[HN Gopher] Ron Patrick's Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Be... ___________________________________________________________________ Ron Patrick's Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle (2006) Author : 1317 Score : 145 points Date : 2023-10-05 13:45 UTC (9 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.ronpatrickstuff.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.ronpatrickstuff.com) | ynoxinul wrote: | Apparently the post is from 2006. I wonder if this contraption is | still street-legal. | K0balt wrote: | It would be legal to run it on the factory engine, at which | point the jet is just cargo. If you start the jet on a public | road, it could be considered a public nuisance, reckless | driving, etc. | | If a the vehicle presents a clear and present danger of any | kind it is a-priory a ticketable offence at least. With the jet | off, it poses no such danger. | moate wrote: | You can own a car, you can own a flamethrower, you can't fire | your flamethrower out of your car while driving on public | roads. | psychlops wrote: | I'm certain an officer could find all sorts of reasons to | ticket that vehicle if inspired. | aidenn0 wrote: | And for California, don't forget "Exhibition of speed" which | is a rather nasty ticket to end up with. | gpderetta wrote: | what I really want to know if he ever finished his scooter! | avg_dev wrote: | nice... does anyone remember a K Car with a supercar engine? that | was not quite as crazy as this one, no jet engine, but it was | nice. i can't seem to find it but i remember reading about this | "sleeper car". | [deleted] | brucethemoose2 wrote: | Crazy engine swaps are not uncommon. There are some Fiat 500s | and such with v8 double motorcycle engines, wankels or even | v12s and racecar v6s: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A52W20Z38Bw | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6SZuionhqQ | | A turbine _is_ relatively exotic, if only because they are even | more impractical. | aidenn0 wrote: | IIRC someone put a turbocharged 7L smallblock V8 in the back | of a Lotus Exige, though they had to lengthen the chassis to | make it fit. | whynotmaybe wrote: | Even a snowblower with a HEMI... | | https://www.ign.com/articles/2005/06/22/that-thing-got-a- | hem... | brk wrote: | This is a hacker classic. Would be curious to know what | eventually became of it. | JoblessWonder wrote: | Can someone ELI20 how one would convert a turboshaft engine to a | turbojet engine? | mr_toad wrote: | Basically you just remove the shaft. | aidenn0 wrote: | And put a nozzle on the exhaust. | JoblessWonder wrote: | Ah, that makes sense. Thank you! | rmason wrote: | How did Jay Leno not get this car on his TV show when he had it? | He still is posting episodes to YouTube so it is still possible. | latchkey wrote: | _Discussions on similar submissions:_ | | _Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle_ | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28349589 (August 29, 2021 -- | 2 points, 1 comments) | | _Ron Patrick 's Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle | (2006)_ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16513835 (March 4, | 2018 -- 156 points, 60 comments) | | _Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle_ | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5384390 (March 15, 2013 -- 6 | points, 2 comments) | | _Street Legal Jet Powered Beetle (2006)_ | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=831185 (September 18, 2009 | -- 76 points, 23 comments) | dang wrote: | Thanks! Here's a great subthread from one of those: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16524533 | | (I just added it to https://news.ycombinator.com/highlights) | latchkey wrote: | @dang I wonder why we don't just generate these things at the | bottom of every article? My extension does it already, but I | feel like it would help a lot as a core feature. | hansoolo wrote: | Wouldn't help me unfortunately, as I am reading HN on an | android app. But good idea. | dang wrote: | The lists that I post, and that most users post, are | reviewed to include only the interesting threads. This | makes them more valuable to readers, since the odds of | going on a click trip to something boring are much lower. | | Rather than autogenerating them, I think what we'll do is | add software support for the community to collaborate on | the 'related 'list for a post. And it needn't just link to | related HN threads - it can be related URLs on the same | story, for example. | | When we'll actually get to this is another question of | course... | latchkey wrote: | Good points. Previously [0], in your list, it doesn't | include the number of points, as well as the calendar | day, which is something that my generator includes and | helps prevent click trips. | | To filter further, the list could just include posts with | some points + comments ratio math. Also filter out | similar posts within a short timeframe, if two posts | happen within a week of each other, pick the one with the | better ratio math. | | No need to involve the community in moderation a second | time, since they've already involved themselves with | points/comments to begin with. | | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37768936 | xrd wrote: | This should be retitled "Now I'm going to finish adding jet | engines to my wife's scooter." | mindslight wrote: | The scooter seems like it could be a poor idea due to | asymmetric thrust, and I have to wonder if he just mocked it up | in jest. It does look pretty awesome though. | [deleted] | grecy wrote: | I'm a little shocked there's no 1/4 mile time. | | Surely when you strap a jet engine to a Beetle you need to find | out how fast it goes! | dotancohen wrote: | Quick, not fast. Low 1/4 times are mostly associated with | acceleration, not speed. | omginternets wrote: | How on earth is it street legal to emit a high-pressure plume of | jet exhaust behind you? | nikanj wrote: | 'Murica | dzdt wrote: | Its street legal to drive using the standard motor with the jet | engine OFF. | aidos wrote: | > That doesn't stop me from the occasional blast on the | highway though. | skeaker wrote: | Something being road-illegal doesn't stop you from doing it | anyways... | omginternets wrote: | Oooh, it's a hybrid! | dylan604 wrote: | "Hmmm, the car has two engines making the car a hybrid so | maybe we can drive in the commuter lanes along with the | Toyota Priuses. " | omginternets wrote: | Imagine being the cop who has to argue over the ticket | with that guy ^^ | [deleted] | ceejayoz wrote: | "I'm... gonna park a little further back." | [deleted] | dylan604 wrote: | There's a paragraph and photo of this very thing in the | TFA | mindslight wrote: | We live in a society where things are legal by default. Why | would adding a jet engine to a car be a priori illegal? If he | harms somebody or otherwise causes damage, that itself is | what's illegal and he'd be liable regardless of motor vehicle | regulations. If this mod became a larger trend, especially | consumer-available, then regulations would be implemented to | head it off. But for a few lone instances it's not particularly | necessary. | shortcake27 wrote: | 20 years ago in Australia my car got canaried because I had | LPG and a pod filter, which was illegal because you were only | allowed 1 modification to the intake system. I am 100% | confident that if I strapped a jet to the car, it would be | illegal. As it should be. If you want to do extremely | dangerous modifications, do it on your own property. Not a | public road where you risk killing a family of 5. | mindslight wrote: | You're speaking from an Australian perspective about _what | is_ , to make an otherwise unsupported argument about what | _should be_ in the US. I 'll be one of the first to point | out problems and blindspots from the American conception of | "freedom", but in this case it seems highly appropriate. | You yourself even got bit by overregulation for something | seemingly reasonable and forward-looking, and yet you're | still reflexively defending it! | | In my estimation your example "family of 5" is at much more | risk from widespread unnecessarily-high bro-dozer trucks | than a single engineer personally adding a jet engine to | his car while seemingly being very in touch with the | dangers of operating it. In fact given the severe disparity | in other vehicle crash survivability statistics between | coupes and trucks, I've got to wonder if this car isn't | still _individually safer_ than a casually-driven pickup | truck. | gafferongames wrote: | As an Australian-American living in the US I can confirm | that the Australian concept of law (aka Nanny State) | would ensure that this modification is illegal by | default. Think of the children. | civilitty wrote: | Children don't really fit in the intake so it shouldn't | be a problem | historyTeach123 wrote: | He didn't modify the car's original factory system. He | simply added onto it, he added a second independent system. | | Tbh I kinda agree this is a bit ridiculous to assume it's | safe to drive on the road though. | cortesoft wrote: | In California, you have to register your car and have it pass | a smog test. How would this pass that? | btilly wrote: | Just drive on the gasoline engine. | lawlessone wrote: | I am not in the US, but where i am afaik anything that | modifies the car like this would have to go through some sort | of recertification process. | | It would be perfectly legal on private property but not | public roads | throwaway20304 wrote: | Well not sure where you are, but where in EU I am, you can | modify the insides of your car (people attach entire | apartments to the insides of their cars...), and there's | nothing wrong about stuff sticking outside - you just need | to attach a red flag if it's over 1.5m out of the car | (maybe red flame would be enough?). | | The modified rear door might be a problem, but where I am | you could simply keep the original open, or detach it. | olyjohn wrote: | In this case the law has already been written. It's not a | CARB-approved, nor EPA compliant engine. You're not allowed | to run it on the street. The law is written so that | everything you do to a car's emission system is illegal by | default. To make any engine modifications in California, the | part must be CARB approved and have a compliance sticker on | it. Engine swaps in California are legal, as long as the | engine being swapped is at least as new as the engine in the | vehicle and meets the same regulatory requirements. Which | means you swap in another EPA/CARB approved engine, but not a | jet engine. | Miserlou57 wrote: | My buddy (a car guy) from Mountain View told me he could hear | this thing on 280 late at night every now and then. Anyone else? | Aurornis wrote: | Awesome project, but are there any actual videos of it running | the jet engine? | | He says the jet engine moves 11,000 CFM of air, but that air can | only come through the windows and the sunroof. Pulling 183 cubic | feet of air per second through those little openings while | sitting in the drivers seat isn't going to work. Just try to do | the math on how fast that air would have to be moving through | those windows. | | Cool show piece though. | samtho wrote: | This not a typical low-bypass, cigar-type turbofan jet engine | you see on airplanes, rather, it's a modified turboshaft jet | engine used for helicopters, intended to provide longitudinal | rotational energy. The air it moves from the intake is a | fraction of what it produces as the combustion process itself | results in gasses being chemically formed. There is no | propeller or fan on this engine - it's closer to a rocket than | what we think of as a jet. | ceejayoz wrote: | Yes, there's video online. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCqxWhKe_tA | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zNdkXwFQ3c | | (Noise warning, for obvious reasons.) | avg_dev wrote: | I see | | > I don't know how fast the car will go and probably never | will. The car was built to thrill me, not kill me. That | doesn't stop me from the occasional blast on the highway | though. | | but I am unsure if that means he has never driven it using | the jet engine, or whether the engine even will power the car | or just kinda runs on its own. I'm curious to see it go at | all under jet engine power. | | Edit: maybe this is it | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-ipYAl3o40 | jefftk wrote: | That videos's an original Beetle, not a New Beetle. | dmurray wrote: | I think he means he's used it plenty, but hasn't tried to | max out the speed. | ceejayoz wrote: | That's my reading as well. | | I have a vague memory of this site or an interview | previously saying he got up to 130 mph once, before | deciding he'd rather not find out what speed a VW Beetle | lifts off the pavement. | sokoloff wrote: | Give 6 sq ft for openings, that's around 30 linear feet per | second. ~30 feet per second is ~20 miles per hour. That's a | stiff breeze, but it doesn't seem outrageous. | [deleted] | ralfd wrote: | Comments from 2018: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16513835 | smohnot wrote: | He had it listed on Craigslist a few years ago... for $550k. | Anyone know the current status of it? | | https://www.autoevolution.com/news/get-yourself-the-iconic-j... | stergios wrote: | It's still sitting in his shop. RP is not going to sell it. | KennyBlanken wrote: | I think it's more that like most modded / custom car owners, | he thinks that it's reasonable to set an asking price | according to the following formula: | | (Cost of car) + (Cost of Mods) + (My time x some magical | hourly rate) = reasonable asking price | | The more sane of them add in a multiplier, like say .5 to .8. | Or leave out their time. | | Reality is: | | What 1 person among the people who hear about the sale will | pay = reasonable asking price | historyTeach123 wrote: | [flagged] | hrichards wrote: | Seems like a good time to ask this question that has been bugging | me forever, since all the HN jet nerds will be drawn to this | thread: | | Why hasn't anyone made a hybrid car that uses a gasoline-powered | turbine generator to charge its batteries instead of a piston | engine? | | I'd imagine that hooking up such an engine directly to the | drivetrain like in a Prius would be difficult, but surely a small | turbine with one hell of a muffler running a generator (similar | to a natural gas power plant), both running only at their peak | efficiency RPMs, would yield a very efficient car that could | still use the extant gasoline infrastructure. | | I'm sure there are very interesting reasons, either due cost, | noise, reliability, or durability, that this idea hasn't taken | off, and I'm very interested to hear y'all's thoughts on the | subject. Or maybe there has been progress in this area, and I'd | love to see some links! | mixmastamyk wrote: | Sounds like you just described a hybrid, only needs a larger | tank. | usrusr wrote: | I've been wondering about this very same question a lot myself | and accidentally stumbled across the answer just a few days | ago: Efficiency of turbines smaller than grid scale is simply | not anywhere close to what piston engines can do at e.g. car | size. Even at naval scale, turbines only win in use cases where | power density is more important than fuel