Technically, what [Macona] built with a surplus Garrett GTP30-150(F) turbine is not a dune buggy, but a sand rail, but it does have the delightfully rare combination of electric and turbine drive that is absolutely worth wading through a 53-page forum thread to learn about.
The turbine came bare as surplus, but [Marcona] used a pair of Kia/Hyundai HSG water-cooled motor-generators to turn it back into something very much like the APU it likely started out as. That’s APU as in “Auxiliary Power Unit” in this context, the little generator that keeps the lights on when your plane is sitting on the tarmac. That went into the sort of frame you’d once have put a VW bug engine in — and the 150 HP off the shaft of the turbine beats anything you’ll get with Wolfsburg’s little boxer motor, even after losses in the generator and motors. Even better, the whole assembly, which uses the electric motor from a Mitsubishi Outlander, likely doesn’t weigh any more than the internal combustion engine and transmission, so whatever you call this little off-roader it ought to move well. It certainly seems to in the demo video embedded below.
What it doesn’t do is sip fuel, the T-62 being rated at 19.3 gallons/hr at full load. Fuel efficiency is definitely not the motivation here. He’s absolutely not saving money, especially not with what jet fuel costs these days. It’s one of those projects done purely for the joy of it — where if you have to ask why, you’re barking up the wrong tree. The vehicle isn’t yet street legal, but [Marcona] is working on it.
If you do like the idea of this kind of series hybrid drive, Edison Motors of Canada is working on bringing it both to semitrucks and heavy trucks, and that is motivated by fuel savings.
If you could capture and thicken gasses coming off a porta-potty you could make your own jet fuel. When burned in high temperature it would probably destroy all the stink particles.
The technical term for those is farticles
“Thickening” isn’t exactly the technical term, but yes! We covered that hack:
https://hackaday.com/2026/05/29/be-your-own-oil-company-with-desktop-fischer-tropsch-process/
There are some small natural gas burning turboshafts available. Saw some for sale in Texas. They are used for smaller generator installations inside buildings.
Uh…
https://www.youtube.com/@CBperformance/videos
150 is fairly easy these days naturally aspirated. Add a turbo and I don’t think you could build one that made less than 150 even if you did everything wrong…
But it is not nearly as cool as an actual turbine engine.
This is a cool channel. Thanks.
I think my Ford Lima engine probably is down to about 80 or 90 HP these days… geez
Huh. I was always under the impression you got a grenade if you tried to push that much power. Is it generally usable, or is that a “rebuild after race day” kind of thing?
Better cases, better machining, modern cam profiles, modern valvetrain parts, better cylinder heads/chambers, everything. Used to be, the rule of thumb was that anything over 8:1 static compression was playing with dynamite; not so anymore. No more full-round-skirt pistons with 3mm thick cast iron rings.
I haven’t built one myself since the ’90s but all the production aircooled engines were basically the same tech and quality of parts & machining as you’d find in a Briggs lawnmower engine. The flathead ones, not the new-fangled OHV stuff.
CB Perf has been around a looong time. Lots of shiny things to look at on their website, too.
https://www.cbperformance.com/Engine-Cases-s/200.htm
Its ugly AF but the T62 can run on diesel,
the T62T-2A1 variant can run on gasoline but requires you to mix lubricating oil into the fuel.
end of the day though, there are plenty of light weight 150hp engines that sip fuel that would be a more efficient choice of genset for a series hybrid rail.
a ford ecoboost 1.0L only weighs 30kg more than a t62, puts out a respectable 153hp while consuming ~3.9 gallons/hr
But unless youve got batteries onboard, and are only running the engine intermittently to top them off, WHY NOT GO DIRECT DRIVE? I dont see what the advantage would be without the battery buffer, If youre always running the engine to turn the genset to power the electric motor your just compounding inefficiencies.
This can run off of about anything, gasoline, diesel, various jet fuels.
Engine is fixed speed, no throttle. Plus it has 8k and 12krpm shaft outputs. Kind of difficult to tie into a drive train.
Battery means I can drive it around without running the engine. There is a 84S4P pack of 26650 LiFePO4 cells in the battery box.
Driving around on battery: https://youtu.be/gk09xk7t4jE?si=h0Elb4e6AoNwczng
My run it directly comment was in reference to swapping the turbine for a more efficient engine like the ecoboost. Running off the turbine shaft clearly wouldnt have been an option.
Im curious though, at 150hp, youre not using a T62 as this article claims? Youre still using the Garrett GTP30-150(F) the attached forum posting starts with?
I never had a T62, im not sure where they got they thought I did.
Oh, sure, I could have used a normal fuel efficient engine. But what else am I going to do with the engine? This is way more fun.
There is one guy that used a turboshaft to run a hydrostatic drive for a car. Way more complex than i wanted to deal with.
You said “Solar T-62” in the first sentence of that forum post, The writer probably only ready that far, got some AI generated T62 info, and shat this article out.
Yeah, was writing as I was wading trough the thread, and it did start with “Solar T-62”. That’s my bad, but as for the rest– I beg your pardon!
If I’d only read the first post I wouldn’t have been able to say what motor and generators are in use, so your accusation is false. Besides, I got some wikipedia-generated T62 info before I shat this article out, not AI.
Went down a rabitt hole on the AA tank and forgot that it was a different turbine when I came back out. It’ll make the correction.
You probably want the battery to soak up any spikes and transients? Am I completely wrong about that?
If you can toss the extra weight and get rid of power losses at the same time that would definitely be a win-win.
On to of being able to drive it without running the engine, the inverter will feed back during regen and that power needs someplace to go. Even turning off regen doesn’t work completely, you still get a touch of it when letting off the throttle. You can fry an inverter that way. Originally I was thinking big cap bank to absorb it.
But it does add some weight to the front which is nice, it gives me some extra traction for the front brakes. The brakes suck on this thing.
I used a Garrett GTP30-150(F) turboshaft from a M-247 Sgt York, not a T62.
M-247 was a failed antiaircraft tank from the late 70’s – early 80’s. This provided 24v @ 400v for the electronics and hydraulic power for other stuff, best I can tell. There is almost no remains details on the vehicle or engine.
I heavily support a huge fleet of semi trucks full of gas turbines and electric hybrid equipment, mainly so that my kids will have a bunch of cheap junkyard units to play with one day.
So is this the right time/place to mention how when (not if) I win the lottery I’m absolutely buying a M548?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M548
I bet the helmet is mostly to cancel the noise.
What was the plume of smoke that rised up while reving up the turbine? Lubrication?
Honestly, I think that the turbine should be up to charge half of the battery while driving is done by the electrical engine using the other half.
It’s not too noisy. Measuring the exhaust its 122db. Don’t stand behind it.
Helmet is mostly to keep the safety crowd happy, lol. And keep my face out of the video.
Charge limit on the pack is 40A, I have it limited to somewhere around 30A. So depending on driving it should charge the pack while driving around. Though there is only about 30 mins of fuel on board.
The idea to use a turbine in some sort of “Bat Mobile” is presents quickly. Chrysler tried this in 1963 and 1964 “Turbine Car”. If the turbine spinning at 50,000 RPM is not built to be mounted in a vehicle, are the bearing forces in-tolerance when the car hits a pothole?
Some 1960’s turbines, like Deutz T-216 came with reduction gearboxes with 3600 RPM outputs for stationary backup generator use. Another T-216 variant was mounted to a fire pump with monitors. This 100 HP pump assembly was portable… like a 10kW generator… manhandled.. … which is not possible if it were a 100 HP reciprocating engine. Youtube has a video (German) of a T-216 fire pump in operation next to a river. Look up T216 fire pump or Turbinen-Tragkraftspritze an der Weser
This was designed to be inside a tank, so it should be fine.
This reminds me of the guy who put a used turboshaft engine on one of those awful VW New Beetles about 20 years ago: https://www.ronpatrickstuff.com/