Chrysler Turbine car

[Tilar]

Took mom in to the doctor for some tests, and while I was waiting picked up a magazine called Autoweek. It had an article in January 20th edition about the Chrysler Turbine car. Pretty interesting to say the least. It really was a cool car considering it is now 50 year old technology. Here are just a couple links if anyone is interested.

http://www.autoweek.com/search/?q=Chrysler%20turbin%20car

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRztW6OEcvg

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20130121/detroit/130129979

[ACUDANUT]

I have seen and rode in it, (or one of the 3)  Cool tech, but a waste of money.

[Aero426]

How do you figure it was a waste of money?

[Alaskan_TA]

Lots of turbine car info at http://www.hamtramck-historical.com/ideaCars-05.shtml &

http://www.hamtramck-historical.com/ideaCars-06.shtml &

http://www.hamtramck-historical.com/ideaCars-04.shtml - this one includes some of the turbine truck info.

[odcics2]

I have an NOS inlet temp gauge for the dashboard.  That would be the pod on the left.   Got a key, owners manual, service manual and a bunch of misc. paperwork. cool idea.   Would have been nice in the '66 Charger as it was planned.

[Homerr]

Jay Leno's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2A5ijU3Ivs

[tan top]

interesting stuff  , thanks for posting    

[ACUDANUT]

How do you figure it was a waste of money?

They costs too much make and they could hardly keep up with traffic. The idea was brilliant, but it was not meant to be.

[Ghoste]

As a research project I think its difficult to determine whether or not it "cost too much".  They made advances in metallurgy, transmission science and the exploration of alternative fuels just to name a few.  Chrysler must have not seen it as a waste of money as they continued research with turbine automtive powerplants for another decade and a bit after the well known 64 Dart.  Its a prototype so its very hard to quantify what is an acceptable investment when played against other areas where the technology could be applied.  Not at all unlike money spent on racing.  Is it bragging rights?  Some say its nothing more than that.  Is it advertising?  Some say its that and unnecessary.  Is it research?  Some say no and forget the safety and durability advances.
As for not keeping up with traffic, they kept up with traffic just fine.

[bakerhillpins]

As a research project I think its difficult to determine whether or not it "cost too much".  They made advances in metallurgy, transmission science and the exploration of alternative fuels just to name a few.  Chrysler must have not seen it as a waste of money as they continued research with turbine automtive powerplants for another decade and a bit after the well known 64 Dart.  Its a prototype so its very hard to quantify what is an acceptable investment when played against other areas where the technology could be applied.  Not at all unlike money spent on racing.  Is it bragging rights?  Some say its nothing more than that.  Is it advertising?  Some say its that and unnecessary.  Is it research?  Some say no and forget the safety and durability advances.
As for not keeping up with traffic, they kept up with traffic just fine.

   It's the same argument that keeps government investment down in NASA and many other of the sciences. Too many think/feel that a research project that doesn't have a direct and tangible output was a "waste".  It constantly astounds me, how do you think we got here in the first place?    Nothing works right out of the box the 1st time. 

[Tilar]

The article I read in that magazine said it would run 12's in the quarter, I'd say it was more than sufficient to keep up with traffic. The only downfall was that they had "turbine lag" I believe they called it but that would only drop a second or two, which would put the car into the 10's range. That's nothing to be ashamed of for an off the assembly line car.

[bakerhillpins]

Could you imagine trying to time the tree 2 seconds ahead to make a run.    I was lucky to see one this past summer at the Chrysler museum and toy or not it's a cool car to look over and from an engineering standpoint it must have been a trip to be a member of that project.

[Aero426]

As a research project I think its difficult to determine whether or not it "cost too much".  They made advances in metallurgy, transmission science and the exploration of alternative fuels just to name a few.  Chrysler must have not seen it as a waste of money as they continued research with turbine automtive powerplants for another decade and a bit after the well known 64 Dart.  Its a prototype so its very hard to quantify what is an acceptable investment when played against other areas where the technology could be applied.  Not at all unlike money spent on racing.  Is it bragging rights?  Some say its nothing more than that.  Is it advertising?  Some say its that and unnecessary.  Is it research?  Some say no and forget the safety and durability advances.
As for not keeping up with traffic, they kept up with traffic just fine.

Aside from R & D, the cars generated a LOT of publicity for the company.    And they worked.  Even though it did not reach production, I would not call the program a failure by any standard.

[hemigeno]

One of the gentlemen who was involved in the turbine program since back in the '50s told me that what killed Chrysler's Turbine program was the Federal Govt.  He said that in the Reagan era the Feds made money available for turbine engine research & development - but they excluded Chrysler from consideration for grant money since ChryCo was so far ahead on the learning curve compared to the other manufacturers.  Essentially the Feds were trying to "level the playing field" for a technology that still hadn't been perfected by the clear leader.  Chrysler had developed this technology for automotive use pretty much on their own, and got disgusted when the taxpayers footed the bill for everyone else's R&D.  I can't say as I blame them.

Very cool cars, and an incredible chapter in MaMopar's history.

[ACUDANUT]

If they were so awesome, why were never massed produced.

[stripedelete]

Nowhere to bolt a catalytic converter?   

[Ghoste]

Again, it was an R&D project, the lessons learned from the program have been applied to a large number of mass produced items in Chrysler's history.

[Homerr]

Probably helped get this turbine powered Chrysler project going.

http://www.allpar.com/history/military/M1-tanks.html

[Aero426]

The article I read in that magazine said it would run 12's in the quarter, I'd say it was more than sufficient to keep up with traffic. The only downfall was that they had "turbine lag" I believe they called it but that would only drop a second or two, which would put the car into the 10's range. That's nothing to be ashamed of for an off the assembly line car.

0-60 in 12 sec.  Not the 1/4 mile.      Faster if you held you foot on the brake and spooled it up first. 

[ACUDANUT]

After riding in the bronze one, I was not thrilled with it's HP.  A slant six could have beat it.

[odcics2]

After riding in the bronze one, I was not thrilled with it's HP.  A slant six could have beat it.

Let's see photos!  That's way cool!!   

[tan top]

 come across the whole video !
a program I must of seen about 18ish years ago on history channel , think I mentioned this one before !!   about Chrysler turbine stuff , its a long video , may not be for every one  



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-dfiZ6CwjE

[Patronus]

My favorite Matchbox yet! Just picked this up about 6 months ago:

[flyinlow]

Usually the problems with a gas turbine in things beside aircraft and industrial applications are costs and fuel consumption. They can make impressive power for their weight and run a long time on a wide range of fuels, but probably not for the average car driver. 60 % of max rpm idle speeds , throttle lag, Oxides of nitrogen and particulate emissions would be problems as well.

[odcics2]

After riding in the bronze one, I was not thrilled with it's HP.  A slant six could have beat it.

Photos??