Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 31    Average: 4.3/5]
61 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 37659
Rating: 4.3
Category: Science
Date: 03/14/10 08:06 AM

61 Responses to What Happened To Edwin Gray`s Awesome Car? [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of fancylad
    fancylad Male 30-39
    18502 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 7:08 am
    Link: What Happened To Edwin Gray`s Awesome Car? - In the `60s, this causal positron energy car was set to revolutionize fuel reduction. Then the government stopped it.
  2. Profile photo of a1butcher
    a1butcher Male 40-49
    4812 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:11 am
    And all the blue prints were destroyed and the inventors murdered.
  3. Profile photo of trapinch55
    trapinch55 Male 13-17
    48 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:19 am
    wow,,, i h say its,,, its,,, AMAZING
  4. Profile photo of cheese6969
    cheese6969 Male 18-29
    522 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:20 am
    I would love to drive it if it was a different color
  5. Profile photo of a1butcher
    a1butcher Male 40-49
    4812 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:27 am
    Can we have a temp ban on PENtrap please??
    He`s being a douche.
  6. Profile photo of SomeShoes
    SomeShoes Male 13-17
    2056 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:28 am
    now THAT is sick!
  7. Profile photo of lastrogue
    lastrogue Male 18-29
    176 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:40 am
    something tells me the oil producing companies were to blame for most of it, but the government turned a blind eye. Probably due to financial investments into campaigns.
  8. Profile photo of TheSharpest
    TheSharpest Male 18-29
    1768 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:43 am
    Want!
  9. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10443 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:00 am
    Fuel less? .... right...
  10. Profile photo of AntEconomist
    AntEconomist Male 40-49
    339 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:00 am
    "something tells me the oil producing companies were to blame for most of it, but the government turned a blind eye. Probably due to financial investments into campaigns."

    Which is more believable, (1) that oil companies quashed a technology on which they could make money, or (2) that a freelance inventor circumvented the laws of physics.

  11. Profile photo of Angelmassb
    Angelmassb Male 18-29
    15511 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:03 am
    I bet it was taken by NASA to do secret experiments on it...
  12. Profile photo of blipflip
    blipflip Male 13-17
    87 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:07 am
    Casual positron energy?

    I`m sorry, is this real? Is this guy claiming to have a car powered by antimatter?

    He`s a fraud.

  13. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:07 am
    The oil companies (Exxon in particular) don`t hide the fact that they will hide any tech that will cause less oil to be used. They have publicly said many times that they want people to come up with ways to make fuel efficient engines. They will then buy it from you, and suppress the idea. Exxon themselves have the patents on hundreds of hyper-mileage combustion engines.
  14. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15844 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:12 am
    Anyone who believes you can have a fuelless engine should be put on a foodless diet.
  15. Profile photo of opiebreath
    opiebreath Female 18-29
    15782 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:16 am
    Fuelless and oilless are COMPLETELY different.

    Just wanted to point that out within the oil debate...

  16. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:16 am
    Takes oil to make gas/diesel (fuel) opie.
  17. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:18 am
    Let me edit a tad. They will also try to suppress vehicles that use no oil also.

    That makes more sense in this case.

  18. Profile photo of thelonious
    thelonious Male 40-49
    3278 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:18 am
    Yeah, and then granny`s arse got sucked into the turbines.
  19. Profile photo of opiebreath
    opiebreath Female 18-29
    15782 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:19 am
    Fuel, as in a substance (ANY substance) that can be used to procure energy, doesn`t necessarily need oil.

    I`m just piggybacking off Ollie`s comment.

  20. Profile photo of thelonious
    thelonious Male 40-49
    3278 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:23 am
    There is a big difference between a crazy-energy thread and this crazy energy-thread.
  21. Profile photo of Hemtroll
    Hemtroll Male 18-29
    363 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:32 am
    Hey, if these comments are correct then the oil companies have a bunch of replacement technologies hidden away for when we run out of oil so we`ll all be fine!
  22. Profile photo of mcmonkeyman
    mcmonkeyman Male 13-17
    243 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:34 am
    or its like the flinstones and has pedals
  23. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31783 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:39 am
    Well, here`s a linky:
    http://free-energy.ws/edwin-gray.html
    I doubt it produced more energy than it consumed, that would:
    A) violate the laws of thermodynamics
    B) be a perpetual motion machine
    Nicola Tesla invented (years before Gray) an electric engine that produced over 90% of the power it used, that tech was supressed, along with almost all his inventions, but is making a comeback lately.
  24. Profile photo of littlepete50
    littlepete50 Male 18-29
    1359 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:48 am
    MASSIVE CONSPIRACY about oil companies

    seriously IAB forumers.... grow tf up.

