transport trucks, there's always a big steam cloud pouring out. in places with free water available in large amounts -everywhere-, they can be used like that, but take ten minutes to toss the hose into a river, fill the tank, stow the hose before going again, makes delivery times rise lots. with 50%+ condensing, that will mean a tiny tank can last days, but condensers are heavy too.
Just for laughs I read a lot of the comments. As the intelligent folks here point out, a steam engine (no matter how much technology you throw at it) is not as efficient, safe or practical as a modern ICE. Yes, Mr Pritchard put a steam engine in a Falcon. And he made all kinds of efforts to have it put into production, but an internet search finds nothing that shows there was an improvement over ICE engines available when Mr Pritchard was working on his engines. There is no conspiracy by the automobile makers or oil companies to prevent production of a steam powered car. You may think the Big 3 have squashed the development of steam power, but actually they have researched it and it just does not prove to be better than ICE. If steam powered cars were such a good idea you can bet any of the Japanese companies would have put it to use, as would the car companies in India and China. Many high tech companies and research universities have tried to develop a modern, efficient, safe, and low maintenance steam engine for cars, but they have yet to produce anything equal or better than modern ICE. I admire Mr Pritchard's efforts and those of others exploring engine technology, but what we need most is a big improvement in battery technology, because electric motors are the future of transport power, not ICE or steam. And thanks to paulaus for posting this video....led to some interesting research. 👍
Battery-powered electric propulsion might not be the ultimate solution. As long as lithium is used, it is not recycled properly and its useful life cannot be extended. Bolivia and Argentina concentrate (supply) 91% of the world demand for this mineral. And producing it at the pace that would be needed would destroy the ecosystems of those countries.
@Amphidory
I think the Bristol Freighter from 1948, still does freight cars in Canada and NZ, using two sleeve valve engines that first ran in 1936.
Having read the comments, I can see that most people, thanks to public education, are completely technically illiterate.
True.
Well , that comment fixed everything .
Steam is a lost technology
@@IRNoahBody Steam may seem simple to understand for those with limited education... but it is far more complex and has several inherent efficiency disadvantages that most people don't have any clue about.
@@michaelkupchik3974 steam cars are an obsolete technology.
@KrazeeCain Most steam engine designs do not recirc their steam just like when they were new. And ofcourse theres heating the boiler of water. I am designing steam engine setup myself and a few of the main problems I've ust about solved is
A compact boiler
Another way of rapidly heating the water
Reusing spent steam which helps out a small boiler and increases mpg like the return line in most automotive fuel systems.
I tried PepsiRefresh under Project Steampunk to no avail.
I see arguments about efficiency going on, but wouldn't steam have an edge simply because there's a more complete burn of the fuel? Obviously you need good insulation too, but I know we've come a long way in that department also.
It has more to do with heat loss not complete burning of the fuel air mixture...
Even if you could achieve 99.9% complete combustion of the air-fuel mixture...? The steam engine will always lose more heat in the Carnot cycle... so it will always be less fuel efficient than a typical ICE or gas turbine.
The real doktorbimmer I don't know much about steam engines, but tell me if someone's already done this: run the steam exhaust over a heat exchanger for the water going into the boiler. Or maybe a steam bubbler into a main unpressurized tank
Nabre Labre Its called an Feedwater Heater or Injection Water Preheater... they have been around for a couple hundred years.
There is also exhaust flue gas heat exchangers such as the 'Green's' "economizer"
Both preheaters and economizers are most effective on and typically found on large stationary powerplants due to their large size, weight and extra expense.
The real doktorbimmer The theoretical efficiency of the steam engine (Rankine cycle) is greater than that of the petrol/diesel cycle (otto). This is why steam engines are used in power stations today, however you have a point in that small reciprocating steam engines used in steam cars usually have a lower efficiency than ICE's (about 5-10% less). Even so, who would care as the price of steam fuel is much lower than that of petrol (plus you can use pretty much any fuel you like) and thus the operating costs would be lower.
Chali Chaligha WRONG.... you just got an 'F' sir....
We compare all HEAT ENGINES by using the CARNOT CYCLE FORMULA.
The steam engine can NEVER be as thermally fuel efficient as an ICE... NEVER.
@Phi1point62 Thank You for sharing that with me, I've heard of cyclone before, but haven't checked on them for a while. Good to hear that they're making progress. If they offered it as a crate engine, I'd almost certainly buy one. (as long as the price is reasonable)
You're spot on with electrics, they're best suited for small cars in urban environments. I think everyone is making a mistake by trying to find one single replacement. ICE's, EV's, and Steam all have their place.
