The Elio Engine

[Joshua Caldwell]

Cool it guys.

 

[Truett Collins]

Please tell us wise one how'd you figured how much time and money it costs to test each combination, as you eloquently put it, on an EXISTING ENGINE as opposed to BUILDING AN ENGINE FROM SCRATCH? Please enlighten me o wise one!

First he didn't say anything about how much it cost or how much time would be spent......only that it would cost both time and money.

 

[Truett Collins]

Ford Duratec 1.0L triple - from current Ford of England website - 2015 Fiesta ebrochure (have to download), page 35. 80hp / 77lb-ft
http://www.ford.co.uk/Cars/Fiesta/BrochureAndPriceLists#primaryTabs
Production 2011-current (this is the base version of the EcoBoost 1.0L)

48 mpg, does not meet required mpg for the ELIO, and the cost also put it out of range.

Hyundai Kappa II 1.0L triple - 68hp / 70lb-ft cost to develop - $421M over 48 months. Worth reading the Design/Valvetrain/Crank info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Kappa_engine
Production 2008-present per wikipedia, but I think the 1.0L started a bit later than the 1.25L four.

47 mpg, again does not meet required mpg for the ELIO, and again the cost came into play.

Fiat Twin-Air 1.0L twin - 60hp / 65 lb-ft (they also have a 0.9L turbo & bi-fuel turbo)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinair_engine
Production 2010-present
International Engine of the Year 2011

57 mpg, again does not meet required mpg for the ELIO, and again the cost came into play.

Why test something that is already proven not to meet your goals?

 

[eliothegreat]

litany of insults .... so, pointing out that on some things we clearly disagree is an insult .... interesting, very interesting

the belief that there is a pretty good chance that there will have to be some bugs worked out during the early stages of production is universal, not just with EM .... EM recognizes this and has scheduled a break in early production to take care of in issues which may arise .... note I didn't say will, I said may .... to me that reflects real world wisdom and planning

I didn't miss the rest of the post, I acknowledged the core of your answer to my question and thanked you for taking the time to provide an answer .... I quoted you, not Clint Eastwood but as since you brought it up, it is a point that has merit

in the first sentence you reference people in a position to provide accurate answers .... in post 1611 above I acknowledged that "you have every right to believe what you choose to be believe about Paul and EM" .... your belief in this area is one I don't share and I believe I have a right disagree .... to redirect to the point you were making in claiming that Paul/EM didn't make an effort to find an acceptable in production engine .... it is on record in multiple reports that Paul says he/they did .... I choose to believe him on this and I'd appreciate it if you would provide authoritative documentation to support your contention that he/they didn't

Oh, I guess that you calling me a troll is not an insult. My bad.

Paul Elio @ SFU

His comments on the engine start about the 8 minute mark. Listen closely between 8:25-8:45. He never tried to contact any of the engine manufacturers. Again, scotoma. You can't see and hear Paul stating, "Not that I tried."

 

[eliothegreat]

Ford Duratec 1.0L triple - from current Ford of England website - 2015 Fiesta ebrochure (have to download), page 35. 80hp / 77lb-ft
http://www.ford.co.uk/Cars/Fiesta/BrochureAndPriceLists#primaryTabs
Production 2011-current (this is the base version of the EcoBoost 1.0L)

48 mpg, does not meet required mpg for the ELIO, and the cost also put it out of range.

Hyundai Kappa II 1.0L triple - 68hp / 70lb-ft cost to develop - $421M over 48 months. Worth reading the Design/Valvetrain/Crank info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Kappa_engine
Production 2008-present per wikipedia, but I think the 1.0L started a bit later than the 1.25L four.

47 mpg, again does not meet required mpg for the ELIO, and again the cost came into play.

Fiat Twin-Air 1.0L twin - 60hp / 65 lb-ft (they also have a 0.9L turbo & bi-fuel turbo)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinair_engine
Production 2010-present
International Engine of the Year 2011

57 mpg, again does not meet required mpg for the ELIO, and again the cost came into play.

Why test something that is already proven not to meet your goals?