  25. Profile photo of Boredered
    Boredered Male 18-29
    2508 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 9:58 am
    The real question is would this machine work on tuesdays?
  26. Profile photo of PUDDING1961
    PUDDING1961 Female 40-49
    446 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 10:07 am
    Oh My! One teeny wheel in the front. Make me think of that 3 wheel car that Mr Bean allways manages to massacre...lolll!
  27. Profile photo of The_Maddog
    The_Maddog Male 30-39
    3371 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 11:04 am
    PUDDING1961
    Female, 40-49, Canada
    57 Posts Sunday, March 14, 2010 10:07:26 AM
    Oh My! One teeny wheel in the front. Make me think of that 3 wheel car that Mr Bean allways manages to massacre...lolll!
    --------------------------------------------------

    That would be a Robin Reliant

  28. Profile photo of anothertime
    anothertime Female 18-29
    13 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 11:13 am
    watch "who killed the electric car?"
  29. Profile photo of Avalessa
    Avalessa Female 13-17
    491 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 11:34 am
    Littlepete50, you grow up. Cussing on a forum is just as meaningful as punching a nun.
  30. Profile photo of incubus_inc
    incubus_inc Male 18-29
    976 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 11:35 am
    Conspiracy? What is so wrong with speculating conspiracy??? Is it really so unbelievable that someone or someones out there are consciously making an effort to provide everyone with less so that they can have more? It happens everyday on a small scale right in front of me. Keep friends close... enemies closer. Even if nothing can be done, don`t just turn away from something you think you should see.
  31. Profile photo of taylor_stone
    taylor_stone Male 30-39
    2688 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 11:44 am
    Oil companies controlling much of the world`s economy is NOT a conspiracy. Its a fact that even the US government has actually ADMITTED to many times in the past.
  32. Profile photo of gorgack2000
    gorgack2000 Male 13-17
    4683 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 11:56 am
    "Is it really so unbelievable that someone or someones out there are consciously making an effort to provide everyone with less so that they can have more?"
    Yes.
  33. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 12:50 pm
    Here`s what happened to the car: it didn`t work.

    People have been selling magic stuff that doesn`t work for at least as far back as the beginning of recorded history. There are always suckers eager to buy it, even today when people should know better. There are still people getting funding for perpetual motion machines. Seriously. They don`t work, of course, but suckers give the "inventors" money.

    I`m not saying it`s always a con. Sometimes the people selling it are deluded.

    There may well be some radical new technology invented at some point, either utilising a previously unknown reaction or making use of something in a way no-one has considered before. There`s a very important difference between that and all the delusions and cons - it can be proved to work.

    For example, a research team is developing a battery with 10 times the charge to weight ratio of Li-ion batteries. Very radical. The key factor is that they have demonstrated a working prototype.

  34. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 1:00 pm
    Oil companies controlling much of the world`s economy is NOT a conspiracy. Its a fact that even the US government has actually ADMITTED to many times in the past.

    It`s also irrelevant.

    Say I have invented an engine that uses no fuel and has no emissions and can be built for about as much as an ICE. Impossible, but for the sake of argument assume it was real.

    Option 1: I approach a major transnational company with it. Tens of millions for a production facility will be buttons to them. They could sell a billion of these engines as fast as they could build them and make trillions in profit. You think they`ll say "no"? Really?

    Option 2: I start my own company. If it works, it will sell and it will get publicity.

    Option 3: I release full details and plans to the public domain as a service to humanity. Even if only a thousand people build one, everyone will know in weeks.

    If it existed, it would be impossible for oil companies to bury.

  35. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 1:07 pm
    watch "who killed the electric car?"

    It`s amusing in a way. Like "Loose Change". Neither should be taken seriously.

    Electric cars don`t work all that well, aren`t particularly green, aren`t particularly cheap to run when all costs are taken into account (e.g. battery replacements), can`t be produced in sufficient quantity and couldn`t be supported by current generation and distribution if they could.

    All that was even more true in the period covered by "Who killed the electric car?"

    No-one killed it. It`s just not good enough.

    To make it viable, we`d need radical advances in technology. Either in batteries, generation and distribution or in fuel cells and hydrogen production and distribution. Or both. We`re not even close yet.

  36. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 1:10 pm
    Nicola Tesla invented (years before Gray) an electric engine that produced over 90% of the power it used, that tech was supressed, along with almost all his inventions, but is making a comeback lately.

    I wondered who would mention Tesla the Magic Man, inventor of 90% of supertechnology.

    I`m idly curious as to whether any of the stuff attributed to him actually existed. I`m also idly curious as to whether or not he was a StarFleet engineer from Star Trek. That would explain a lot.

  37. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25408 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 1:27 pm
    I want one!
  38. Profile photo of duffytoler
    duffytoler Male 40-49
    5196 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 2:19 pm
    >>Nicola Tesla invented

    Yeah! And the warp drive, and anti-gravity, and the computer, and the portals gun, and the stargate, and the time machine, and parallel universes, and the laser, and the tractor beam, and the atom bomb, and R2D2! WHY doesn`t he get credit for any of this? Why oh why were all of his secret inventions suppressed by the government ?

  39. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31783 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 3:00 pm
    vv Tesla invented A/C current, you might have heard of it?
    This place has along, dry reading of his works.
    The device I`m refering to is this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_turbi...
    Which was `rediscovered` at great expense in the 90`s, lolz! They thought they hit the jackpot, but Tesla pattented it almost a century before!
    ANyhow, On-topic: Yes, early versions of the electric car would have cost $200K and wouldn`t be as good as...
    The TESLA!
  40. Profile photo of panth753
    panth753 Female 18-29
    9184 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 3:04 pm
    I want...
  41. Profile photo of billy66bare
    billy66bare Male 18-29
    289 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 5:03 pm
    But if they allowed this out, our economy would collapse *maybe*, who wants to live in a future with a different economy when you can live in a barren waist land....our kids have soooo much to look forward to!!
  42. Profile photo of ChelseaSmile
    ChelseaSmile Male 18-29
    9 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 5:05 pm
    I sat in the tesla at the Seattle car show, nice little car. I cant remember the name of it but another company made a purely electric sedan.
  43. Profile photo of DarkFerret
    DarkFerret Male 18-29
    2750 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 7:08 pm
    Dude, that`s awesome!
  44. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 7:47 pm
    A comparison of the Tesla and the Lotus Elise it`s based on. S is base model, SC is top end. Both handle much better than Tesla due to lower weight.

    UK prices, feel free to do the same for your own country.

    If anyone disagrees about the tax...do you really think the government would stop all that tax income? Of course not.

    2010 Elise S 37.2 mpg
    SC 28 mpg

    Petrol 111.89 per litre
    Tax 72.85p
    Actual price = 39.04p

    UK gallon = 4.55 litres

    UK gallon actual price 177.63

    UK cost per mile:

    Elise S 4.78
    Elise SC 6.34

    UK electricity cost ~10p per Kwh

    Tesla 28Kwh per 100 miles.

    UK cost per mile: 2.8p

    But...the big cost is battery replacement. Tesla say you`ll get 100,000 miles of normal driving. They won`t give a price, because they know it`s bad news. £10,000 is a reasonable estimate. So that adds 10p per mile, making it double the running cost of an Elise SC and not far off triple that of the Elise S, both of which are much better cars at half the

  45. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 7:55 pm
    Assume everyone went electric anyway, despite the far higher cost.

    We can`t make enough batteries to meet the demand.

    We can`t make enough electricty to meet the demand.

    We can`t distribute enough electricity to meet the demand.

    We can`t charge the cars fast enough to make it viable except for overnight charge in a garage. Many people don`t have a garage.

