And for a while, it worked. The early engines had only a few horsepower, and thus speeds and performance of the mechanical engines were more or less identical to animal power they replaced. Unfortunately, as technology progressed, many carmakers failed to anticipate the changes new power plants would have on the frames they put them in, and accidents began to occur.

Over the decades, car manufacturers began to take into account the safety needs of their customers, and cars became safer. They were by no means perfect, but they were certainly better than their open-top buggies and wooden-wheeled predecessors.

In our modern age, car safety design is state of the art. With governmental safety standards and company reputations to uphold, automakers have to design their cars to be as safe as possible. Unfortunately, sometimes the inherent design or manufacture of a type of car makes the occupants more vulnerable to injury or death.

What even the best-designed car in the world cannot do is change the mentality of the driver behind the wheel. Some people are better drivers than others, but certain types of cars engender feelings of invincibility when normal people get behind the wheel. When that happens, accidents occur.

Common types of cars that can make drivers change their driving habits and become more dangerous include:

Sport Utility Vehicles: SUVs are commonly included on lists of cars that are simply more dangerous than others. Part of the danger is due to the driver’s sense of invulnerability that stems from their notion of driving what they believe are driving a safer vehicle, and partly due to the basic nature of the car. Studies consistently show that when people think they are safer, they tend to take more risks, and nowhere is this truer than behind the wheel of a monster SUV. Furthermore, many popular SUVs are simply large bodies attached to smaller standard frames, frames that were never designed to accommodate the differences in performance and weight distribution found in many SUVs. Basically, combining a vehicle with a narrow wheel base and a high profile with a misinformed driver is a recipe for danger.

Convertibles: Perhaps no image is more iconic in the minds of Americans of any age than that of tooling down the freeway in a convertible with the top down, throwing caution to the very wind that blows through your hair. There is no doubt, convertibles are fun and exciting, but there is also no doubt that they are extremely dangerous as well. As with SUVs, people that drive convertibles can get caught up in the experience of driving, and not pay attention to the dangers. The primary risk of any convertible is a rollover. Most cars have reinforced roofs and weight distribution to ensure that in the event it flips over, the roof will not cave in and crush the passengers. This is not the case for many convertibles, and even ones with so-called roll bars are not entirely free from this danger. Because of these factors, convertibles can make people more inclined to show off, take risks, and generally act in ways they shouldn’t on the road.

“Smart” cars: Thanks to the cost of oil, and due to the demand for smaller, less expensive transportation, micro compact cars have become a popular alternative for city-dwellers and suburbanites alike. Unfortunately, drivers of smaller cars fall prey to the same mentality of SUV drivers, in that they think their vehicles are safer, thus they drive more dangerously. Also, while SUVs have their dangers, their larger bodies and open interior space offer far more protection than a super small car. Potential drivers must balance the risks and dangers of these vehicles with the savings they provide in order to make an informed choice about their transportation.

Ultimately, driving a car is dangerous, regardless of the safety features or well-envisioned design. As a driver, you need to be aware that if you are involved in an accident because of another driver, you have rights.

For more than 25 years, personal injury attorney Bryan Snyder has worked with people facing damages, both physical and material caused by negligent and irresponsible drivers. As an auto accident lawyer, Bryan Snyder has successfully represented victims and families of those injured in Southern California.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Bryan_Snyder

I went one step further. I listed everything which would make a perfect engine.

1. Same engine just different sizes for different applications. Generators, food mixers, cement mixers, food blenders, spaceships, lawn mowers, trucks, cars, pick ups, airplanes, boats, no exceptions! Any Brand, any Type.
2. A lot of power, but easily controlled power.
3. Very economical after purchase, no or only a tiny amount of money for upkeep.
4. Easy to work on, Just a few tools.
5. Very small amount of maintenance required.
6. Safe, no or very few moving parts.
7. Safe, nothing radioactive or poisonous.

The engine want list seemed reasonable to me, so I took the next step. I listed everything I did not want on an engine.

1. No fuel-no fuel of any kind, especially not petroleum or propane.
2. No oil-no oil for cooling or lubricating on a massive scale like internal combustion engines. One exception; oil/grease for bearings, a small amount only.
3. No fuel filters, no oil filters, no carburetors or injectors.
4. No pistons, no sleeves, no rubbers, no shims, etc.
5. No radiator, no water cooling system, no antifreeze.
6. No air cleaner, and all that stuff.
7. No transmission.
8. And while I was at it No Clutch.

I was very pleased with my lists. At the first opportunity I presented my Husband with my lists and told him to build the engine. You must understand, my Husband could do anything.

He quietly read my lists, then burst out laughing. He laughed so hard he threw out a rib vertebra and gave himself a tummy ache.

When he could speak without laughing and giggling, he told me “you need a magnetic engine but they do not have much power”, then “If you design it I will build it.”

So I bought books and designs and spent my spare time for the next two years learning and teaching myself about magnets, motors and engines.

To me the flaw in the designs I came across was obvious. I could see that the designs do not allow the power to escape or to run.

I kept seeing a picture in my mind of the inside of a rifle barrel. The rifling is those spirals cut into the metal of the barrel. The purpose of the rifling/spirals is to spin the bullet, improving it’s trajectory, distance and accuracy.

One day I decided I was ready to design the Magnetic Vortex engine.

The shaft was straight, slightly tapered at both ends, for pressed on bearings. One end was splined for a yoke. The u-joints would mount on this. Drivelines could be extended or a second driveline could be fitted where the transmission and clutch assembly and housing had been or direct, for example, into a generator unit.

In front of the splines was a carrier bearing fitted into one end of a stout housing. The whole housing was a cradle. The rear housing held the bearing and the loops’ guide rods, the bottom was straight, to the joint in the middle of the cradle, you have to separate it to mount the shaft and loops and of course whatever kind of mount receivers you require, to the front end of the housing, which held the bearing and the loops’ guide rods.

The shaft was steel and everything but the loops were steel. The shaft in front of the rear bearing and housing was drilled in a reverse double rifling/spiral and fitted with magnets positive side down. This was for going in reverse. Note; as I found out later, hang the loops before fitting magnets into shaft.

The next portion of the shaft was straight and clear, this was the place the loops “rested” in non-operating mode. Be sure to allow a generous clear area in front and rear of the loops.

In front of this clear area of the shaft was drilled in a forward double rifling/spiral fitted with magnets, positive side down, approximately 4 times the rifling/spirals, 4 times lengthwise the reverse rifling/spiral.

In front of this rifling/spiral area is the front carrier bearing and front housing. In front of this the shaft is cut with key ways for pulleys, for example, alternator, powersteering, etc.

Be careful to balance the yoke weight with the pulley weights to reduce vibrations. The strength of the magnets, the thickness of the shaft, the strength of the housing obviously vary depending on application. Your blender would not require reverse, use your heads people.

Magnets can be made. Use square or round keystock. Cut to lengths that you want the magnets to be. Touch positive to one end and negative to the other end. Just a quick zap. Be careful!

It will work. Not super long life, but it will work and cheaper than other magnets. Use the better quality magnets for moving equipment/vehicles. Magnets depending on quality will last for hundreds, or more, of years.

The loops were made of aluminum, drilled to receive magnets positive side down, towards the shaft, and drilled again to allow allen screws to act as keepers for each magnet.

I used 5 loops just wide enough to securely hold one magnet and keeper. These magnets fitted in all around the inside of the loop/circle. The next loop/circle had the magnets slightly offset from the first loop and so on, like the rifling/spiral inside of a rifle barrel.

The loops were separated by spacers but bolted together as one unit. The loops were hung on guide rods, running from the rear housing to the front housing. The loops were controlled by a push rod lock and set inside the vehicle and by the floor throttle spring.

