300C AWD Hemi

What you're seeing in the "wow" response is people saying "wow - look
at that pimp mobile" or "wow - look at that wierd ugly brick of a car"
or "wow - look at that Bently that someone chopped down" or "wow -
when did Tonka start making cars?"

It's much the same way that people say "wow" when they see the Oscar
Mier Weiner mobile.

On the other hand, the 300N concept car (LH-based RWD model shown on
the year 2000 car show circuit) was a real class act. People said
oooohh, not just wow. It would have been ready for production for the
2003 model year, and it was much needed at the time given the poor
sales that Chrysler was seeing at the time. But instead a RWD-based
LH line of cars was scrapped by Daimler and the rolling abortion that
is the LX platform was started, and it delayed by a year (or more) the
introduction of new cars by DCX.

 

Exact opposite of me- I've NEVER had a car less than 10 years. I'm still
driving the car I acquired in 1980 (73 Satellite). Of course I'm wierd-
I like driving old cars. I've got a '66 Polara that I'm putting a new
engine in, and I'll drive it for a few years while I give the '73 some
TLC again. I would like to have a "newer" car for my wife and for
vacations, but I think we'll just soldier on with the LH for her every
day car, and take the Polara on the long road trips for the next few
years. Its the most comfortable highway car I've ever ridden in anyway.

That logic is EXACTLY what keeps me in old cars.... you can buy a whole
lot of gas for the ridiculous price of a new car these days. Maybe when
a few low-mileage Magnum RTs show up on the market we'll make a move.

 

Same is true for my wife's 10-year old Vision. But its not fast compared
to a v8 Magnum or an Impala.

Click and Clack are on my "top 10 idiots list."

 

LPE
water as the pistons . 2 cylindrs 3x30 with a sliding vane rotor
between and the same gas air mix bu with o2 boost .
sliding vane rotor has an inside cam wheel and the vanes are spring
loaded.
The water pistons are 60 strokes MP wile the rotor is 500 rpm.
This ic engine is 10 x better.
The engine the oil bosses fear.
The engine the Gov dont want anyone to see.
It will end the oil age by reducing it .


Group: alt.energy.homepower Date: Wed, Oct 26, 2005, 8:19pm (EST+1)
From: (tj Frazir)
Your car is 10 % fuel effective .
Add o2 and its 5 times stronger but still 10% effective. IT starts up at
2 cycle gas engine without the steam 1/6 the fuel your
car used .
  The water is the pistons so the water will boil . When the water
is 450 deg F then o2 without the gas will work but it takes some heat
out of the engine. So the steam and o2 and gas is ballanced at 450 deg F

  Thats 2 cylinders 3x30 inch with a sliding vane rotor bewteen them
60 rpm water pistons driving the sliding vane 1 square inch flat vane
blocking the flow 100 % at 500 rpm.
 thats 500 psi at 12 inch R at 500 rpm.
48 hp off the top of my head.
 600 inches of intake per minute.
..............................................
  Im running the same gas air mix with o2 boost. The piston is not
running at 5000 or 6000 or 7000 rpm like your car . The stroke has 5
times the power your car stroke has because like YOU said o2 in the
stroke is 5 times stronger.
  Thats simple as **** moron.
Now just what the **** dont you understand ?
  ............................................
a ship stroke is 10 feet at 100 rpm ..dont think 60 rpm wount fire. 60
rpm wount work in your car because the crank R is 1 inch if its a 2 inch
crank.
    ..........................................
and then te internal combuston water rocket runs on air intake gas and
o2 boost .
it has no crank no rotor.
  its just a 3x30 inch 4 pipes with a big fill flap valve and a 1
inch nozel valve out.
it has an exhaust valve at top and 2 injectors and a 1 hp air compresor
and intake valve.
one injecto for gas the other for o2.
  It injects 120 psi air into the space left when the water is up
the pipe. then direct injects boath gas and o2.
    500 pounds thrust ........ on 10 inches of intake per
second. 1.2 sec
stroke.
..............................................
  138 HP 216 mpg
266 hp 145 mpg
48 hp at 516 mpg.
500-2000 foot pounds.
depending on how far out you push the vanes.
..............................................
      we worked on the hydroelectric and first you said it
was 150 kw . I
said I was running a 38 Mw ac ..at 19 Mw.
  3 miles of pipe 22 inch going up a mountain to elv 1200 feet 500
psi on a 600 square inch vane . 300,000 pounds of thrust . biult for
skagway alaska. ( donated )
another in the south pacific
another in brazil and one running an aluninum production in south pac.
..............................................
    you wount do the math on lpe in 15 minutes. you cant even
draw a pic of the sliding vane rotor with the innerr cam and slide out
directors for vane clearance.
..............................................
      I make about 40 sizes of slide vane rotors with inner
cam wheels . the smallest is 6 inch x 1/2 inch . the biggest is 48 x 10

  Ive biult lpe engines for over 15
  years ..all 12 of my ships over 100,000 tons run on whale LPE
engines. My IB allso.
    I have over 2 million auto LPE done and when its up around
10 millin Im going to flood the market and no one will buy anything
else.
  1 million mile garentee 277 - 500 hp
dual rotor engines can run either rotor .
..............................................
    auto stocks will dump and all the suport stocks will dump.
wile evry small shop booms .
I dont sell no stock and own 100 % .
Im a billionaire now .
Ill be the first trillinaire.
      Thenn maybe Ill run for president.
you just wait till the world sees me !!
  im 7 foot 9 but when I was 35 I was 8 foot. 550 pounds present .
  bench press a 1000.
      ........................................
  why write all this shit ??
  because in 20 years it will be history . LPE is not going away but
the oil age is.
..............................................
im workng on a hot water heater to run on lng and o2 LPE to produce hot
wanter and 220 200 amp home power systems that wount ever change speeds.
..............................................
  1980 ships were going out of biz due fuel cost and bigger boats ..
I
biult my way out of it

 

You must like excessive power.
The M with it's 3.5L has more than enough power for legal driving.

 

What you're seeing in the "wow" response is people saying "wow - look
at that pimp mobile"[/QUOTE]
You've got it. The pimps sure like it!

Actually the Chrysler car stylists quit and the 300 job was done by the
truck stylists.
Perhaps Chrysler was actually thinking ahead and built the car people
downsizing from their gas guzzling huge truck based SUVs would like.

 

That's true, mid range cars aren't cheap.
My '95 LH I purchased at one year off lease for quite a saving.

That gives me a problem, the 300 line won't be on my used car list.
RWD, small windows and ugly style. No one I know likes them, so how
could I now change my mind.

 

I beg to differ, these are not the responses I've received. I've never had
so many people make such positive remarks about the styling of any car I've
owned and they certainly wouldn't fall into the pimp category.

 

I agree. Most people that I’ve talked to love the styling of the
300/magnum/charger. I personally like the body style myself as well as
RWD. To each their own. I have an LHS and it’s a great car that I
wouldn’t trade in ’till it croaks. I hate FWD cars they are vague and
have major torque steer. RWD is the best platform for cars in my
opinion, if you know how to drive properly they provide the
best/purest handling next to AWD of course. Just my .02. I just wish
Mercedes would offer a 6 speed manual with the Hemi......

 

Me, I'm comfortable with those responses. It definitely stands out, but I
really like it. I never cared for the 300M. It was basically just another
jelly bean.

 

It seems I have to push down hard to get the M to go.

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna

 

Believe it or not probably a Ford 500. Great room and visibility.
Certainly not a Mercedes. Not in my price range no matter what.

 

I don't think the Dodge Charger is too bad looking and at least the rear
window is a lot bigger.

 

I have to agree. My 2001 Avalon feels faster than my 99 300M.

 

Now heres what would be cool for the M and LHS or any LH car w/ 3.5.
Removed the cat’s and move them underneath and use the space that the
cats were to build headers and mount 2 turbos there. I would imagine
with 8lbs of boost it would make around 350+ HP. Good luck getting a
tranny to hold up to the abuse or even control the steering under hard
acceleration but that would be awesome....

 

I wonder if you know the history of the Smart?

It wasn't invented by DC (Daimler-Benz, that is). DC was the car building
partner of the company that produced the Swatch. The idea was that it
should be the car equivalent of a Swatch watch. Cool, funky, fashionable,
affordable etc etc. The partnership fell apart for reasons I don't recall
and DC decided to run with it.

It is a highly innovative car and does allow one to change some panels
oneself, like changing a watch strap, so to speak. It was not intended to
be the primary family car.

However, commercially it is not a success; it is a loss-making division.

I suppose that is mainly for the reason you have implied - other cars offer
a bit more space for similar or less money.

Oddly, one of my neighbours here in central London has a Range Rover and a
Smart (Brabus version, costing double a base model).

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

 

How does it maintain constant speed, then?

It doesn't?

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[...]
.. The transmission was from the

[...]

 

There's no compariosn styling-wise between a Ford 500 and a Chrysler 300.
Had the 500 or Mercury Montego been available 17 months ago when I got my
300C, I would have seriously considered one.

 

The 500 doesn't have a Nav system so I didn't consider it. I did test
drive a Lincoln LS, it's handling and performance wasn't in the same
league as the 300C. When I was shopping I looked at the Acura TL and RL,
the Lincoln LS, the Lexus LS, the Cadillac CTS, the Toyota Avalon and the
Infiniti M45. The 300C ran ring around all of them. The Acura TL had the
best Nav system and it's reasonably priced but it's performance, while
snappy compared to most cars, doesn't measure up to the 300C. The Infiniti
was also an appealing car but it costs $20,000 more then a 300C AWD. I
ended up buying a 300C AWD. So far I've been reasonably happy with it. My
only complaint is the visibility which is awful, I have to lean forward to
see stop lights. However on the highway it's exhilarating, you put your
foot down a bit and it feels like it has afterburners.

 

The styling is nice on the 500 but that plastic crap interior Ford has now
leaves a lot to be desired. In fact, it's the only new vehicle (Expedition)
that had a terrible new car smell.

And about that Duratec 3.0? No way. I test drove a Ford Escape with one and
that engine is weak and quite a chatty engine at that.

No more Fords for me unless they can that cheap interior.

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna