15 years from now.

[TsLeng]

Anyone got a crystal ball or whatever please tell what cars will be like in 15 years time.

My guess is:
-Automatic parking. BMW is developing it.
-Can function as an office(equipt with computers.......and who knows what)
-all electronic controls(drive by wire, brake by wire, steer by wire..............cause accidents because of wiring failure)
-lighter materials used to aid economy and more aerodynamic.
-impossible to steal, wired up to the internet.
-and my favorite. Hydrogen power, just condense the vapour from the exhaust and you get distilled water! No more water shortages.

 

[Kent]

I think you may be right about the hydrogen power.

Thats just about the only thing I would really like to see.

That and hybrid cars that look normal, not these damn concept vehicles that look like crap.

 

[Frustrated Palm]

Well, you never know. We could be at the same level a little bit in 15 years or be alot higher. Thats the thing with the auto industry, you cant predict much though some things you can see coming...

 

[Klostrophobic]

-Automatic parking sounds reasonable I guess. I don't know if I'd want it though.

-You can already equip a car with computers and such if you wanted to. It would most likely cause a hell ofa lot of accidents though.

-All electronic controls is very reasonable.

-Cars are always going to become lighter and lighter and more aerodynamic.

-You can't make a car impossible to steal. Someone is always going to think up a way to steal a car.

-Well, we could have hydrogen powered cars if someone wanted to build one. I guess there is more money to be made with petroleum burning vehicles. I don't see hydrogen powered cars becoming anything until the oil supply is nearly depleted.

 

[HRT_Maloo]

Would hydrogen powered cars sound like gasoline cars today?
Would you be able to redline it and it would sound good, or will it sound like a vacume cleaner or something similar?

 

[TsLeng]

I forgot to add that the GM Autonomy concept is quite cool.
Crash your SUV today and change it into a coupe. And powered by hydrogen! Yay! clean air for everyone.

 

[Pupik]

In 1988, I was into cars, but I can't say I've seen huge changes to cars in general. Yes, supercars are more "super", but the biggest changes are the widespread availability of many options that were only found in some luxury/sports cars.

The biggest example was airbags. They became mandatory about 10 years ago, so I can only guess more safety restraints will come along. I'd really like to see better restraits like racing-style (not "ricer") harnesses for high-performance cars so you're not tossed around. But we're probably not likely to ever see that in a minivan...

ABS was an option in BMS and Mercedes-Benzs, maybe a Cadillac or two. Now, yo ucan get it as an option on nearly every car. Even non-factory car alarms were rare (you actually noted when one went off!), as were trunk-releases.

If current trends are anything to go by, cars are actually getting heavier than 5-10 years ago. Every automaker is touting strengthened chassis and better crash resistance whatnot, it comes at a price of greater weight.

Although I'd like to see more polymers and carbon-fiber, I don't think we'll see it in anything other than supercars and a few other limited appications because the proce of the substance hasn't really changed much in the past few years.

Hopefully, we'll see better fuel economy, but it really seems we've done as much as we can with the fuel we're using now (without sacrificing performance). Hybrids will become more prevalent, Electric cars and hopefully cars that run on natural gas or some other alternative fuel will be more readily available.

We'll see more options like navigation and satellite radio on almost every car. If we don't see Internet-ready cars, we'll at least see smarter computer applications inside cars; perhaps maintenence, or even something you can download from your car to a PDA/PC/whatever-we're-using.

What does scare me about the future is that technology may make everything known to those with capability to read it. Will the mechanic/dealer/manufacturer know how many times you've broken the speed limit? How hard you drive? Where you go?

 

[12sec. Civic]

Research towards Hydrogen powered vehicles has really been stepped up in the past 5 years or so. Anyways, I saw a show on Discovery Channel and they talked to one of the foremost cutting edge Hydrogen powered vehicle scientists.

Basically the verdict they've come to, is this:

Since Hydrogen is very scarce in the world, since it bonds with everything and becomes something other than Hydrogen so easily. We will most likely not see Hydrogen vehicles in the next 10 years, as mass produced vehicles.

The reason, is because factories need to fabricate hydrogen and its much harder to store and transport than regular gas.

Now, the main reason they discussed why Hydrogen won't be produced for the car market, is because the factories that would be making Hydrogen take up more energy in so many different ways, that they would not only cause just as much, if not more, environmental damage as gasoline powered automobiles around the world do. But they would make driving a car VERY expensive, and there is so much bi-products and waste with the production of Hydrogen as well.

Its basically taking the source of the pollution from the cars and putting it in the factories. That also take up room etc etc.


Of course there is a possibility that after time, we will find cheaper ways to produce hydrogen with less waste and more efficiency in the actual production process.

But who is going to provide the initial capital, to just lose millions of dollars a year until more efficient methods of production come around for them to finally break even.

Because if someone did start producing Hydrogen they would not get much return for their investment, because car companies wouldn't produce cars that people wouldnt drive, if they had to buy expensive hydrogen for them.

So its like a viscous circle of unlikelyness.



The only possibility is that the government HEAVILY subsidizes Hydrogen production, and doesnt charge people alot of money to use it.


But that would severely drain the economy two-fold. 1) The government would have to hand over mass amounts of cash to produce hydrogen. and 2) they wouldnt be able to charge tax on fuel which is a HUGE source of income for the government.

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by 12sec. Civic
Since Hydrogen is very scarce in the world, since it bonds with everything and becomes something other than Hydrogen so easily. We will most likely not see Hydrogen vehicles in the next 10 years, as mass produced vehicles.

This only goes to fuel my argument that the current line of thought for hydrogen cars is not well thought out. The current method requires that you store the hydrogen in large tanks, at former petrol stations I suppose, and fill the car with H2 directly.

Not only is this impractical, but it's idiotic. The huge batteries and fuel cells are just...a waste of time and engineering. Try this:

- Fill the car with water (we know that's abundant).
- The water flows through the regular "petrol" fuel system.
- Before being sent to the fuel rail, the H2O is split into H2 and O2 (electrically, of course).
- Inject both gases into the cylinder (same old cylinder!).
- Compress and spark as usual.

This method requires so little changes, it's ridiculous. Same fuel system, same engine layout, same chassis as a result of the former two.... There'll be some tweaking to engine timing and fuel pumping, probably no more difficult than the diesel/petrol differences. Most importantly, it leaves just one thing to engineer: a compact electrolytic converter (which isn't exactly large these days).

We get to keep our dash & windshield layout (no more "I can see your shoosies!"), the same engine tuning (similar, at least), and same engine revving and burnouts. I can easily see Ferrari jumping on this. I can't see Ferrari doing a fuel cell; that has no soul whatsoever.

So why force fuel cells on people? Because it will keep oil companies in business. They change from providing petrol to providing H2...at high cost, no doubt. Plus, they get to still use oil. How? Crappy, inefficient conversion of H2O to H2. This keeps hazmat transport in business, too. And we get to pollute just as much then as we do now, only more localized. And I don't even want to guess what happens to fuel cells when they die. I don't imagine massively-sandwiched toxic chemicals recycle well.

This drives me up the mutha effin' wall.

 

[12sec. Civic]

The only problem with this, is that H20 needs quite a while to be converted to H2. So it couldnt really happen in the engine right before combustion. It would take a few hours to convert enough H20 into H2 to run an engine for maybe 5 minutes.

 

[milefile]

I don't understand why auto engineers think that filling a car with gadgets makes it better. The purpose of a car is to get in and drive, not watch movies, send email, talk on the phone, or otherwise fiddle with distracting toys.

And if cars parked themselves, the manufacturer could be liable for fender benders.

"Hey man, don't look at me. It was the car. Blame BMW!"

 

[12sec. Civic]

But you know it yourself. The more gizmos and computers they add to a car. The more money GM gets and the less money Hewlett Packard gets. I think GM would sell toilets if they could make a profit from it.

