So what do we do now that internal combustion has reached its theoretical limits and is outstripped by electric...

Then explain how it's not.

I'm not sure combustion technology can keep up the pace. 2,000 lb-ft of torque available instantly seems impossible to attain.

The fastest street cars most people can take their engines is 1,000-2,000 hp, and those are diminishing returns.

>Do we eventually do electric conversions to our cars to make them keep up
No, we'll use biofuels.

Can biofuels net us power gains?

...

batteries are still fucking useless mate.
at least my fuel tank doesn't shit itself in 5 years and if it did it doesn't cost half the value of the car to replace.
also im not sitting around for 3-15 hours waiting for an electric car to charge if i need to travel more than 300km which i regularly do.

No but hydrogen can. Dorito was not a mistake after all.

Hydrogen, senpai?

The ICE reached its peak in late 1954 with the introduction of the SBC. It's 63 years later and electric still can't compete.

>So what do we do now that internal combustion has reached its theoretical limits
When the first 14 words of your post are blatantly wrong we can at least directly dismiss the stupidity of the rest of it.

The theoretical limit for an ICE is 100%. The practical levels currently achieved in motorsports are up to 50%. Most directed injected road engines are only getting up to 35%. They can catch up to that 50%, and they will, and in the meantime motorsports will have pushed the barrier even further.

that 2000 lb ft will last you a nice 10 minutes before drying any reasonable amount of batteries you can fit on a car.

>walking through museum
>room full of different plane engines from the 20s-40s
>other than being refined all of the tech is basically the same as engines still being manufactured today

i love me some ICE, but it was pretty eyeopening

And what the fuck do you think electric motors are?
Even brushless motors are basically the same as the first commercial motors in 1890.

This. We've been using the same formula for 100 years.

Yes. Ethanol for example has a lower specific energy and higher latent heat of vaporisation than conventional gasoline, meaning it effectively cools the intake charge more, resulting in a more efficient burn and thus more power.

i didn't even mention electric motors

i was just saying, the tech hasn't really progressed in nearly 100 years

there was a few very basic electric cars from the 1890s in the same museum

it's the battery technology that has come in leaps and bounds, not the motors themselves

Sold.

HCCI, electronically actuated valves, laser ignition

>mfw tesla sends updates to their cars lowering their power to conserve battery as they get older

>2,000 lb-ft of torque available instantly
however electric car manufacturers (*cough* *cough* tesla) that even if you put fuck-powerful motor which is - let's say - 95% efficient on average. you still have a lot lot heat to reject not only from motor alone, but battery and inverter, differential, and (single speed) transmission.

most ice manufacturers know deal with heat.

aren't HCCI and laser ignition mutually exclusive?

Basically it goes like this. Pistoncucks will preignite due to hot engine parts but a rotary has separate chambers for intake, exhaust, and combustion. Mazda did it with a few RX8s to great success.

>apple

Freevalve doesn't increase peak efficiency, it increases efficiency across the powerband.

I guess mazda has to build a laser ignition HCCI ultra lean burn twincharged rotary with ceramic apex seals and continuously variable ports running on natural gas/hydrogen to keep up in the future.

All other manufacturers are already going hybrid now and have some electric cars on their lineup.

yeah and tesla is the apple of cars