Can a gear system be modified to have 12-17gears? I am asking this because I have a project in mind to create a prototype of a small V-12 engine. It will come with a rimless wheel whose surface would expand as the engine gains speed. The plan is to place the engine on the front part of the rear wheels for effective distribution of weight.
The prototype will have two connected fuel tanks, 72 valves and two starters. It will employ two types of braking systems with six turbochargers using chains instead of belts. Other features will include: adjustable ride height, drifting option using the rear and front wheels to turn and increase vehicle’s agility, four mufflers with valves and gear levelling on every wheel to improve performance.
To make the engine hybrid, I will use an electric motor that will cause it to use hydrogen or other compound gases as opposed to traditional liquid fuel. It will also have a wide hood to increase aerodynamics, super quick 12-speed gearbox.
Now let’s come to the airbags because safety is key, right? The design I have in mind is such that at impact, the bags will pop out from the doors, the dash board and the steering wheel.
In addition, the seat belts will be synced in such a way that the vehicle won’t start until all occupants are buckled up. In the event of impact, the belts will tighten to normal grip so as not to trap the people inside. The seats will be designed in such a way that they auto-tilt backward slightly to prevent head injuries.
Well, that is my dream. I wonder, where can I get help to actualise this project? Kindly advice.
When I first started reading your rather breathless correspondence, I thought "Here is a guy with a vision" but a few lines in, my thoughts turned to "This guy is dreaming" and by the time I got to the closing statements, I was firmly on the "I suspect I am being trolled" side of the table.
But then again, you are only 16, so listen here very carefully:
I don't know how serious you are about your intentions. If it is a joke (because it sure sounds like one), then haha! You got me there, moving on swiftly. If it is an actual vision you have, then good. Let's get started.
It's very ambitious, that's for sure. Oddly enough, it is also achievable. There is nothing you have described that hasn't already been done before; however, there are two addenda that I would like to bring you back to earth with.
There are reasons why all this technology has never been found on the same car, and there are reasons - the same reasons - why, even though existent, a lot of that technology hasn't entered production on any vehicle, and those reasons are cost and practicality.
Those two words sum up the fact the vehicle you envision doesn't make any rational sense whatsoever. It would cost too much to build, and would be difficult to package and operate. This is why all the inventors who tried all that stuff you have listed did not pursue their ventures further. Most of them only did it as a proof of concept.
You can have a 17-speed transmission if you wanted, but why would you? What advantage does it offer over the world's most popular transmission, the 8-speed ZF 8HP? You will need to pay a manufacturer millions of dollars to develop the transmission for you, but this has to be after you have finished building your engine, which will cost you billions of dollars to do from scratch. The manufacturer cannot make a custom transmission if he doesn't know what engine it is going to be mated to.
You say a small V12, right? Only three manufacturers still make V12s: Ferrari, Lamborghini and BMW. Mercedes, inventor of the motor vehicle, no longer builds V12s. Aston Martin, once a V12 powerhouse, now gets engines from Mercedes, who no longer make V12s. None of the V12s from the last three bastions are compact, they're all larger than 6000cc. Where are you planning on getting this small V12 from? Build it from scratch? You will need a lot of scratch (multiple billions of dollars).
The rimless expanding tyres are another source of financial pain, as is the entire raft of technologies you list: the hybrid tech, four-wheel steering (which will make drifting harder, not easier), hydrogen injection (yikes!), externally fed airbags, et al; though a lot of the safety stuff involving seat belts can be borrowed from Mercedes-AMG.
So now, the summary is you will need money, no? For someone to give you money, they expect a return on their investment, which will lead to the following questions: why does this car need to exist? Where will you build it and at what cost? What are your year-on-year projections? Is it a long term project or will you build 20 cars to be sold at 25 billion dollars each then call it a day? Who is the market for it and will they pay 25 billion dollars for a car built by a 16-year old?
However, we live in strange times. We are in the midst of a global pandemic whose fatality somehow seems to be tied to geopolitics and race; and we have the county government of Laikipia which decided to fund the BJ-50 project.
2020 is the one year we can say we have seen it all, so strike while the iron is hot. Make some news. If they can fund a BJ-50, they can fund an overwrought pipe dream. Visit the Laikipia county office and tell them you want to build a hybrid V12 with a 17-speed transmission and rimless tyres, but do this while it is still 2020. If you wait too long we might wake up from this year and realize it was all a bad dream.
A Nissan Juke.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
I believe the Nissan Juke and Mahindra Bolero the ugliest vehicles ‘across board, what do you think?
Anyway, I am thinking of buying a gti mk5 or a Subaru Legacy saloon 2012. Which of these two has more speed which has more speed toe to toe?
1. The Nissan Juke may not necessarily be the ugliest vehicle across the board, but it sure is a strong contender for the title. I will have to disagree on the Mahindra Bolero, though; it looks like a cross between the previous model Land Rover Defender and a Mercedes-Benz G Wagon complete with a nose that could only have been sourced from behind the Iron Curtain - none of those vehicles has ever been described as ugly by anybody with fully functional 20/20 vision and we all know that anything Russian or Russian-looking is synonymous with “badass”. That Bolero looks rugged. Get rid of the silly hubcaps and install some offset rims shod in chunky rubber and “colleck that respeck, homie”.
2. Which Legacy specifically are you referring to? Anything turboless will have its trunk lid handed to it by the German hatch, but there are three specifications that The People’s Car may have trouble keeping up with, let alone passing. First up is the 2.5GT which as the name suggests has a two-and-a-half liter turbo block. Next up in the hierarchy is the 3.6R which, again from the badging, is a saloon car that on paper shares a lot of stuff with a Porsche 911: flat-six engine, natural aspiration, all-wheel drive, 3600cc. It almost goes like a 911 too, key word being “almost” because nothing goes like a 911, but the Subaru sure does make a good attempt of it. Don’t let the natural aspiration fool you: 3600cc is only 10% less than four liters. In a compact saloon car, that is akin to installing a roman candle on a birthday cake. Kaboom!
Yamaha Crux motorcycle
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
I’m a passionate reader of your articles in the Daily Nation. I haven’t rode motorcycles for three years.
I know you mostly give advice on cars but my question is on motorcycles. I haven’t rode them for close to three years. I wish to purchase one for luxury and also to commute to work. However, I am can’t make up my mind on which model to go for. I’m in a dilemma of buying a Boxer X150 motorcycle and a Yamaha Xrux. What’s your take on these two models and which one would you recommend.
I’m sorry, but I am of no help here. I know precious little about bikes apart from the fact that they are noisy, hazardous and uncomfortable. My ignorance on the subject is deliberate for these exact reasons.
However, I have heard a lot about the Boxer so it edges forward by sheer power of reputation. It took an internet search for me to learn two things about the Yamaha: first, it’s called the “Crux” and not the “Xrux” as you have misspelt up there; and second, it comes from India just like the alliterative Bajaj Boxer.
None of these are what you would call luxurious, but I am guessing what you want to know is which one is less punitive to hit the road with. I can’t tell, they look the same but I can infer some of my four-wheeled analysis protocols to see if I can make a judgment call. Aficionados of the iron horse, please feel free to not bother correcting me in case I’m wrong:
The Boxer packs a 150cc single cylinder good for an earth-shattering 11hp and up to 12Nm of torque which would be equal to that of a Scania bus but only if you string together one hundred and thirteen of these motorbikes.
The Yamaha trails the Bajaj with a mere 7hp from 106cc which, when translated into vehicular terms, means “not enough”; and it is made worse by the fact that the torque figure is a single digit as well: 8Nm. My 8-year old son develops more torque when carrying his school bag.
What do these numbers even mean? It means that the Bajaj is comparatively more relaxed and less stressed when “cruising” - though buzzing noisily at 7000rpm is a direct misinterpretation of the word cruising - and with its inferior specs, the Yamaha will deliver a more high-strung performance to what was an already histrionic show.
However, the Crux massively undercuts the out-of-production Boxer in price, starting at Ksh. 92,000/- according to the Toyota Kenya website compared to the Boxer’s Ksh. 123,000/- according to another website that is not Toyota Kenya’s. Does that huge difference (Ksh. 31,000/- or a full 30% of the Crux’s asking price and 25% of the Boxer’s) make an impact?
Yes it does, a big one. The power and torque numbers argument is highly theoretical and if you ride by yourself then they won’t really matter since you will not be winning any races on either bike; but that price difference is as real as the chiropractic problems you will have after riding cheap bikes for too long. Think of it in car terms: one costs 3 million shillings while the other costs 4 million shillings, and the only downside to the cheaper vehicle is an argument based purely on theories. What would you go for?
As a thinking man, you’d go for the Yamaha. It’s a lot cheaper, it’s supported by a franchise famous for its reliable products and it’s still in production. This is what we call a “reality check”.