    That`s not just a matter of the batteries being able to charge fast enough. It`s also a matter of supplying the charge. If, for example, you want to charge 50KWh in 5 minutes (i.e. as a reasonable fuel station stop), you need to supply 600KW to the car and even that`s with 100% efficiency. Can`t be done.

  46. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 7:57 pm
    It isn`t the solution many people think it is. Not yet, anyway. We need far more of everything - batteries from plentiful materials at a fraction of the price, batteries with a much higher charge to weight and mass ratios, at least several times as much electricty generating capacity, much more carrying capacity on the national grid...and even then the charge time is still a problem unless someone finds a way to safely feed hundreds of KW from the grid to the car, somehow.
  47. Profile photo of AnimalBizarr
    AnimalBizarr Male 18-29
    66 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:12 pm
    they supergleud a jet engine to it and shot it into space
  48. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:12 pm
    5Cats...can you find any hard figures for the *total* efficiency of a *working* Tesla turbine? Note the emphasised words.

    It`s an interesting turbine design but, as is usually the case with anything Tesla is connected with, a myriad implausible claims are made for it. It`s easy to build a small one, but far harder to scale it up to a commercial size. I think it`s worth noting that Tesla never managed to do so.

    http://www.tfcbooks.com/teslafaq/q&a...

  49. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31783 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:42 pm
    :blushes:
    Sorry Angilion! I read an article about how a Japanese company is using Tesla`s ideas to make hyper-efficient fans for industrial use, but that was several years ago and of course I can`t find it.
    His main problem was metalurgy. The rotor deformed under the enormous stress and set it off-balance. Other than that it was tested and proven, but not practical in 1923.
  50. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31783 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 8:52 pm
    I know that many of the Space Shuttle`s pumps are `finless` (the re-invention I mentioned) and that in theory they could be as small as a marble & still put out lots of pressure.
    Video:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PdzaYwgQ...
    They work, it`s just a matter of them not self-destructing.
  51. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 10:48 pm
    Without any evidence that it`s hugely better than traditional turbine designs, it`s just more Tesla hype.

    The basic design is well known. It`s not like it`s a secret. So why isn`t everyone using it instead of other turbine designs? I think it`s because it`s worse than other turbine designs.

  52. Profile photo of Andicicle
    Andicicle Male 18-29
    503 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 10:49 pm
    Your postulations are mind boggling (I meant NUMBING).... no matter what you cannot build a safe vehicle in this manner, and no I do not feel the need to elaborate further, its all in your "research" materials.
  53. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 10:57 pm
    Back on the electric car thing, a massive increase in charge to weight ratio and charge to volume ratio would make it viable to solve the charging time issue. Car battery packs could then be small and light enough to make it practical to change them at a battery station. Drive in, swap for a charged pack, the discharged pack from your car can be charged in the battery station, so it doesn`t matter if it takes a few hours.

    It would also improve handling, performance and efficiency by quite a bit.

    Shame it doesn`t exist. But it might at some point, maybe within a decade.

    Although that still leaves all the other problems.

    The grid could be upgraded enough, at a staggering cost.

    Increasing generating capacity by enough would take more than just money.

    Maybe it will be viable in decades to come.

  54. Profile photo of flingspoo
    flingspoo Female 18-29
    999 posts
    March 14, 2010 at 11:31 pm
    postulations

    I like that word. That and alliteration.

    Don`t like the Spanish word "leche" (milk).

  55. Profile photo of meepmaker
    meepmaker Male 30-39
    6694 posts
    March 15, 2010 at 7:00 am
    One day the govt. will let us have things that are helpfull.
  56. Profile photo of ROK9
    ROK9 Male 18-29
    1834 posts
    March 15, 2010 at 12:09 pm
    cool
  57. Profile photo of defcon2
    defcon2 Male 18-29
    41 posts
    March 15, 2010 at 2:02 pm
    Looks like a painting or 3D
  58. Profile photo of LameName
    LameName Female 18-29
    238 posts
    March 15, 2010 at 3:42 pm
    gimme!!
  59. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    March 16, 2010 at 12:15 am
    I have two in my garage.Still waiting for those motors though.
  60. Profile photo of xXKaryXx
    xXKaryXx Female 13-17
    635 posts
    March 16, 2010 at 8:26 am
    aww i want one

    :[

Leave a Reply