Hell, they probably already do.

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by 12sec. Civic
The only problem with this, is that H20 needs quite a while to be converted to H2. So it couldnt really happen in the engine right before combustion. It would take a few hours to convert enough H20 into H2 to run an engine for maybe 5 minutes.

Not if you give it a good spark, and not if you do it in small amounts. The output of oxidized H2 is quite high....

 

[TsLeng]

Wow, imagine filling up the car with water!

 

[NASCARnut]

All of these hybrids are scaring me. WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY LIKE TO DRIVE. It seems car companies are forgetting about us. O how about the people who like the crudeness of 60's muscle cars. There is no way I'm going to drive something that is controlled by computers and takes 2 days with a good push going down hill to get to 60 mph.

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by NASCARnut
All of these hybrids are scaring me. WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY LIKE TO DRIVE. It seems car companies are forgetting about us. O how about the people who like the crudeness of 60's muscle cars. There is no way I'm going to drive something that is controlled by computers and takes 2 days with a good push going down hill to get to 60 mph.

This was one of the fears that prompted my "idea" of a proper hydrogen-powered car.

 

[thinkers]

It is my understanding that a hydrogen fueled car would use a fuel cell. A fuel cell uses the energy in the hydrogen and converts it to electricity. The electricity is then used to power electric motors, which powers the car. The waste product is essentially water, thats a far sight better than a lot of unburned hydrocorbons floating around our atmosphere. However, a lot of new technology in the emissions systems( multiple O2 sensors , higher efficiency catalytic converters, sequential fuel injection) has reduced tailpipe emissions to almost pure CO2. Whatever is going to happen will happen, we ,as consumers , have very little to say about it.

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by thinkers
It is my understanding that a hydrogen fueled car would use a fuel cell. A fuel cell uses the energy in the hydrogen and converts it to electricity. The electricity is then used to power electric motors, which powers the car. The waste product is essentially water, thats a far sight better than a lot of unburned hydrocorbons floating around our atmosphere. However, a lot of new technology in the emissions systems( multiple O2 sensors , higher efficiency catalytic converters, sequential fuel injection) has reduced tailpipe emissions to almost pure CO2. Whatever is going to happen will happen, we ,as consumers , have very little to say about it.

Yes, the waste product of the GM Hywire is H2O, just like every other H2-powered car. And when it comes to the end of the line for that car, you are left with a huge, toxic, chemical mass underneath the soon-to-be-leaking skateboard-wannabe chassis.

One example of a "proper" hydrogen powered car I can not believe that people keep ignoring:
http://www.bmwworld.com/models/750hl.htm

"During internal combustion, the hydrogen combines with oxygen. The resulting energy powers the vehicle, while the hydrogen is returned to the environment as water."

Direct quote from the website (i.e., BMW). This is, for those who didn't read the page, a hydrogen combustion engine. New 5.4L V8, but a V8 nonetheless. The difference is that H2 is converted outside the car, supercooled for increased storage, and injected as "standard fuel".

Another one:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/news/news_detail.cfm?news_id=453

Ford Model U. Probably slow as slugs in SLC, but another H2-combustion engine. Anyone else picking up on the fact that this works?

Sheesh. Peeves mode off.

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by thinkers
It is my understanding that a hydrogen fueled car would use a fuel cell. A fuel cell uses the energy in the hydrogen and converts it to electricity. The electricity is then used to power electric motors, which powers the car. The waste product is essentially water, thats a far sight better than a lot of unburned hydrocorbons floating around our atmosphere. However, a lot of new technology in the emissions systems( multiple O2 sensors , higher efficiency catalytic converters, sequential fuel injection) has reduced tailpipe emissions to almost pure CO2. Whatever is going to happen will happen, we ,as consumers , have very little to say about it.

Yes, the waste product of the GM Hywire is H2O, just like every other H2-powered car. And when it comes to the end of the line for that car, you are left with a huge, toxic, chemical mass underneath the soon-to-be-leaking skateboard-wannabe chassis.