+Autistic Boy *But steam cars are obsolete because they are **_LESS_** efficient and LESS cost effective...*
+Autistic Boy *_The Second Law of Thermodynamics_** is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it.*
*Steam engines are **_LESS_** environmentally friendly... because they waste more fuel and have a much larger carbon footprint than internal combustion cars.*
@@doktorbimmerFuel burnt in a furnace is more efficient than a running ICE all day long. The inefficiency comes with the second process of heating the water to get the steam before the work occurs
@@plap.What exactly is your point?
We are discussing automobiles, not central heating units.
York motor museum in Western Australia has a steam car but not this one. Last time i saw it it looked like a beach buggy with a large radiator to recover the water.
Its has been a while since I saw it so might pay to check with them if they still have it.
After Ted Pritchard embezzled all of the investments his company filed bankruptcy and both cars were seized and sold for scrap metal to repay creditors.
As far as eco-friendliness goes, the horse carriage is still unbeaten...
Idk the amount of land you need to feed a horse is more than you need to grow biofuel to do the same work, mainly because a horse consumes energy if it's in the stable doing nothing
@@jakedenos A major flaw in steam cars is they waste lots of energy when they are not moving too.
Yeah. You can eat the engine when it gets to the end of its useful life.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 The same could be said for your diesel cars.
The steam engine does not produce Co2. It's powered using hot water in a boiler. Unless you believe that water, a natural element found in the wild, is somehow detrimental to our environment, your comment doesn't prove anything. But sure, go buy a horse-drawn carriage. Let us know how that's working out for you. Most of us are already passed the 19th century.
look up the doble steam car it was the furthest advanced steam car using a flash boiler technology , it was ready to run on a cold day in less than 30 seconds...look it up on jay lenos page ... amazing machine
A 1925 Doble E-20 Steam Car has a top speed of 136 MPH and 1,000 FtLbs. of torque, I think that could easily rival a gas car
+WoodenTreeMan Well you would be very wrong sir, The Doble produced a very unimpressive 150 horsepower and barely got much over 8 MPG..
Even a piece of shit Hyundai Elantra would "blow the doors off" the Doble up a steep highway grade and get 400% better fuel mileage..
There is a good reason why these dinosaurs were obsolete on arrival... steam cars were already obsolete by 1925.
WoodenTreeMan Yup and could go over 1,000 miles ... with a electric boiler system of today's technology if only they weren't so complicated... there only true fault sadly
+Autistic Boy *Unfortunately public education produces functionally illiterate imbeciles like you that think that the Rankine cycle can achieve higher efficiency...*
*The Second Law of Thermodynamics is already public knowledge... there is no need for you try to discover it again...*
*Nicolas Carnot discovered internal combustion engines were more efficient than steam back in 1824.*
I saw this at The NY International Auto Show in 1972 or 3...
Maybe steam used in combination with microwave and Sterling cycle could improve efficiency enough
PacificCircle1 Still have the latent heat loss when you convert water from one state to another...
The real doktorbimmer True, but you'd have that anyway. I was just contemplating improving on heating of the water.
Using a turbines seem to be the way to go, as with certain large ships and fueled power plants.
PacificCircle1 Yes but the problem with the efficiency is also related to scale, you can reach the thermal fuel efficiency of an ICE with a steam turbine, but only when you are dealing with systems in the 100,000 to 1 million horsepower and greater size range. Its not even cost effective unless you are burning a cheap fuel source like coal or nuclear... All new ship are Diesel... why? because even at 100,000 horsepower a Diesel is significantly more fuel efficeint than any available steam turbine. Now if we jump back to the automobile engine with an average output between 100-200 hp with the steam turbine you are looking at less than half the fuel efficiency of a typical gasoline fueled Otto engine, the is just no way to compete with the thermal fuel efficiency of the ICEs.
About ships and subs, nuclear reactors make steam. I any case I was just wondering what could be done.
PacificCircle1 Nuclear powered ships are a very unique in terms of fuel efficiency... considering that an atomic ship reactor can operate up to 20 years or more without refueling there is much less demand for thermal efficiency. I'm not a specialist in nuclear engineering but from the data I have seen it appears that thermal fuel efficiency is very low especially for the systems like the ones found in submarines that are realitively small scale and that are closed secondary cooling circuits. A termendous amount of heat energy is wasted through these types of secondary condensers as they must maintain vacuum and not vent any water vapor or gasses.
How did he make it?, Is there a guide on how to make one or are the pattants to make this Falcon publicly available?
The Pritchard Steam Car Company was scam, it went completely bankrupt.
For fuel efficacy, diesel is vastly superior. See any steam locomotives lately?
And diesel-electric and pure electric is even more efficient.
@@rizzlerazzleuno4733 - It's been 4 years but when I said diesel, I meant diesel-electric.
@@scootergeorge9576 Great. Thanks.
The statement made at about the 1:30 mark about a boiler being a more efficient use of fuel isn’t exactly true. Though you can have more complete combustion the heat transfer from the flame to the exhaust gasses to the boiler itself and finally to the water constitutes great losses in energy. Hence why it takes so long for a steam engine to start from dead cold.
External combustion Rankine Cycle engines are inherently much less efficient than internal combustion engines.
This was discovered by Nikola Carnot in 1824.
If they brought back the Doble design with electric batteries to heat the water for steam and today's computer controls , you could run the car for 2 or 3 years and never charge it or add water. Todays carbon fibers and light weight plastics could make a re-designed Doble weigh less than 1500 pounds.
Poy Ester but cost how much also you would only make enough power as to boil the water the batteries would die quickly the boiler wouldnt be able to recharge the batteries at the same rate they are heating the water
+Poy Ester So what you are saying is basically you know absolutely nothing about engineering or steam engines...
troll
You are a troll? Because you are certainly no engineer..Lol!!!
You're an idiot.
@barghandi The boiler still uses fuel and and the steam power plant was thirstier than an IC engine for the same performance.
The newly launched cyclone steam engine looks promising but it's still at the start of it's development
Cyclone Steam Technologies was a fruadulent investment scam that left its investors penniless.
Harry Scholl is a crook that embezzled all the money into building a luxury yacht... powered by Diesel engines!
This makes me wish I was a machinist and an engineer. I wouldn't only have a steam car, I'd have a steam powder home supplemented by solar and hydrogen.
You know that's a wish you can grant yourself right?
You should take a thermodynamics class first and learn why it's a bad idea...
go with nuclear power.
@@1voiceofstl you mean like the Ford Nucleon?
@@6killer426 The Nucleon was not real..
if they managed to make a fully closed no loss water circuit these could be really good..they already pollute less than most cars..I wonder how many kw heat output the burner was?
I've got a petrol camping stove that produce 2,5kw and it runs for something like 6 hours on half a litre of petrol..if they used something like that with some serious insulation that could be an extremely efficient steam generator
Steam is LESS efficient and creates MORE pollution.. that is exactly why they are no longer used for cars.. that, and the fact that they are more expensive to build and operate..
+Autistic Boy *Yes, thank you for proving to us all you are completely ignorant of the SECOND LAW of THERMODYNAMICS... listen kid, maybe you should stick to something you actually understand instead of making yourself look like a fool!*
+Autistic Boy *I would ask you to provide some evidence to prove your foolish theory is true... but I already know that no such evidence exists... so I won't bother*
the REASON should be clear to all why the steam engine went into obscurity almost..**BECAUSE its the most efficient !
+Frank James Steam powered automobiles are completely obsolete because its the LEAST EFFICIENT form of combustion engine transportation.
+The real doktorbimmer steam isn't combustion.. but it IS the most efficient engine
Frank James Well, I've never seen a car fueled by Nuclear or Geothermal...
Internal combustion engines have a far higher practical and theoretically efficiency than steam...
Steam is LESS efficient than ICE's.. much, much less on the scale of an automobile.
Frank James Nikolaus Carnot proved that the internal combustion heat engine was more efficient have steam...
decades before ICE's were even invented.
He also calculated that steam could never reach the same efficiency as internal combustion..
+Frank James the REASON should be clear to all why the steam engine went into obscurity.. they waste fuel
I am sure I saw this car in the early 70's. It ran on steam and powered by LPG gas. if this is Melbourne, then I did see the car. It was on show but can't remember where. I think it was at the Melbourne Exhibition Building. I was so impressed about the conversion that I even tried to do it myself on an AP6 Valiant after the 70's oil scare. Is the car still around?
Yeah ya right mate, he built the old falcon steamer in the 1970s
I think I read some years ago that it is now in the Sydney Power House Museum.
Yes Melbourne, they were in Caulfield, Kambrook Rd? used to see it being driven.
After Ted Pritchard embezzled all the money from his investors the company filed bankruptcy.
Creditors seized both cars, neither car ran and they were sold for scrap.
I'd buy a steam powered car.
+Autistic Boy *Then why doesn't any automobile manufacture sell them today? Steam cars went obsolete over 100 years ago.*
+Autistic Boy *The truth will always prevail in the end...*
@profnasty oil companies would very pleased to see fuel guzzling steams cars on the roads... very good for their business.
@@doktorbimmer Because it's not status quo and the oil companies have a monopoly over the automobile.
@@SorrowAvenue *Steam cars run on petroleum and are horrible gas guzzlers.*
*If Big Oil companies had any control over what cars are made?*
*We would all be driving steam cars.*
One thing I've thought about, might already exist, could you heat the cylinders instead of a boiler tank, then inject water into the cylinder where it becomes steam? I suppose the hurdles to overcome would be a high temperature lubricant inside the cylinder, and keeping the engine hot enough while spraying water in for long periods
No. Water is non-compressible. Gas (steam) is.
