Yves,
Now I understand where you got the 118 figure. I'm proudly guilty of being a unitationaly myopic American. I didn't see a specific conversion reference in the thread. I've seen some really good data, but not 118 mpg(US). Please understand that it's not a claim of 98 mpg on the Federal EPA cycle. It's simply a steady state fuel economy figure that has been reported from chassis dyno testing, with the appropriate 50 mph aero drag, and mass, etc . . . factored into the dyno load. In a nutshell, Transonic is claiming this is approx. 50% better than a typical Diesel CI pass. car of similar displacement, power, etc . . ., and closer to 100% better than the equivalent SI gasoline engine under the same conditions. This is public information, but perhaps not been made concisely enough (my opinion.)
Transonic is using those numbers because that particular test plays right to the sweet spot for the TSCi technology - light load/cruise. Those operating conditions demonstrate the biggest relative improvements of TSCi. Since this just happens to be where most typical pass. car engines spend 95%+ of their operational time, I think this is a very big leap forward.
I don't want to overstep my professional bounds here, but because of my involvement, I take it personally when I see statements like "snake oil", and "flackery". However, until we have finished putting together a more comprehensive, independently verified (outside test lab), data package, and reach the appropriate time when our team decides it's best to release such data, I'm thick-skinned enough to keep biting my lip. I'm personally very proud of the work that Transonic's people have done to take an initial good idea from our founder, and realize it, improve it, and develop it to where it is today.
I appreciate that everyone is interested, but all of the technical analysis being discussed here is based on the limited amount of marketing information that's been released. It is what it is; marketing information. It's designed to raise interest in what we are doing, and to attract potential customers, who get much more in-depth data after signing an NDA.
In my opinion, Transonic isn't asking anything from the general public, so we don't have an obligation to publicly reveal anything unnecessarily. Doing so at this stage carries the risk of showing a potential competitor too much. I completely understand the skepticism, because the numbers are big, and you don't have all the details. I know I would be myself. Wait until more in-depth data is ultimately released for public consumption and scrutiny. I cannot give specifics, but I will say it's in the plan. That's only logical, as we move forward as a company. When more information is released, I will be sure to post a link to it here. That is what the OP requested.
-Tony Staples
![[thumbsup]](/data/assets/smilies/thumbsup.gif "[thumbsup] [thumbsup]")