efficiency. | Helicopters are deep in the (specific) camp of power density | beats efficiency because carrying a heavier but more efficient | engine would easily eat the fuel savings. Fixed wing aircraft | gain range by climbing high, but up there both efficiency and | power density of piston engines decreases dramatically with | decreasing air density, so they are also in the camp of power | density over efficiency (turbines are also affected, but not | quite as much). | | Note that despite all this, the Otto Aviation 500L that is all | about fuel efficiency at high altitudes uses a piston engine | (they probably put a lot of effort into their turbocharger, | those can lessen the impact of thin air) | KennyBlanken wrote: | The bit about the naval use and efficiency isn't quite | accurate. | | The issue isn't that they're not efficient. It's that they | are only efficient at high power level, and the minimum power | level they're efficient at (and even their minimum power | level, period) - is quite high. To compare: Britain's current | aircraft carrier has four diesels that total 40MW...combined | those diesels equal one of its two 40MW turbines. | | This minimum power level is why jet airplanes have an APU, | and often taxi with just one engine running, with the second | started up with enough time to get up to operating | temperature for takeoff. | | Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_MT30 | | ~40MW, minimum efficient power level 25MW. | | 25MW, even if it's very efficient in terms of turning | kerosene into shaft power, means the ship is moving really | fast, and thus there's enormous fuel consumption and drag. | anjel wrote: | Celebrity and Cunard built a few Cruise ships that use | turbines to generate power to its electric motor | propulsion.[1] They regret the endeavor owing to cost of | operation.[2] | | [1]https://www.ge.com/gas-power/industries/cruise-lines | | [2]https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1202425 | xattt wrote: | I don't have the source at hand, but a gas turbine is | ridiculously inefficient for variable loads. At idle, fuel | consumption can be ~35% of what it is at full power. | | It would only need to charge for short time, and subsequently | shut off. When a charge top-up is required, startup would be | another rigamarole. | | Now, rotary engines, that's a different story... | playworker wrote: | https://www.mazda.co.uk/cars/mazda-mx-30-r-ev/ | mschuster91 wrote: | > Why hasn't anyone made a hybrid car that uses a gasoline- | powered turbine generator to charge its batteries instead of a | piston engine? | | Because turbine engines have some pretty serious downsides. | Compared to a piston engine, they guzzle fuel [1], they're | pretty complex to repair (which is one of the problems Ukraine | is facing), they spin at absurd RPMs which means that they need | some serious housing to not turn into a shrapnel dispenser in | case of an engine failure or accident, and they produce an | awful lot of hot exhaust gas at high velocity that needs to be | dissipated somewhere - down isn't OK because it will melt the | asphalt, sideways is not OK because it will melt or injure | anyone and anything next to the car, and upwards carries | serious risks as well (e.g. if you're in a tunnel). | | [1] https://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/politik/panzer- | vergleic... | historyTeach123 wrote: | [flagged] | jabl wrote: | As mentioned in a sibling comment, turbines don't scale down | very well. Boundary layer friction gets relatively worse for | smaller turbines, and AFAIU small turbines have relatively | larger inefficiency due to air leaking past between the blades | and the casing, etc. | | There's a couple of companies working on recuperated turbine | engines for small aircraft in the few hundred kW range, remains | to be seen whether any of these will succeed. | iancmceachern wrote: | The military has made several "micro turbine generators" Here | is a report on one: | | https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA515623 | | My guess the answer to your question would be cost. | h2odragon wrote: | i think even the tiny, model jet engines used in radio control | planes are both very hot, and move lots of air. both of which | are hard to tame to the point of making them comfortable to | coexist with on a city street in large herds. | | I still want one. direct the exhaust forward, dump in a little | extra fuel, and instant snowblower / flamethrower. Makes that | pesky crosswalk crowd just melt away. | jacquesm wrote: | And turns it into a skating rink five minutes later. You want | the snow to go away, not to change into liquid water on a | sub-zero stone substrate. | h2odragon wrote: | Excellent point, but i must rebut: (a) i'm already on my | way by then, and (b) FIRE! </beavis> | rainbowzootsuit wrote: | It's a(t least one) thing. Test run before the snow gets too | deep: | | Jet Powered Blower | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcEkt5vQTVQ | clucas wrote: | Having an ICE that drives a generator (alternator?) to power a | traction motor(s), without being mechanically linked to the | drivetrain, is how diesel locomotives operate. I believe the | concept also has been (is being?) explored for linehaul trucks. | But I'm not sure what constraints there are on passenger | vehicles though... I'm also curious. | | If I had to guess, I would bet that the constraints are more | commercial than physical... hybrids are already very efficient, | so the market for such a vehicle would probably not justify the | engineering costs. But that's just a guess! | linkjuice4all wrote: | Union Pacific tried using turbines in the 50s[0] but fuel | consumption was an issue (I think they had to keep the | turbine idling and maybe throttling wasn't as easy?). Also | mentioned in the wiki article was the low-grade fuel they | were used was able to be used for plastic manufacturing | instead of just burning it. | | The bigger difference between locomotive applications and GPs | question is around charging batteries as opposed to running | motors or directly turning the wheels. Efficiency of the | smaller turbine is mentioned in another comment - but I have | to imagine you'd also see some loses going from turbine to | generator to battery and then to electric motor. | | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Pacific_GTELs | thebutcher wrote: | I think someone is making this, or maybe I misunderstood your | question. The Ariel Hipercar uses a jet engine to power it's 4 | electric engines. I think it's just used as a range extender, | and last I saw they didn't have it working yet. It's been a | while since I checked up on the car. | | EDIT: I just read this article from 2023 that says the turbine | engine still isn't working: | https://www.evo.co.uk/ariel/206120/ariel-hipercar-prototype-... | TuesdayNights wrote: | Arnold Schwarzenegger's Hummer from the early 2000's is setup | like this -- 100mpg with bio-diesel. I think this is the | original article I read about his car's creator, Johnathan | Goodwin, from years ago. | | https://www.autoblog.com/amp/2007/10/20/biodiesel-turbine-su... | Scene_Cast2 wrote: | To add to the discussion - the M1 Abrams tank uses a turbine. I | don't know how that's linked up to the tracks though. | ithkuil wrote: | Interestingly, that engine has good power to weight ratio, | has a better noise profile (higher pitched noise, that | doesn't transmit far, albeit louder locally), can operate | with a variety of fuels, and can handle arctic conditions. | | The downside is that it consumes 50% more fuel than a | comparable diesel engine. | efitz wrote: | Former M1 Abrams crewman (19K). It has an automatic | transmission. | shagie wrote: | I recently stumbled into a couple of YouTube videos on turret | design for tanks. | | * What actually IS an "Oscillating" turret? | https://youtu.be/46k7uhPHpLY | | * What happened to Rear-Mounted Turrets? | https://youtu.be/g5DOf2eZW3Y | | At 4:24 in the rear mounted turret video it touches on the | aspects of modern transmission. | usrusr wrote: | "The car has two engines: the production gasoline engine in the | front driving the front wheels and the jet engine in the back." | | Careful wording to give the impression that the drive shaft of | the helicopter turbine would be connected to the rear wheels, | without actually claiming that it is. So it's a car with a large | flame thrower in the back, minor The Boring Company vibes. | | Well possible that the author might have had more fun writing | than building/driving. (I do love the incredulous tone of "#1 | Does this mean I'm the right hands?") | UniverseHacker wrote: | It produces thrust in the normal way a jet engine aircraft | does... with high exhaust velocity. From the videos you can see | shock diamonds, so it is producing supersonic exhaust. | alright2565 wrote: | I don't think so. In another part he mentions | | > This is a helicopter turboshaft engine that was converted to | a jet engine | | I can't see a way to get rotary power out of this engine after | the modifications. | ben7799 wrote: | For a stunt car like this there's not a huge need or desire to | have it powering the wheels at all. | | The direct air thrust will push the car just fine, doesn't need | a transmission, has zero issues with wheel spin or traction, | and so then doesn't require re-engineering the wheels/tires and | then the suspension and/or chassis to handle 1350hp. | generalizations wrote: | > You have to give the California Department of Motor Vehicles | (the DMV) credit for creativity on this one. A DMV insider has | disclosed to me that the DMV has made a formal request to a | federal agency to rule if my Beetle constitutes a threat to | national security based on what could happen if it got into the | wrong hands. This raises three questions in my mind: #1 Does this | mean I'm the right hands? #2 If someone with the name "b_laden13" | is the highest eBay bidder for my Beetle can I refuse his offer | even if he has the prestigious eBay Red Shooting Star feedback | rating (the highest)? #3 Would this affect my eBay rating? | | Wonder if they ever found a way to give the guy a ticket. | literarylover wrote: | [dead] ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-10-05 23:00 UTC)