Guys, I'm not paying him to ask such softball questions.

Let's see. Paul claims that the light weight and improved aerodynamics improves fuel economy. "Half the width, double the mileage" is a major advertising theme. So if Paul is right, the Duratec would get 96mpg in the Elio, the Kappa II would get 94mpg, and the TwinAir would get 114mpg.

Also, one would suspect that Elio wouldn't be buying a complete donor car for each production Elio. The logical way would have been to buy one of each of the complete cars, test them, then drop the engines into Elio prototypes, then test and compare. That's the whole idea of off-the-shelf parts. Per your logic, they couldn't use a Camaro steering wheel or a Mustang seat, because those cars cost more than $6800 and don't get 84mpg.

 

[eliothegreat]

Two lines on one page of a 46 page manual and only indirect references.
And not described as "Duratec" anyplace else that I could find.

......." I have started several companies. Three successful.".........
And are they still profitable going concerns?
Facilitated, no doubt, by your people skills.

Again, your google-fu is very weak, grasshopper. The brochure is quite clear. Your inability to find and assimilate information is your problem, not mine.

Again, your concern is touching. First my health, then my finances, and even my relationships. After all the insults and name calling, I was beginning to think that you didn't like me.

 

[Lil4X]

Yikes! I'm not sure I want into this insult-slinging contest or not.

Here are a few considerations for building a proprietary engine that may have been overlooked:

1. "Borrowed" engines are not free. They will have to be purchased at market price.
2. Market price may be inflated - after all, when was the last time you gave a competitor a "deal"?
   
3. The seller would have to be guaranteed a certain number of orders to justify tooling up to produce several thousand additional engines. That's dangerous for a start-up company to make that commitment. Sales volume could be limited by the engine-builder effectively controlling your sales.
   
4. Using a significant component provided by a competitor is dangerous. They have you at their mercy.
5. Even if a buy-out is feasible, the engine is going to have to be modified to meet your specs. Torque and power curves may need adaptation to suit the weight of the vehicle while meeting fuel economy requirements.
6. Buying out components never allows you to enjoy economies of scale and efficiency. The Elio is going to be built around that engine and powertrain, so there's no option to switch vendors.
   
7. It's difficult to warranty an engine built entirely by a competitor. That's why it seldom happens.
8. When all is said and done, a "home-built" engine, although expensive, is going to be cheaper in the long run. What would happen if Ford stopped building the EcoBoost in its current form? Or broke the contract with Elio? EM would have to build it's own engines anyway - with a huge loss of business.
9. Then there's that "U"-word. Most of the majors are at the mercy of the UAW. If they call a strike at Ford (and they will one day), EM would lose its engines and be unable to deliver vehicles. Small start-ups can't tolerate this, thanks to their just-in-time delivery schedule - they would be the canary in the coal mine - the first suffer from a strike. (Note that EM is consciously manufacturing in a "right to work" state.)

This list could go on and on. EM is doing it right by doing all the development on the front end. "Borrowing" major components is fine for low-volume manufacturers, but if you intend to reach a production level of 250,000 units annually, it makes no sense.

 

[WilliamH]

Yikes! I'm not sure I want into this insult-slinging contest or not.

Here are a few considerations for building a proprietary engine that may have been overlooked:

1. "Borrowed" engines are not free. They will have to be purchased at market price.
2. Market price may be inflated - after all, when was the last time you gave a competitor a "deal"?
   
3. The seller would have to be guaranteed a certain number of orders to justify tooling up to produce several thousand additional engines. That's dangerous for a start-up company to make that commitment. Sales volume could be limited by the engine-builder effectively controlling your sales.
   
4. Using a significant component provided by a competitor is dangerous. They have you at their mercy.
5. Even if a buy-out is feasible, the engine is going to have to be modified to meet your specs. Torque and power curves may need adaptation to suit the weight of the vehicle while meeting fuel economy requirements.
6. Buying out components never allows you to enjoy economies of scale and efficiency. The Elio is going to be built around that engine and powertrain, so there's no option to switch vendors.
   