The cylinder would hopefully be hot enough to flash steam a tiny amount of water. Doesn't water expand something like 1700 times when it evaporates? Inject a drop in mist form. I'm gonna try and build a junky little engine and try it out
Nabre Labre Someone has to come up with a way to use sea water as a fuel. We would have an unlimited Co2 free fuel source.
that's another thing I was thinking about, could you put salt in the boiler provided its at least lined with a material that doesn't rust or corrode in the presence of salt. The water will boil faster and the salt will not evaporate
Nabre Labre Yes, salt does not evaporate but what it does do is leave very damaging deposits called scale
And we all pay for that loss of interest. What an unfortunate setback for the world.
Funny how they don't make any specific claims of higher fuel efficiency???
doktorbimmer Well you obviously have not read or seen the history and documentation of the Doble steam cars and lorries of the early 1920s till early 1930s . They have had fuel efficiencies equal to todays large trucks and mini vans as well as very low emissions due to there mono tube boilers. Check them out as they were the best steam cars ever built even today.
"They have had fuel efficiencies equal to todays large trucks"
I am familar with the Dobles.. they are highly regarded and fine machines for ther time but
I have never seen a steam motor vehicle even come close to a modern Otto or Diesel cycle engine in fuel efficiency... it seems highly doubtful.
Do you have any BSFC or MPGE data to back this up?
Cheers!
Early and modern steam is the boss, But thanks to improvements with internal combustion, A wood gasifier could yet prove to carve our futures, Especially when all sorts of trash, Scraps, Or woods can be easily transformed into a burnable gaseous fuel with a gasifier. But early steam is a great backup because they cant be stopped dead with an EMP....
james placey or a zombie attack... you could dry out the corpses and use em for fuel too Lol!
@NearAbbeyRoad Whites Serpollets and Dobles had flash boilers though most prefer the term monotube steam generator. Stanleys are vertical fire tube and take quite a while to warm up. Google Jay Lenos garage
the reason that steam never took off in the modern world is not because it wasn't efficient enough or it was too efficient nor that gas was too cheap at the time or its a government conspiracy its because steam is inconvenient. really its a hassle to work with theirs wait times and things you have to do before start up and after start up. you have to constantly put oil into it so it can lubricate its self and you have to make sure not to hydro lock the block and you have to blast the scale out of the pipes. its just too inconvenient where as gas is relatively more convenient. also why electric cars are not dominating the market. recharge times are too long and that makes them inconvenient. once charge times equal that of gas fillups electric cars will be more convenient and then they will dominate the market. ps i like steam but electric is just the future and its futile to focus on the past
+Anthony Gelardi *Its all about efficiency, the simple fact remains that steam is much less efficient than ICEs. One of the fundamental concepts here is that there is always a loss when you convert energy or matter from one state to another, steam is deeply flawed by higher conversion losses.*
*Electric motors are very efficient in conversion loss but batteries unfortunately are also severely limited in range and efficiency. Although there are more EVs made now than ever, they actually have a lower market share than they did a hundred years ago.*
*I'm still here boy... the only thing that is no around anymore is steam cars... because they are not efficient enough to compete with internal combustion cars.*
pop pop boats are extremely efficient
autistic boy and doktorbimmer #goinghomesomeday
Don't write off hydrogen as a fuel. Australia has just found a way to transport large volumes as a liquid. This will change the game.
*Autistic boy is one of those "Google" engineers that doesn't have a clue about thermodynamics or engine efficiency... which is why he continuously make erroneous statements and then contradicts himself... good job, maybe we will nominated you for the "Pretchard Award" for outstanding automotive failures in history **_Hahahaha!_*
@felderup I know that, but I was refering to the anime movie where everything is steam powered. the fashion movement kinda derived from the neo-victorian style of dress from the movie
@kdc43 Pritchard's Steam Car would generate steam to a sufficient pressure in less than a minute, which back then was pretty much the standard amount of time you'd warm up your ICE car for.
Anybody know if there is any museum in Australia that has the Pritchard car or engine on display?
All scrapped after the scandal broke and Ted left the company bankrupt.
I have a 63 falcon and I want to do this .please tell me how to get his blueprint
@cocacola443 the reason its possible to get high efficiancys is the fact that IC's waste heat big time even in the dead of winter with the heat blowing full blast thousands of btu's are exscaping unused, but steam engines can recycle heat using low temp waste heat to preheat boiler air and or feed water from the condensore this is the secret of steam engines
@cocacola443 not really, some 1930s cars were making over 30 mpg, I think the model T was getting over 40 mpg
Yeah but it only went like 30mph
@@rallycobra5738 like the Model T the Pritchard only made 20 horsepower, it could only breifly sprint above 30mph before running out of steam pressure.
What a shame the support was withdrawn. Wouldn't have been nice to see this developed to it's utmost potential.
There is always the freeze problem in cold countries. Antifreeze is not compatible with steam engines. I noticed that steam cars would be an advantage only in tropical countries.
