RUMOUR OF NEW ENGINE TRANSMISSION ??? Any thoughts on this one ??? grateful for any help.

ep

No.
Let's not forget that Toyota looked at [TRK]ivt amd pulled-out to develop their own. I can't see manufacturers beating a path to the door of a Patent-holder (which started quite some years ago) - who has no experience in making gearboxes. [TRK]does not own all versions of ivt (remember DAF?), but from what we hear (from TRK) ivt is the answer to global-warming emissions because of the greater efficiency etc. etc. - yet in reality the greater efficiency is theoretical until cars are out there, being driven in cities etc....I doubt that the improvement (over the best alternative which I say is Prius=hybrid) will amount to much at all. One good belter at the lights and much of the morning's saving will be gone.
Let's not forget that hybrid/Prius has ZERO emissions when driven for short town trips - and they are a reality, right now. Prius can be recharged from Nuclear generated electricity (or wind turbine if you live in the wilds).
Face the facts that the ic engine has had its day; in 10 years' time they will be as silly as steam cars are to us (even though steam works perfectly well). ?
//This is not to say TRK won't make money for "some punters" (they know who they are!), that spot the ups 'n' downs, but as a long-term bet I think the writing is already on the wall as oil prices creep up - as exploration costs rise, car makers already have some ideas as to what they will be doing in ten years...

+ Countries with oil "could" become the new World leaders - just tell me why not! This is nothing to do with TRK's technology, but it could alter our way of life, esp as most of the oil is in the most volatile areas of the World. Forget SPECTRE - just organise about 30% of World oil and you have the greatest power on the planet.

Prius can be recharged from Nuclear generated electricity (or wind turbine if you live in the wilds).

The Prius's battery is recharged by one of its internal motor-generators (motor generator 1) and not from an external power-supply. It is a petrol powered car, not an electric powered car. The battery is just for storing the effects of regenerative braking, etc. It can pull away on battery power only, but it won't run for long on just the batteries.

When we look at the Prius's CO2 figures, 114 g/km, we should maybe look at the Toyota Yaris D4 too, 113 g/km. The Yaris is the same as the smart and the Peugeot 206 1.4 HDI, all three just marginal more efficient (ie less greenhouse gas polluting) than the Prius. A touch better than those is the Renault Clio 1.5 dCi (110g/km), which is equivalent to a Citroen C3 1.4 HDI (110g/km).

For good efficiency, try Honda Insight hybrid petrol/electric model (80g/km).
The same can be achieved by a VW Lupo 3L TDI which is also about 81 grams of CO2 per kilometer.

Face the facts that the ic engine has had its day; in 10 years' time they will be as silly as steam cars are to us (even though steam works perfectly well). ?

Predictions about the future aren't terribly good. Do you have a gyrocar yet?
Why would anybody swap a VW Lupo 3L TDI with 81 g/km CO2 for something else? Suppose for example that steam reforming petrol into hydrogen is 60% efficient, and suppose a hydrogen fuel cell can be made 60% efficient, and that electric motors can be made 80% efficient. Then just petrol tank to wheels, efficiency would be 28.8%. Feel free to change the figures around a bit. I'm sure you get the idea though: no way is a fuel cell vehicle going to be able to match the Lupo or petrol powered Honda Insight. Now imagine if the Honda Insight were diesel. Then imagine if it had electronically controlled valves. Now imagine if the engine was downsized (for example by adding a two stroke mode when more power was required). And if it was further downsized by adding a compressor (supercharger or turbocharger: like the Lupo TDI).

Basically, it better to go from fuel to motion rather than fuel A to fuel B to electricity to motion. So given that Fuel Cells are just promotional hype from the motor industry, as an excuse to prevent costly legislation for efficient engines, what do you propose might replace the internal combustion engine.

Even for battery applications, where fuel cells really ought to shine, firms are looking at microturbines: thanks to the miniturization made possible by the computer industry, people are putting petrol engines on a chip; they are so small the problem is keeping them warm enough and the warm exhaust gas has to be circulated around the engine instead of cooling. The government has deleted a whole fuel-cell section from its plan for future transport, where it was thought that a reversible fuel cell could be used for storing power from regenerative braking. It is now accepted that the good old battery is superior technology.

Sorry, but engines are here to stay. At the moment it takes a gallon of oil to create a gallon of bio-diesel. We just need to get agriculture more efficient and then bio-diesel powered VW Lupos (and agriculture) become CO2 neutral sustainable transport.

Do you have an alternative that will withstand analysis?

Countries with oil "could" become the new World leaders.

I agree with that, although it depends on what you call a world leader. America running trials of putting radio frequency identification chips in its citizens could be counted as world leading or people farming Nile flood plains and getting 15,000 fold energy return on what they plant could be regarded as world leading. But if we don't bother running off at a tangent, yes, oil is power at the moment. A flight to Australia creates more CO2 pollution than an average African creates in his whole lifetime. It clearly better to be a drug dealer than the addict, but I wonder if the person that comes out best in the final analysis is neither of the two?

surely you are not suggesting that might be the government!;-)

Great picture chrystalclear, looks a real classic, what is it and how does it stand up? I can only see two wheels.

Hangon, a couple of points about you comments:

a. In very simple terms, DAF was a CVT (constantly variable transmission) based on pulleys & rubber belts. TRKs transmission is an IVT (infinitely variable transmission) based on software control & is more flexible than DAFs CVT and the others that are about.
b. TRK WILL NOT be making gearboxes, they will be licensing existing gearbox manufacturers, several of which companies are currently involved in developing & testing the technology.

TRK is not the final answer to global emission problems, but it goes a long way to improving the present pollution problems created by cars etc.

OK it has to be the hidden wheel at the front! Very interesting machine and certainly would be if cornering quickly, that is if it would go quickly. Still interested in details about the machine please.