7. It's difficult to warranty an engine built entirely by a competitor. That's why it seldom happens.
8. When all is said and done, a "home-built" engine, although expensive, is going to be cheaper in the long run. What would happen if Ford stopped building the EcoBoost in its current form? Or broke the contract with Elio? EM would have to build it's own engines anyway - with a huge loss of business.
9. Then there's that "U"-word. Most of the majors are at the mercy of the UAW. If they call a strike at Ford (and they will one day), EM would lose its engines and be unable to deliver vehicles. Small start-ups can't tolerate this, thanks to their just-in-time delivery schedule - they would be the canary in the coal mine - the first suffer from a strike. (Note that EM is consciously manufacturing in a "right to work" state.)

This list could go on and on. EM is doing it right by doing all the development on the front end. "Borrowing" major components is fine for low-volume manufacturers, but if you intend to reach a production level of 250,000 units annually, it makes no sense.

Congratulations! You get it

 

[JEBar]

Yikes! I'm not sure I want into this insult-slinging contest or not.

Here are a few considerations for building a proprietary engine that may have been overlooked:

1. "Borrowed" engines are not free. They will have to be purchased at market price.
2. Market price may be inflated - after all, when was the last time you gave a competitor a "deal"?
   
3. The seller would have to be guaranteed a certain number of orders to justify tooling up to produce several thousand additional engines. That's dangerous for a start-up company to make that commitment. Sales volume could be limited by the engine-builder effectively controlling your sales.
   
4. Using a significant component provided by a competitor is dangerous. They have you at their mercy.
5. Even if a buy-out is feasible, the engine is going to have to be modified to meet your specs. Torque and power curves may need adaptation to suit the weight of the vehicle while meeting fuel economy requirements.
6. Buying out components never allows you to enjoy economies of scale and efficiency. The Elio is going to be built around that engine and powertrain, so there's no option to switch vendors.
   
7. It's difficult to warranty an engine built entirely by a competitor. That's why it seldom happens.
8. When all is said and done, a "home-built" engine, although expensive, is going to be cheaper in the long run. What would happen if Ford stopped building the EcoBoost in its current form? Or broke the contract with Elio? EM would have to build it's own engines anyway - with a huge loss of business.
9. Then there's that "U"-word. Most of the majors are at the mercy of the UAW. If they call a strike at Ford (and they will one day), EM would lose its engines and be unable to deliver vehicles. Small start-ups can't tolerate this, thanks to their just-in-time delivery schedule - they would be the canary in the coal mine - the first suffer from a strike. (Note that EM is consciously manufacturing in a "right to work" state.)

This list could go on and on. EM is doing it right by doing all the development on the front end. "Borrowing" major components is fine for low-volume manufacturers, but if you intend to reach a production level of 250,000 units annually, it makes no sense.

excellent points .... as noted earlier, EM's management is building a company with a long term vision ....

 

[eliothegreat]

Yikes! I'm not sure I want into this insult-slinging contest or not.

Here are a few considerations for building a proprietary engine that may have been overlooked:

1. "Borrowed" engines are not free. They will have to be purchased at market price.
2. Market price may be inflated - after all, when was the last time you gave a competitor a "deal"?
   
3. The seller would have to be guaranteed a certain number of orders to justify tooling up to produce several thousand additional engines. That's dangerous for a start-up company to make that commitment. Sales volume could be limited by the engine-builder effectively controlling your sales.
   
4. Using a significant component provided by a competitor is dangerous. They have you at their mercy.
5. Even if a buy-out is feasible, the engine is going to have to be modified to meet your specs. Torque and power curves may need adaptation to suit the weight of the vehicle while meeting fuel economy requirements.
6. Buying out components never allows you to enjoy economies of scale and efficiency. The Elio is going to be built around that engine and powertrain, so there's no option to switch vendors.
   
7. It's difficult to warranty an engine built entirely by a competitor. That's why it seldom happens.
8. When all is said and done, a "home-built" engine, although expensive, is going to be cheaper in the long run. What would happen if Ford stopped building the EcoBoost in its current form? Or broke the contract with Elio? EM would have to build it's own engines anyway - with a huge loss of business.
9. Then there's that "U"-word. Most of the majors are at the mercy of the UAW. If they call a strike at Ford (and they will one day), EM would lose its engines and be unable to deliver vehicles. Small start-ups can't tolerate this, thanks to their just-in-time delivery schedule - they would be the canary in the coal mine - the first suffer from a strike. (Note that EM is consciously manufacturing in a "right to work" state.)

This list could go on and on. EM is doing it right by doing all the development on the front end. "Borrowing" major components is fine for low-volume manufacturers, but if you intend to reach a production level of 250,000 units annually, it makes no sense.

You didn't join the insult-slinging contest, because you didn't insult anyone. I apologize, but I just ran out of cheeks to turn. Rational posts deserve rational responses.

1. Agreed. At least in concept. No idea where you come up with "borrowed". We are discussing purchasing the engines at market price, just like all the rest of the parts and supplies that would be used in the production of the vehicle. The only thing Elio was/is getting below market is the plant.
2. Market price is market price. Elio has proclaimed that they work well with their suppliers, and have worked own deals that benefit all parties. If they are that good with all the other suppliers, they should be able to do the same with an engine supplier.
3. Again, not an issue in the real world. Unless all the plants are already at full capacity, no additional tooling would be needed to increase production. Paul never tried, so he doesn't know what the options are. All of your concerns are equally valid for every part that would be incorporated into the Elio. Any supplier failure could be an impediment to production. Engines are not some magical component totally separated from all the business facts that apply to the rest of the vehicle supply chain.
4. You keep getting stuck on "competitor". Once agreement is reached, the engine manufacturer is a supplier. Solid companies do not randomly attack their customers. They would never be able to get more customers if they did. Do you think Aisin became a world-wire supplier of transmissions by breaking contracts and cheating their customers? Business agree to sell (supply) product because they make money. It's not a charity, and mercy is not required. Negotiate a good deal, and live by your agreements. Again, this applies to every part on the Elio, not just the engine.
5. Theoretically true, but practically irrelevant. The 3 proposed engines are all very close to the mission specs, and would need only minor tuning at most. Transmission gear ratios would be far more likely than the engines to require some tweaking to optimize fuel economy. All three of these engines are already designed for economical operation.
6. There you seem to be stating that Elio's entire business model of using off-the-shelf components is flawed and doomed to failure. According to you, Elio has already committed a major blunder by agreeing to us Aisin transmissions. If you cannot trust your suppliers, you should be using other suppliers. You may have noticed that many vehicles have both base and optional engines. It really isn't that big of a deal to design a vehicle capable of taking various drivetrains. This is a non-issue.
7. Same argument. Competitor vs supplier. Also, historically inaccurate. Many companies warranty parts produced by others. If Elio makes it to production, they will be doing it.
8. That is one theory. If it costs so much that they cannot afford to go into production, it will be far more expensive in the long run. If there are reliability issues with the IAV unit (the Vega engine would be one example), a small company like Elio will not survive. Nothing would happen to Elio if Ford stopped producing the EcoBoost 1.0L. That's not one of the options being discussed. Though an EcoBoost Elio would be worth considering. Are you saying that Ford has a history of breaking contracts? I was not aware of this. What about Fiat & Hyundai? The rest of Elio's suppliers? Are all successful businesses in the habit of breaking contracts with their customers?
9. Arguably the same effect would occur (strike scenario) with any of Elio's suppliers. Are you saying that you have confirmed that none of Elio's proposed suppliers are union shops?

Overall. Again, I have repeatedly suggested that Elio should be outsourcing the engine for startup. To have a chance as a start-up, Elio needs the off-the-shelf/no-new-technology model. If the product sells, that would be the time to consider producing their own engine and other component, and to start researching new tech. It would be quite logical and wise for Elio to move into engine production in the future, once the company was established and profitable. It is illogical and wise to do so at the current time, as it puts too heavy of a load on their finances, time, and business operations.

I appreciate your response, but I didn't overlook those considerations. I just don't think that they are good reasons to bankrupt the company before it gets started.