*Steam cars do not offer an advantage in any country... which is why they have been obsolete for over a century.*
*Then why are there no longer any steam car companies... they all died a century ago!*
@NearAbbeyRoad The last Sentinels ran on pneumatic tyres and could cruise at 60mph. Fast, great load carriers, but taxation changes and the need for a 2 man crew killed them. Last batch went to Argentina in the 1950's. Enginon seem to have done nothing for the last 5 years or so.
No Bristol Frighteners fly anywhere in the world now. Candians managed to bust up theirs, the English crashed their museum one, and the one in NZ is taxi only. If you have 100K I know of a flyable one for sale
Luke bonar from triple MMM nightshift made me look this up cheers lukey 🍺👍🏻
And on a winter's day, the cloud of steam ☁️ would create a wonderful fog bank, perfect for a bond movie!🌞.
James Bond is too cool to be seen in a steam car.
It would have had a condenser so the exhaust steam is recycled. Otherwise you need to carry a lot of water such as in a railway locomotive.
I want a car powerd by steam, its a great idea! and surely its a good way of using, disposing of sump oil / vegtible oil, you could run it on almost anything!
*But a Diesel engine can run on the same fuels and still achieve 400% higher energy efficiency...and that is why steam cars are obsolete.*
*That is obvious... Probably because it is not controlled by your brain!*
@@doktorbimmer your not quite right and pollution would still be a problem.
@@michaelkupchik3974 A modern Diesel car is closer to 800% more efficient than the Pritchard..
The U.S. EPA tested steam cars in 1971 and found they actually produced more exhaust pollution than the internal combustion cars tested.
@burntvalve86 Honestly, I am considering converting a CJ-7 to steam. I would probably fire it with diesel/kerosene, and use a reciprocating system.
+Autistic Boy *Sounds like a waste of time, internal combustion engines are superior to steam in every possible way imaginable!*
+Autistic Boy *There is only one thing you need to learn son **_The Second Law of Thermodynamics_** without this critical knowledge you will be just wasting your time!*
*What would be the reason or the advantage of converting a jeep or any car to steam???*
What was the fuel consumption? The original Falcon with a 2.8 litre 6 got 30 mpg.
*Ted Pritchard kept that fatal flaw a secret... steam cars have terrible fuel consumption compared to internal combustion engines and the Carnot Formula tells us that he would have been unable to make any significant improvements with such a crude engine design.*
@JaxRhapsody try looking up the lamont boiler, except for a tank on the side, it looks like any other monotube boiler, the lamont has higher efficiency so you can make it tiny. there's also other old tech bits to use.
and, what's steampunk have to do with steam power? steampunk is mostly a fashion and artistic movement, not about making steam anything. heck, the last, most famous, steampunk steam vehicle, was an electric motorscooter with a device to make little puffs from the back, art.
had he done this 5 years ago and not 41 years ago he would have enough interest and investors to start manufacturing them himself
:(
Hi are their any plans or more information about this car and the engine, I would like to know how it works?
Books will be your only comprehensive sources.. steam cars have been obsolete for over a century.. there isn't much available on the internet..
The Bessler brothers bought Doble's design after he went bankrupt.. they sold some material to Japan, and some was purchased by General Motors
+Autistic Boy *Really? The Bessler brother's engines ran on kerosene... Kerosene is a FOSSIL FUEL*
+Autistic Boy *I would wish you good luck if you had any chance of succeeding but I already know that it is simply not practical... and it will be less efficient.*
Pritchard's steam cars looked attractive straight after the 1973 fuel crisis, but fuel prices plateaued for a while, and there was no longer any economic advantage in developing them. The last I saw of a Pritchard steam car (the green prototype that looked like an MGB/240Z hybrid) was in Giltrap's Motor Museum at Dreamworld in '86. Ask me about the public appeal on Brisbane television.
@fizzguts
Thanks. Is Jay the US TV man with a private collection? I'll have look. I recall as a very young boy the last Sentinel steam trucks. They had solid tyres and went very slow. There was a pipe through the centre of the curved fronted cab with smoke coming out. :) But they carried very heavy loads pulling trailers.
Enginon in Germany developed the SteamCell, Steam engine in a PC tower sized box. Could power a small car or the ancillaries in a bus/ruck. Main engine, only traction.
Enginon was revealed to be a hoax and an investment scam.
Very nice, but how long did it take to build-up operating steam pressure on a cold day?
No turn-the-key-and-go with this model.
Saab's 1974 steam car had 30 second heat-up time....max, With today's insulation materials you could reduce that to zero in normal operating cycle of a commuter car. Oh and having your maintenance costs cut by 80-90% would make owners a bit more forgiving.
I remember Ted saying once back in the 70s that it took as long to heat as it took to roll a cigarette. With a bit of modern burner tech and insulation materials it could be made extremely fast. I'd be thinking in terms of using stored compressed air to get rolling while the flash steam generator came to temp.
Manintoga Soooo . . . you're saying that modern insulation materials are far superior to asbestos, which was commonly used one-hundred-years ago? I am obviously not as technically advanced as you guys, because the only way I can imagine getting water to boil instantly is to use an immense amount of energy.
Keith Otis Edwards
Yes Keith, modern insulation is far beyond asbestos, take for example the insulation developed by NASA for the space shuttle. There is also a thing called 'solid smoke' search that one. A common product for kilns is at about 30mm thick and equivalent to a fire brick for only, I don't know, about a tenth of the weight! With modern burners that have auto ignition a steam generator comes up to pressure in seconds rather than the 3 minutes that Ted had, fuel economy should be better than an internal combustion because there is no transmission sucking 15-20% of the power out, also fuel air ratios can be keep optimal unlike the constantly changing demands of the interanal combustion. In many ways external combustion is far superior, ask any steam enthusiast and they will tell you that the low speed torque leaves internal combustion in their dust, they are also very quiet too, long wearing, low revs. If only the same amount of R&D money and time was thrown at steam and compressed air as has been squandered on I.C.Engines, we'd be worlds better off! Hope this helps, cheers. Oh, check out Jay Leno's Doble, even as primative as it is it still has exhaust air quality as good as modern standards require (mostly).
That Interanal combustion sounds painful, reminds me of the mornings after eating too much habanero sauce XD.
External combustion steam engines make a lot of sense.
I really wish they would made a comeback.
I'd buy one if the price was reasonably close to a gas internal combustion engined car.
modern condensing methods would no doubt reduce the water refills, and you could even have an electric boiler that runs on batteries until the steam is up enough to run the engine and generator. than drive forever until you need more water...some day
+Autistic Boy *What about the CONVERSION LOSS... this is a basic fundamental problem that people without formal engineering education seem completely ignorant of... it'is as if these morons think energy is MAGIC or something??? Fucking morons!!*
+Autistic Boy *Some people don't understand the **_Laws of Thermodynamics_** or the **_Conservation of Energy..._** these fuckin morons will believe anything is possible...Lol!!!!*
*You don't need to be an engineer to figure out that if an electric motor is over 90% efficient, why would you use heavy, inefficient batteries to power a steam engine that is less than 20% efficient...*
*It will never happen, because to operate your car on a warm day with a 100% closed system your condenser would need to be larger than the whole car.... not never practical now is it?.*
The Pritchard steam car was one of those novel dream ideas that I read about in Wheels magazine as a youngster; all who commented on it believed it held great potential. Where are the engineers all hiding? Surely Ted was not the last of the great dreamers....
Cowering away behind oil companies.
Inherent problems are it's a large pressurized vessel of heated water. Get something wrong with that and it will blow up. Wrong things are scale build up,the production of nitric acid as a by product of the steam process and possible clogging of the valves. It's not many people who want to drive around with a large pressure cooker in front. Even Jay Leno talks about this.
The steam does pass the rings?
@JaxRhapsody hmm, k. perhaps that howls castle movie?
This is the car from memory that was bought by Exxon Mobil and hidden if not scrapped
+myfeelin4you Ted Pritchard's designs were purchased in 2009 by Uniflow Power Limited which does not appear to have had any commercial success with the technology either.
I need to know if this gentleman is still living please
Hi Vicki. I'm afraid he passed away a few years ago. His Son is running a company using similar technology to generate power for remote and underdeveloped areas.
Ok thanks Paulaus
@@TwiceShyBabe Please see www.uniflowpower.com
@@onggk6561 *Beware! Uniflow is a fruadulent vaporware investment scam.*
hydrogen is not they way forward. it is an energy storage medium at best, like a chemical battery. you cannot get a decent return of energy density to feedstock required to make it (nowhere near as efficient as the gasoline refining process). not to mention the special handling requirements which makes setting up a network of hydrogen filling stations prohibitively expensive and dangerous.
Jay Leno outta buy this little Falcon and interview this amazing engineer.
*The car was scrapped after the venture went bankrupt and Ted died a few years ago.*
+Autistic Boy *Indeed, Teds engineering failure is a perfect example of "how not to design an automobile after 1915"...*
+Autistic Boy *I feel sorry for the poor fools that actually invested their hard earned money into this hopeless crackpot scheme.... but if they had any knowledge of engineering they would have know better!!!!*
I want one!
So you are saying his technology was more advanced than the 1925 Doble E Steam Car? I sure would like to know what he developed .. The early 1900's steam engines required high maintance ..
No, Ted Pritchard was a crackpot and a crooked businessman.
Doble lost 55,000 dollars on every car he sold... went bankrupt in 1931.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 1931 was the Great Depression almost every business went Bankruspt then Many Farmers lost their Farms and many small busineses lost all .. Plus the Dut Bowl a Huge drought was going on and crops were dying..
