![]() ![]() for all fuels ever, until it was surpassed by the Honda Fit EV in June 2012 and the BMW i3, Chevrolet Spark EV, Volkswagen e-Golf, and Fiat 500e in succeeding years. In November 2011 the Mitsubishi i ranked first in EPA's 2012 Annual Fuel Economy Guide, and became the most fuel efficient EPA certified vehicle in the U.S. The range for the 2012 model year American version is 62 miles (100 km) on the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (US EPA) cycle. Īccording to the manufacturer, the i-MiEV all-electric range is 160 kilometres (100 mi) on the Japanese test cycle. The American-only version is larger than the Japanese version and has several additional features. Fleet and retail customer deliveries in the U.S. International sales to Asia, Australia and Europe started in 2010, with further markers in 2011 including Central and South America. The i-MiEV was launched for fleet customers in Japan in July 2009, and on April 1, 2010, for the wider public. The i-MiEV was the world's first modern highway-capable mass production electric car. Rebadged variants of the i-MiEV are also sold by PSA as the Peugeot iOn and Citroën C-Zero, mainly in Europe. The Mitsubishi i-MiEV (MiEV is an acronym for Mitsubishi innovative Electric Vehicle ) is a five-door hatchback electric car produced in the 2010s by Mitsubishi Motors, and is the electric version of the Mitsubishi i. I don't know if all that had any bearing on GM not using reverse-cooling after that or not.Japan: Kurashiki, Okayama (Mizushima Plant)Ĥ7 kW (63 hp), 180 N⋅m (133 lbf⋅ft) permanent-magnet motor ġ5 A 240 V AC (3.6 kW) on the SAE J1772-2009 inlet, optional CHAdeMO DC rapid charging, adapters for domestic AC sockets (110–240 V) There was a lawsuit and that was the allegations. GM told him no thanks, then later released his design into production without paying royalties. GM tricked the inventor and kept the his car overnight, but really reversed engineered his design. Something about the air bleed hole had to be a certain smaller size. An inventor had a working example he designed. ![]() ![]() One interesting story is GM had problems getting their reverse cooling system to work. Nominal coolant temperatures are similar to what we see in LT1/4 engines Like most engines of the last 20 years or so, the LS1 uses a 195 degree thermostat. With a better combustion chamber and water jacket design and improved antifriction technology in the block, pistons and rings it made sense to go back to the normal-flow cooling system. The clean-sheet-of-paper approach also allowed design of the cooling passages around the chambers to be more efficient such that the engine can put out more power than the Gen II but yet have coolant flow in the conventional direction to eliminate problems with aeration. Those features allow them to make more power. Though the LS1 has a lower static compression ratio its cylinder heads have improved combustion chamber design and intake ports that breathe better. The problem with reverse flow is that with coolant flowing downward and air bubbles flowing upward keeping air out of the Gen II cooling system was difficult. This often causes localized boiling and that, in turn, allows hot spots to develop on chamber walls and they cause detonation. Clearly, reverse-flow cooling, the publicity darling of the Gen II engine, was really nothing more than a fix that allowed the limited cooling of the old Small-Block head to work with the higher compression necessary to reach the 300 horsepower level.Īir in the cooling system becomes problematic if it gets into the water passages surrounding the combustion chambers. The cooling system was revised to run the cylinder heads cooler as an antidetonant strategy, and to run the cylinder bores hotter for higher oil temperature and less friction. The reason Gen II went reverse was that, to make the power Corvette Development wanted it had to have a higher compression ratio (LT1, 10.2:1 LT4, 10.8:1). Coolant is pumped into the block, around the cylinders, up into the heads, then out to the radiator. The new engine uses conventional pushrod V8 cooling. Remember 1992, when Chevy raved about the Gen II’s reverse-flow cooling? Well, reverse is, apparently, out. ![]() Nothing special about it, you are not going to hurt it. Your 5.3 is identical architecture to my LS1/5.7. That was 32,000 miles and 150 1/4 mile passes later with N20 and a nice size cam. Went to work checked it when I got home topped it off. I flushed i,t drained it, filled it, ran it around the block, topped it off. Should be as simple as flushing out my Trans Am. The LSX, hence the 5.3 is not reversed cooled so nothing to worry about there. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |