What automotive trends do you hate?
- Thread starter mx597turbo
- Start date
04LE
Registered
Hope that link works but renault clio 200. Fwd to the 2:40 mark they demo it for you. Its to the interior passangers as the sound is recreated through the speakers. I thought they went into more depth on the show but I might be wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
Another trend I don't like is self driving cars. Down the road when people are in these cars and I am not, will it automatically be "my fault" if we get in a wreck? Or will premiums shoot through the roof if I am not in one of these cars? Not to mention giving up the freedom of driving... Endless possibilities none good..
04LE
Registered
Personally I kinda hope for the self driving cars.. being more productive getting to from work. Plus side I can think of it is kinda how the car saved horse racing the self driving cars could get more people to want to have a "race car" to have fun on the track.
But as im typing this I would not enjoy a self driving motorcycle bc whats the fun in that.
piratediverjefff
Registered
I'm glad I lived during the time of the internal combustion engine and my Brocks pipe,if I had no choice but to ride an electric bike I'd hang it up for real.
It's just a matter of time, and the internal combustion engine will no longer be part of the next generation.
Toyota Mirai ? The Turning Point
Toyota Mirai ? The Turning Point
piratediverjefff
Registered
Neither will I.
Neither will I.
You will be remembered as the the Pirate who lived during the oil age.
piratediverjefff
Registered
IG.
Registered
Some time ago, I was very curious about hydrogen powered engines as seemingly the best alternative to gas powered engines because they are not relying on batteries while being clean. There are multiple obstacles of various significance there, but to me the most annoying one would be that you need a lot more fuel for the same distance (8 times more IIRC). Simply put, if a car let's say has 16 Gal tank, you'd need 128 Gal tank to run the same distance. The reason for that is simple: one molecule of hydrogen packs only two atoms of hydrogen, while one complex molecule of gas packs a number of them.
IG.
Registered
I second that - lots of potential issues. Driverless cars will turn new generations into dummies who don't know how to drive and who would have no idea about the joy of driving the way you want it.
Honestly, I think the most practical way this will be implemented would be following the principle of cruise control. You turn auto-pilot when you want or feel it is appropriate, while driving yourself at other times. Of course, all the marketing hype goes overboard and tries to present the future as completely driverless. However, in real life, making a driverless only car just wouldn't make any sense. What if a sensor fails, what if you need to move your car from one side of the street to another? Weather? Emergency? And gazillion of other circumstances.
Remember human nature... All it takes is one accident clearly caused by a driverless car in order to ground the entire fleet. So, I think we are good for a while.
I think the most advantage driverless cars (or rather auto-driving mode) would bring would be reduction of rubber-necking delays. There will be less traffic, and when there is traffic it will go smoother and without stop-and-go.
These folks disagree with you?
Hydrogen Fuel Cost vs Gasoline
They say you would get 81 miles to a gallon of hydrogen, compared to 31 miles a gallon of gas.
It is semantics, but the fuel cell is kind of a battery that charges real fast with replenishment of oxygen and hydrogen. No moving parts in either.
My first car (a 66 Corvette 427 ) had a owners manual consisting of maybe 10 PAGES. My wife's new Lincoln MKZ has 456 pages in the owners manual. When my mech went to a Ford/Lincoln meeting
(since I mentioned this to him) they told him NO BODY reads the manuals anyway and it's a legal thing. To his retort, I KNOW ONE PERSON WHO DOES , Nuff Said
(since I mentioned this to him) they told him NO BODY reads the manuals anyway and it's a legal thing. To his retort, I KNOW ONE PERSON WHO DOES
, Nuff Said
IG.
Registered
These folks disagree with you?
Hydrogen Fuel Cost vs Gasoline
They say you would get 81 miles to a gallon of hydrogen, compared to 31 miles a gallon of gas.
It is semantics, but the fuel cell is kind of a battery that charges real fast with replenishment of oxygen and hydrogen. No moving parts in either.
LOL... What "They say" is very optimistic, and even if it's true (which makes it twice or so better than most fuel efficient cars), you still need 4 times bigger gas tank or whatever storage. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it happen.
Look at the specs, up to 700km the fuel tanks look pretty manageable to me. Anyways, Toyota has been testing this for 20 years, they are confident and have high credibility. It is coming, CA ahead of the rest of the nation.
Toyota Global Site | Fuel Cell Vehicle
IG.
Registered
It doesn't say where comes the energy to produce Hydrogen on such massive scale?
One can't pump Hydrogen at the station like gasoline. High pressure (10 MPa from their site), special connection and seal.
Any Hydrogen leak creates an extremely explosive mixture (hint: Hindenburg explosion). Even high pressure alone is dangerous.
Any accident causing a Hydrogen leak along with sparks would create a massive explosion. And it would take only ONCE to show the public how 'unsafe' this approach is.
I could put out a cigarette in a bucket of gas. The same cigarette would cause a massive explosion being placed next to a hydrogen leak.
Those above are very practical matters... It would be absolutely cool to actually resolve all of them. No doubt, burning Hydrogen (like in ICE) or converting straight to electricity would be the best possible solution.
On the other hand, I wish scientists could come up with synthetic fuel which would burn cleanly, producing nothing but water and a few harmless solids (not gas).
One can't pump Hydrogen at the station like gasoline. High pressure (10 MPa from their site), special connection and seal.
Any Hydrogen leak creates an extremely explosive mixture (hint: Hindenburg explosion). Even high pressure alone is dangerous.
Any accident causing a Hydrogen leak along with sparks would create a massive explosion. And it would take only ONCE to show the public how 'unsafe' this approach is.
I could put out a cigarette in a bucket of gas. The same cigarette would cause a massive explosion being placed next to a hydrogen leak.
Those above are very practical matters... It would be absolutely cool to actually resolve all of them. No doubt, burning Hydrogen (like in ICE) or converting straight to electricity would be the best possible solution.
On the other hand, I wish scientists could come up with synthetic fuel which would burn cleanly, producing nothing but water and a few harmless solids (not gas).
I'm not looking for it but I believe there's a 60 Minute piece on a hydrogen fleet in California back in the '70's, might have been Maw Bell. It's not a new technology, however I think the fuel cell is. Running hydrogen in a internal combustion engine isn't. Water vapor was the by product. I think the cost of production is the issue.
Similar threads