@@mikeskidmore6754 Steam cars were rendered completely obsolete in 1914... White Motor Company switched to internal combustion engines in 1915.
Stanley went bankrupt in 1926 and Doble continued spending his personal fortune and went bankrupt in 1931.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 So you are saying if Civilzation falls apart and there are no refinereies left to make gasoline .. you would not want a wood burning steam tractor ..
Steam Locomotives were used into the 1950's all you need is water and wood or water and coals and some heavy lubricating oil
@@mikeskidmore6754 Its 2021 and steam powered road vehicles have been obsolete for over a century.
What is compressing the air?
they need to do a where are they now special on this car
@cocacola443 Pritchard claimed that the second generation of the motor had a fuel consumption 22.5 MPG (US) when dyno tested at 50 mph, which would've been somewhat better than many vehicles of the time achieved. Look up "popular science pritchard steam" on Google to read the September 1976 article on the engine.
Cyclone Power Technologies claims that their steam engine has an efficiency of about 30%.
+Autistic Boy *But if you understood something as simple and basic as the **_Second Law of Thermodynamic????_** You would already know that combustion steam technology is NOT the future.*
+Autistic Boy *Why would you use a less efficient technology based on more expensive and less available renewable sources... If you were going to shift to renewables wouldn't make sense to use the MOST energy efficient technology??? Why spent more to get less and generate more pollution in the end. Combustion steam engines have appallingly massive carbon footprints.*
*Steam technology has always utilized renewable fuels... and that has not made them more energy efficient... which is the reason why steam cars are obsolete.*
fyi; *_Cyclone Power Technologies is a defunct investment scam... it was never able to prove its efficiency claims or that its engines actually worked reliably. Most of the money that was defrauded from its investors was spent on luxury homes and a super yacht._*
Yeah, and Ironically Pritchard Steam Car Company and Cyclone Power Technologies were both notorious investment scams so I wouldn't trust any of those numbers without verifiable, independent third-party testing... which neither company ever produced.
I don't know how 'modern' a steam engine can be made but they were never immediate You were there for ages getting up pressure & when you stopped it all cooled down and youd'e have to go through all the same process again before it was ready to drive back! The best bet would be some type of hybrid but then two powertrains adds to the weight and intrudes on passenger and luggage space.
Would have been better if it showed more details on how it worked.
+Maurice Upton Nothing cutting edge in the engine or boiler design... a 2-3/8" X 2" twin cylinder, double-acting, Uniflow design using 15" diameter steam generator mono-tube coil with electric blower fan and fuel pumps... max pressure 1,400psi
Feed pumps and the condenser fan was driven by a second stage rotary vane motor.. similar to a pneumatic air tool motor that ran off the exhaust steam... the condenser lacked any vacuum air pumps...
In its peak fuel efficiency mode it produced only 160ft.lbs of torque
Horsepower output and fuel consumption is not published... but estimated in the 50hp to 120 hp range with about 11 mpg to 19 mpg with kerosene under ideal conditions... other alternate fuels will produce lower mpg ratings
Me thinks this should be revisted. As in all cases of transportation and power generation, it's not a one size fits all. Unfortunately, the higher up muckity-mucks with all the money make the decisions that benefits them the most. Street cars, cables cars, and other tracked publix transportation dissappeared mostly from US cities in favor of buses made by GM which happened to buy out most of these public rail services and closed them down. Now we are finally getting back to rail.
and how much was the car
Cole Miller Prototype only, he only ever built one.
+Autistic Boy *If you knew anything about steam cars you would know there is nothing cheap about them... using renewable fuels does not make them more fuel efficient... so its is nothing but a big waste of time in the end... Its why steam cars obsolete, remember?*
Fascinating
amazing a steam turbine rotating pistons is the only thing i can of think of that can get a car that uses steam to go that fast
hmm, it would be perpetual motion, but your forgetting one thing. It will always need water added as its source of fuel, therefore its not perpetual because it will always need something added to keep it moving...
Where is the car.?
The Pritchard Steam Car Company was a scam, after defrauding its investors the company went bankrupt and both cars were sold for scrap to repay creditors.
What program was this video extract taken from and what year was it first transmitted?
ABC TV Australian Story and a week or two before I uploaded it.
I hope you don't mean that the steam engine turns a generator that supplies electricity to heat water to create steam to power the steam engine. Cuz that's what we refer to as perpetual motion. which is impossible.
Steam cars will be back on our roads soon. I hope to have the Pritchard Eddie on the road soon. Then the Pritchard Jes, and then The Pritchard Aleksy.
Must be nice to have all that money.
@@SorrowAvenue Well, its safe to say that prediction was completely wrong.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 And you know this how? Do you the man?
