VIDEO: Jay Leno explains his biodiesel-powered EcoJet, races a private plane
by Jeremy Korzeniewski on Sep 28th 2009 at 7:28PM 
Jay Leno's EcoJet - Click above to watch the video after the break
In a garage full of ultra rare, highly desirable cars and trucks, Jay Leno's EcoJet still manages to stand out as one of the coolest. Part of the vehicle's claim to fame comes from its ability to run on biodiesel fuel, putting out an impressive 750 horsepower and 700 ft-lb of torque at 48,000 RPM from its Honeywell LT101 jet turbine engine.
Underneath its distinctive carbon fiber skin lies an aluminum chassis that is kept in contact with the ground using existing suspension bits from the Chevrolet Corvette. Also in use is a four-speed automatic transmission from General Motors that gets its input from a custom gearbox that reduces engine speed from those aforementioned lofty heights down to 6,000 rpm.
Naturally, special carbon fiber brake discs from Brembo paired up with aluminum six-piston calipers were necessary to hold back the engine's 200 horsepower at idle. Inside, Microsoft built the dash, including a full Windows Vista-powered computer that is fully connected to the internet.
As we have come to expect from Leno, the EcoJet does indeed see action on the roads in California, and Jay also finds the time to visit the airstrip for a race against a private jet. Wanna know who wins? Click past the break to watch the video.
Gallery: Jay Leno's EcoJet
[Source: Jay Leno's Garage]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Taglane 7:41PM (9/28/2009)
I want to see this car in Cadillac's lineup....
Reply
fmwso 8:41PM (9/28/2009)
I second that. This is a gorgeous car imo. I wish this car were made in production. Jay Leno is truly a car guy.
Quantumphysics 8:43PM (9/28/2009)
Jay should have invested in an ultra high performance electric powerplant. This way you could get massive horsepower and it would be ultra quiet.
Berto 7:43PM (9/28/2009)
but has it gone around the Nurburgring yet?
=P
Reply
2004m3driver 8:06PM (9/28/2009)
I wanna know when it can fly across the Pacific.
Trent 7:48PM (9/28/2009)
carbon fiber brake discs eh? i'd like to see that in action.
Reply
Ray 8:16PM (9/28/2009)
You can. Formula 1 comes on early next Sunday morning.
Trent 8:53PM (9/28/2009)
carbon CERAMIC people. CERAMIC.
Trent 8:58PM (9/28/2009)
Ok let me remove my foot from my mouth for a second and ask this: Is it simply a matter of nomenclature? If you look em up on the brembo website, NO WHERE does it say "carbon fibre." However, if you read about F1 brakes off the F1 website, it says the discs are carbon fibre composite. Could someone explain this?
dac 2:57AM (9/29/2009)
Carbon fibers can be used to reinforce many different types of materials. The fibers work on the same principle as rebar in concrete, but at a smaller size and larger scale. In most automotive applications the "concrete" is a plastic of some kind, but a heat resistant ceramic filler is used for brake pads.
So to answer your question, the technical terminology is something like carbon fiber reinforced ceramic. In any case, I think "carbon fiber" and "carbon ceramic" brakes can be used interchangeably because they are both unambiguous shortenings on the correct term. Likewise, ricers should say their hoods are carbon fiber reinforced plastic, but that just doesn't have the same ring, now does it?
Dan Mosqueda 10:29PM (9/28/2009)
@Trent, I think you're right. I thought they were carbon ceramic.
okiedokie 7:48PM (9/28/2009)
thats one ugly car
Reply
Luso 7:21AM (9/29/2009)
UGLY! Really?!?!?
I think it looks nice for what it is. It's no beauty, but I wouldn't call it ugly.
"- One of us should have gone to spec savers?!?!?"
http://www.carnorama.com
Jim 7:56PM (9/28/2009)
The Honeywell engine is a turboshaft engine from a helicopter, not a jet engine.
Reply
Epyx 11:08PM (9/28/2009)
It is a jet turbine engine, which is one form of the more generic "jet engine." Yes, it is usually found in helicopters but it is still very much a jet engine.
Jim 11:20PM (9/28/2009)
A "jet engine" (i.e. turbojet or turbofan) produces thrust from the exhaust jet (see that word?) This is a turboshaft; the free turbine spins an output shaft and produces no thrust. Both are gas turbines, but only one is a "jet" engine.
you can't just redefine terms however you like.
jason 8:45AM (9/29/2009)
Jim - you are correct. This is NOT a jet. When I saw the headline and the name of the car I cringed. I guess "Jet" just sounds cooler for media attention.
extinctdoughnut 8:56AM (9/29/2009)
Gas turbine.
BoxerFanatic 11:10AM (9/29/2009)
That is a common misconception, almost to the point where it has become accepted terminology, even if it isn't 100% vocabulary correct.
Even some people call gas turbine powered helicopters "jet" helicopters.
Bell even leveraged the name on their ubiquitous "Jet Ranger", one of the most prolific helicopter designs out there.
But the principle is the same that it is an external combustion, compressed air engine, whether it derives motive force by exhaust gas thrust, or by exhaust gas turbines that convert that energy into mechanical kinetic energy, directed into machine works, like a rotor blade system, or a car's driveline.
Frankly, I have long thought that a much scaled-down version of such a gas turbine engine, coupled with an electric generator, a modest electrical capacitance buffer with a high discharge rate, and electric drive, as a series hybrid, would be one of the more logical, clean-sheet purpose-driven designs.
Someone mentioned above... an electric power plant... An electric supply power-plant usually uses a steam-driven turbine to drive a generator. Such a car would not have a steam system on-board, but a liquid fuel gas-powered turbine powering the small on-board generator instead... with all the re-fueling infrastructure already in place across the country and most of the world, and not needing to wait hours for batteries to re-charge.
In that case, unless the generator's specs require it, there wouldn't need to be a step down gear reduction, or a transmission at all. The engine speed would be fully de-coupled from ground-speed, by the electrical drive system, which would also introduce integral regenerative braking, and all-wheel drive, and individual wheel resistance or torque application traction and stability control programming, by dual-motor-on-axle drivelines on both axles.
There wouldn't even really need to be a differential, if each axle has two motors, one for each side. (although central mounting and CV shafts to the wheels would greatly help for mass centralization, and unsprung weight.) Maybe an electronic locking or limited slip device as a mechanical bridge between the two sides of each axle, but most could be controlled by metering the electrical supply to the motors individually.
That would be an interesting evolution of combining the superior energy production and storage of liquid fuel, and the inherent characteristics of electric drive, without the huge hurdle of large amounts of electrical storage on board. Just enough electrical storage to buffer between the generator's more steady-state output, and the motor's fluctuating demands, and perhaps enough to move the vehicle around a short distance, like parking structure, or to otherwise re-arrange the car's location, without having to power up the turbine engine just for that.
Aside from that, Leno's car is a bit slab-sided and blunt looking to me... OK, but not great. And I am not sure about a Microsoft Operating System controlling the car's functions... What happens to the controls when it gets spyware or viruses? What about a blue screen of death, or when the interface won't respond because a background process is seizing all of the processor cycles... or registry corruption... as someone who works on end user computers for a living... consider me not impressed by that. A more purpose built, embedded-style always-on, or ultra-fast-boot OS with configurable software on top of that seems like a better bet to me.
Jim 11:22AM (9/29/2009)
"Even some people call gas turbine powered helicopters "jet" helicopters."
then they're wrong, plain and simple.
"Frankly, I have long thought that a much scaled-down version of such a gas turbine engine, coupled with an electric generator, a modest electrical capacitance buffer with a high discharge rate, and electric drive, as a series hybrid, would be one of the more logical, clean-sheet purpose-driven designs."
you have to get around the fact that 1) gas turbines, in general, still have higher specific fuel consumption vis-a-vis piston engines, for a given power output, 2) turbines in general have a much longer spool-up/refire time than a piston engine, and 3) are horribly thirsty at anything other than 100% load.
"Someone mentioned above... an electric power plant... An electric supply power-plant usually uses a steam-driven turbine to drive a generator. Such a car would not have a steam system on-board, but a liquid fuel gas-powered turbine powering the small on-board generator instead... with all the re-fueling infrastructure already in place across the country and most of the world, and not needing to wait hours for batteries to re-charge."
Steam turbines and gas turbines run different thermodynamic cycles (Rankine and Brayton, respectively.) They're not directly comparable; a steam turbine has no compression stage or burner, for starters.