The push rod lock and set was a rod which (in direct line with the loop guide rods) you push forward to engage forward, brought back to the right to lock/unengage moved further right and back to engage reverse. A simple sideways flattened Z.

The throttle shaft and spring took over once the rod was “unlocked” and engaged forward. If the throttle spring broke, the rod spring would act as a hand throttle. No more runaways!

I made a “quickie” shaft from a wooden dowel and magnets. I drilled the dowel and popped in the magnets. I used packing tape to hold them in place.

I punched holes into aluminum tubing and shoved in the magnets. I did not use any formula, just drilled and stuffed. I did not test my design, so sure was I that it would work.

I presented my plans/designs to my Husband.

He was very quiet and spent over an hour studying them. I then presented him with my demo model.

I had made my shaft and put it in a box, then made the loops and put them in another box. They were flimsy and I did not want them to fall apart.

He had a very strange look on his face and made some unkind remarks. I responded by grabbing the loops with my left hand (thank God my fingers were out of the way) and brought up the shaft.

I had barely gotten the shaft level not even into the loops, almost but not quite and it was gone.

The shaft left a hole slighly more than 1 inch in diameter through the office trailer wall. The loops had grabbed the shaft and pulled it through and shot it out the other side.

My Husband spent the next two days walking and thinking. He would not even talk to me, except to tell me to talk to no one.

Finally he came to me. My Husband said “They will kill us. The only way this can be done is for thousands or better millions of people to know how to do this. They must know all at once, worldwide. There is no way. I will not build the Magnetic Vortex Engine, you will never speak of this again. I forbid you to experiment with this.”

That was twenty years ago, my Husband has passed away. The internet is the answer to the dilemma of how to share this information fast and worldwide.

Take hard copies of this and share it with everyone you know.

I give all patentable rights to all people.

Rhondalyn Teel is a researcher and correlator. Search Rhondalyn Teel on http://www.lulu.com or on Kindle at http://www.amazon.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Rhondalyn_Teel

Ford showed off its latest design at the 2008 SEMA show. The engine will make its debut appearance in 2010 in the F-150 SVT Raptor. Originally dubbed the Hurricane, the name was changed to the Boss after Hurricane Katrina devastated much of the Louisiana and Mississippi coast line in August 2005.

Rousch Racing has had a hand in the field testing of Ford’s latest engine creation. It was run as an experimental large displacement version of the engine code named “777″. It was run at the National Mustang Racers Association on e85 biofuel.

The Boss will have design characteristics similar to the modular V8, its predecessor. Fans of the modular V8 will recognize the deep skirt block with cross bolted main caps, overhead camshaft arrangement and crankshaft driven oil pump. The bore centerline is the single biggest difference between the Boss and the modular V8. The Boss bore center line will be 4.53 in (115 mm) wider the older V8. In order to attain the 379 cubic inches of displacement, the 6.2 Liter Boss utilizes a 4.015 inch (102 mm) bore diameter and a 3.74 (95 mm) stroke. The intake valve is reportedly 2.10 inches and puts the exhaust valve at 1.65 inches. The Boss will also have single overhead camshafts, two valves per cylinder, and two spark plugs per cylinder. The fuel economy will be increased and emissions reduced utilizing cylinder deactivation.

With the financial difficulties facing the auto industry, Ford Motor Company included, there has been some concern that Ford has once again decided to shelve its latest engine design. However, Ford has shown every confidence that this latest technology is just what is needed to turn things around. The latest reports reveal that production of the engine is on schedule and will be offered in the 2010 F-150 SVT Raptor. The word now is that modular V8 in production now will be offered in the first few months of production for the 2010 Raptor and then midyear the switch will be made to the new Boss engine. The Ford F-150 Raptor should be available with the 6.2 Liter Boss engine no later than the winter of 2009.

Ronnie Tanner is a contributing writer at http://www.swengines.com He writes about used Ford engines and choosing this as an alternative to costly car purchases.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Ronnie_W_Tanner