Spied: 2015 Cadillac ATS-V

[BloodRain]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Hydrogen isn't a viable source of energy for automobiles yet. End of story. And no, there aren't any conspiracies against it or whatever.

False. It is beyond viable. As I said, as long as the oil lobbyists control the automotive and political atmosphere, we will NOT see hydrogen due to its obvious benefits that has very little drawbacks. Those drawbacks being purely infrastructure based only. Gas is scared of proper competition, and competition breeds excellence. Electric cars will fail to take off unless better battery technology is created. They are too heavy, take too long to charge, and unless its the volt, leaves your ass stranded should there be an unexpected delay. Come on, 70% of our planet could be a massive reserve of energy. No excuse, the actual end of story. The failure is lazy misinformed people and greed, as always.

[FenwickHockey65]

Are you kidding me? There's so much scientific evidence out there that says hydrogen just isn't practical for widespread use in automobiles it's not even funny. Are you saying all those people have been bought out by oil companies? Please. Take off the tin foil hat.

Like Number 3 (who's an engineer and has worked for multiple manufacturers) said, it's just a science project for now. Until someone can come up with a more efficient way of using hydrogen, it won't go into widespread use.

[buckeyemike]

Originally Posted by knowitman

My friend with a relatively new STI manages roughly the same gas mileage as a Camaro SS, yet he is running a 4 cylinder engine with nearly 400 hp.

A nearly 400 hp STi is a modded one, so naturally he's going to get poor mpgs, stock STi gets better mpg than my car from what I've seen in real world usage.

[King Sun]

why did this turn into a alternative fuel discussion. Damn

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by buckeyemike

So you're telling me a TTV6 off the powerband gets the same MPG as a V8? Have you ever driven a turbo car before?

Yes I have. But neither of us have driven a 6.2L direct injected, variable valve timed V8 that can turn itself into a 3.1L V4 when the extra displacement isn't needed. Nor have we driven a turbocharged direct injected variable valve timed V6 that's been built by General Motors. So driving experience doesn't exactly play into this.

A turbocharged V6 is less efficient than a NA V6 by a couple MPG. A V8 with AFM, VVT, and DI is more efficient than one without such things, by a couple MPG. When you've only got about a 4 mpg difference to start with ... the two are going to lay almost on top of each other. On the highway, the V8 might be a tad more efficient, while the V6 might be better in the city. But overall, I'd be surprised if there was a difference of more than 1 mpg combined between the two in the same car, with engines of roughly comparable outputs.

Well, there's that, and the Corvette engineers that allegedly put the TTV6 into the C7 and killed the idea once they determined that there was no fuel economy benefit over the LT1.

Originally Posted by BloodRain

False. It is beyond viable. As I said, as long as the oil lobbyists control the automotive and political atmosphere, we will NOT see hydrogen due to its obvious benefits that has very little drawbacks. Those drawbacks being purely infrastructure based only. Gas is scared of proper competition, and competition breeds excellence. Electric cars will fail to take off unless better battery technology is created. They are too heavy, take too long to charge, and unless its the volt, leaves your ass stranded should there be an unexpected delay. Come on, 70% of our planet could be a massive reserve of energy. No excuse, the actual end of story. The failure is lazy misinformed people and greed, as always.

Producing hydrogen from water via electricity is about the least efficient means to create hydrogen. And again, it is not an energy source, so the oceans are not a giant energy reserve. Go back to highschool (or maybe even grade school) chemistry: energy+2H2O => 2H2 + O2. Thats why you get electricity back from a fuel cell when you recombine the hydrogen and oxygen. Electrolysis is great for little science experiments, but when you need a plant to produce millions of litres of the stuff, there are better alternatives. Some are used currently, others are still in development, but zapping water to get hydrogen is a really good way to waste power & money.

Also, while a hydrogen car can get refilled quicker than an EV, its still painfully slow compared to gasoline. I think the fuel-cell Equinox that Number 3 mentioned takes something like a half hour to refill, for a tank that won't carry you much farther than an battery powered EV would, and about half as far as its gasoline counterparts. Nobody is going to want to wait around for an hour to fill up their hydrogen car. So there is another technical hurdle that makes them non-viable right now.

I don't know where you are getting your info from, but my interest in hydrogen started when my thermodynamics professor showed up late for a lecture because he was attending a confrence/meeting with a research council he was on regarding the large scale production of hydrogen. He then spent the rest of the lecture talking to us about the current problems, as well as what they're doing to address the problems. I forget which groups were specifically involved, but I know that it was a collection of academic researchers, the Ontario government, crown corps, and private companies. Anyway, after that I took a keen interest in the prospects of a hydrogen economy and I still believe it has potential, but the technical challenges alone (beyond setting up national infrastructure) are going to take a concentrated effort and at least another decade, if not 2, before it can compete with gasoline & diesel. We'd be further ahead to invest in things like biofuels and better urban transportation solutions and other things if we want to curb our dependence on fossil fuels.

Originally Posted by buckeyemike

A nearly 400 hp STi is a modded one, so naturally he's going to get poor mpgs, stock STi gets better mpg than my car from what I've seen in real world usage.

From what little I've seen, the V6 Camaro tends to get somewhat better mileage. STi's getting from high teens to low 20s, while V6 Camaros seem to average very high teens to mid 20s. Its not much of a difference, but the edge seems to go to the Camaro.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by BloodRain

False. It is beyond viable. As I said, as long as the oil lobbyists control the automotive and political atmosphere, we will NOT see hydrogen due to its obvious benefits that has very little drawbacks. Those drawbacks being purely infrastructure based only. Gas is scared of proper competition, and competition breeds excellence. Electric cars will fail to take off unless better battery technology is created. They are too heavy, take too long to charge, and unless its the volt, leaves your ass stranded should there be an unexpected delay. Come on, 70% of our planet could be a massive reserve of energy. No excuse, the actual end of story. The failure is lazy misinformed people and greed, as always.

Competition will be on a $$ basis.

Right now it take more energy to get Hydrogen from water than the energy left to use. So yes 70% of the world is H2O (but not hydrogen).

I urge you to look beyond your belief in consipiracy theories and look into the science and logic.

Anyone that could offer hydrogen at a cheaper price with less drawbacks would win in the market, wouldn't you agree? And if you think it is simply the oil companies, don't you think Europe where gas is $8 to $10 per gallon wouldn't be an even better place to crack this open (excuse the pun)?

It is viable only in that it can propel a vehicle. BMW can go 100 miles on liguid hydrogen at a cost much higher than gas.

Also, I urge you to look up Fuel Cell technology. It is truly a science experiment at this point. And yes, Honda and GM have shown Fuel Cells that are bout the size of an IC engine, but they still cost an order of magnitude more. And they also require batteries like a hybrid so the cost will ultimately stay high for anywere near the next 20 years.

And although you seem to think the oil companies are in control here, you have to realize there are countries with princes that are far richer than most of our oil countries. They will likely keep oil just cheap enough to keep the US from going into the rocky mountains for shale oil and keep the investment in Fuel Cell technology from being financially viable.

You are correct, though, money will drive this. When and if hydrogen can stand on it's own financially it will win. Money will declare the winner.

But look at what it takes to break hydrogen free of the oxygen bonds and how much energy that takes and you will answer your own question. Doesn't matter how plentiful H20 is.

Again, how bout dem spy photos?

[Camaro_Corvette]

What is this thread about again?

[CamaroSkooter]

Originally Posted by Camaro_Corvette

What is this thread about again?

Bench racing.