Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

what happened to the clean air engine developed by Rover cars ?

this engine was developed at the same time as the catalyst exhaust, it gave out far less omissions, in fact ,less than government requirements for some years to come, but the politicians opted for the catalyst which has been a dismal failure.

5 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    The Rover co developed the Gas Turbine engine in the 60's i know this as where i used to work at Hull College actually had one on a test rig (it hadnt been used for years) what the asker is talking about is an extremely lean burn engine that used closed loop technology and was very effiecient due to fuel charge control and combustion chamber design, unfortunatley as per a lot of good british ideas it was not adopted, im not sure where the patents lie with it as it was a lot cleaner than the present engines

    Source(s): Master Technician L.C.G.I, M.I.R.T.E, M.S.O.E. ENG TECH Former College Lecturer in Auto engineering, Mechanic since 1983, Assessor and Apprentice trainer For Mercedes Benz uk, see 360 profile for full qualifications
  • ?
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    I think not motors with fuel injection converters and electronic engine management systems make more power than ever and emit less pollutants. Because British Leyland fell on hard times in the 90's it sold to BMW now I thought Proton, Malaysia company bought Lotus Rover and others. Next thing Volkswagon Will own Bugatti (oh they do) Manufactures are needing the next step by 2013 probably stratified charge internal combustion engine might get 10 to 13% better CO AND CO2 Emissions. Were about to the end of cars as we grew up with.

    Source(s): ASE master tech
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    That is because the Yanks went for the, so called, catalyst and of course all the world has to do what the Yanks do whether it is good or bad. Like TSR2 which was superior to the Yankee plane of the 70's it will have been destroyed to placate the Yanks.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It was a gas turbine engine and it never was practical because it lacked the torque of a conventional engine... the governments had NOTHING to do with it's demise... it just wasn't practical from a commercial standpoint.

    You are welcome to your opinion, but you are not welcome to your facts... and the FACTS are... it wasn't commercially viable.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Ask the oil producing lobbing companies

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.