@@SorrowAvenue *He posted the comment 11 years ago.*
@@SorrowAvenue *Not the sharpest tool in the shed are you kid?*
*Your village must be so proud of you.*
Propane powered steam car...Now that's an idea!
similar idea to the Doble cars from the 1920's
Yes, Doble was also indicted on fruad and embezzlement charges. Both companies were investment scams and went bankrupt.
Hmm, very interesting! I wonder what would happen if development of steam cars continued with modern technology. It's actually quite difficult to make a steam car with efficiencies on par with internal combustion engines, but modern technology might be able to achieve high efficiencies while preserving other advantages of steam engines.
+#420: Weedle Its actually a lot more than "quite difficult" The Carnot Cycle formula tells us its also impossible to match the efficiency of internal combustion.. steam is an inferior working fluid and offers poor thermal efficiency. The only advantage steam cars offered was a way to start the engine without hand cranking which was very difficult and often caused injury or death. But after Charles Kettering invented the electric starter motor the steam cars became obsolete overnight. Cheers!
Dang, I didn't know that about hand cranked cars! Guess the electric starter's another one of those inventions that's kinda inconspicuous until you realize what it would be like without it.
Yeah, I agree, a steam engine's not going to surpass an internal combustion engine in terms of thermal efficiency. There are already diesel engines in cars/trucks getting 40%+ efficiency. But the steam engine has other advantages like flex fuel, low emissions, high torque, etc. that might be worth going for. Efficiency's still one of the major issues, though maybe with today's tech, steam engines can achieve the boiler temps/pressures necessary for good efficiency. They won't get to 40% efficiency, but they might at least be close enough to a gasoline Otto cycle engine that their other advantages would be viable.
+#420: Weedle Yes, indeed.. hand cranking was very difficult for anyone that did not possess significant physical strength, it required a certain degree of skill and none of this could protect you from being severely injured.
We definitely take the starter for granted today.
Absolutely.. there is no practical engine design that can come close with the Diesel.. it is supreme in terms of thermal efficiency..
It too is Flex-fuel capable, low emission and high torque.. its also low cost and low maintenance.
The steam cars has not be commercially viable in over 100 years.. and unfortunately there has been no changes that will alter its obsolete status.. I will admit its an interesting topic to discuss though, I often wondered about steam making a come back somehow... but when you look at the facts and the engineering problems you soon learn to dismiss these thoughts as more fantasy than reality. Cheers!
I agree, there's no engine that can match a diesel in terms of efficiency. The big ones in ships are over 50% efficient, better than any other simple cycle.
But honestly, I don't think the steam car is entirely obsolete. A lot of its problems are still solvable. I did some calculations with steam tables, and steam engines should be able to get around 30% efficiency with easily achievable conditions (
#420: Weedle I see where you're coming from, but you will find no legitimate automotive engineers looking to produce a commercially viable, real world design that will agree with you.
Looking at the formulas and existing tables it may appear possible, theoretically... but an efficient vacuum condenser, steam-to-air heat exchanger for a 150 -200 hp engine suitable for an automobile? Will also be the size of a typical automobile..
The only steam engines that are currently practical (and still cannot match ICEs) are in +100,000 hp scale or larger and almost exclusively use a large body of water as a thermal sink... 2nd, 3rd and even 4th pass cycles may be practical in a multi-megawatt power station where the extra cost can be spread out of 40 years this is simply not practical with cars.
Actually the truth is, the remaining applications that use steam are continuing to shrink, their days are numbered..
The Carnot formula tells us that steam is near to reaching its practical limits.. while ICEs have a much higher practical and theoretical Carnot efficiency limits... this is a serious roadblock for steam which has no possible solution.
um it may be time to go back to these blue prints
Uniflow Power Ltd is an unlisted public company based in Perth, Western Australia, dedicated to commercialising a new renewable energy technology, the Uniflow Generator, a simple, small-scale biomass fuelled steam engine. youtube clip of functioning engine title is Uniflow4TH-cam.mov
lets be honest, you thought it was talking about the steam videogames platform not the real steam
The Pritchard Steam Car Company was not real... it was an investment scam.
Ford would like to say the model T burned more fuel than it really did. Maybe it wasn't so bad, but Ford wouldn't look so great if it was just a little lower mpg than comparable cars have today. I guess we would have to ask somebody with a T.
Amazing!
It should have a steam whistle instead of a horn!
+Autistic Boy *Modern cars have horns... steam cars are obsolete son... don't you know why yet???*
Yeah, baby...yeah...Steampunk!
Steam is not start and go there is a lag of a few minutes from start to getting to drive your car.
TheusZeusDeus, Because ICEs are more efficient than steam... and in the case of small scale power units like automobile they can be twice as efficient!
The most efficient practical heat engines in existance (and in service) are Diesel engines which have higher single cycle thermal fuel efficiency than any steam engine know to exist , steam powerplant or automobiles
Someone needs to point this guy at Kickstarter.
Hella cool