One example of a "proper" hydrogen powered car I can not believe that people keep ignoring:
http://www.bmwworld.com/models/750hl.htm

"During internal combustion, the hydrogen combines with oxygen. The resulting energy powers the vehicle, while the hydrogen is returned to the environment as water."

Direct quote from the website (i.e., BMW). This is, for those who didn't read the page, a hydrogen combustion engine. New 5.4L V8, but a V8 nonetheless. The difference is that H2 is converted outside the car, supercooled for increased storage, and injected as "standard fuel".

Another one:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/news/news_detail.cfm?news_id=453

Ford Model U. Probably slow as slugs in SLC, but another H2-combustion engine. Anyone else picking up on the fact that this works?

Sheesh. Peeves mode off.

 

[thinkers]

I stand corrected. I didn't realize BMW had an engine like that. How safe is the hydrogen storage tank? Wasn't the Hindenburg filled with hydrogen?

 

[milefile]

Gasoline is more explosive than hydrogen. Therefore, hydrogen is safer.

 

[thinkers]

Am I correct in saying that the combustion chamber temperature of a gasoline powered engine is in the neighborhood of 2400 F. . And a hydrogen powered engine would be more around 3300 F. Would these engines be as durable, or possibly cost prohibitive to the general piblic. Could these engines be made of ceramic?

 

[milefile]

I think so. I just heard a panel of experts interviewed about hydrogen. It was on the radio and I driving and I can't remember all the details but one issue they dealt with was the stability of hydrogen vs. gasoline. One thing I remember was the range of temperatures within which hydrogen will explode is smaller than that of gasoline... I think. The main thing I remember was that I was convinced hydrogen is at least as safe as gasoline when used for this particular application.

I personally think it's a great idea with one caveat. Gasoline should be reserved for motorsports and auto enhtusiasts. For going back and forth to work, to the store, etc., alternative fuels are fine, even better. But I would not want to live in a world where auto racing is outlawed.

But if just the idle polluters were eliminated just imagine how much cleaner our air would be. Racing probably makes up 0.00000001% of internal combustion pollution.

 

[thinkers]

I agree, life without motorsports would be Hell. What would all of us here at GTP do with ourselves?

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by thinkers
Am I correct in saying that the combustion chamber temperature of a gasoline powered engine is in the neighborhood of 2400 F. . And a hydrogen powered engine would be more around 3300 F. Would these engines be as durable, or possibly cost prohibitive to the general piblic. Could these engines be made of ceramic?

Sure. You could make a petrol engine block out of ceramic, but it would cost as much as the car itself. Of course, this isn't just toilet-bowl ceramic, but a carbon-ceramic composite, similar to F1 brakes. Last I'd heard, F1 brakes (or any c-c brakes) cost about $2,000 per wheel. IMO, the standard aluminum alloys should hold up well for hydrogen combustion. I don't think either the BMW 750h or Ford Model U are using anything so esoteric.

 

[thinkers]

I found this to be very interesting.www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/1614/

 

[milefile]

Wow. I want one.

 

[Hooligan]

Originally posted by thinkers
I found this to be very interesting.www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/1614/

Oh. Silicon. I guess that's technically a ceramic. Sure, that'd be great. Just finance the cost of all-new tooling, mining, material acquisition.... It's not as though you can just go down the Home Despot and pick up a diamond-tip bit to put in your "$100" vibrating drill. Like I said, "$2,000 per wheel".

Believe me: I'd like to see this as much as anyone. I just don't think the ceramic option is available anytime soon.

 

[thinkers]

The ceramic brake parts you speak of are availiable on some high end sports/performance production vehicles. Yes they are expensive, but on a production automobile they will last nearly forever! Cost effectivness over time makes the parts affordable.

 

[TsLeng]

Yeah they are available on the Porsche 911 Turbo. It expensive and makes no difference to braking performance, but overall life is very much longer than the normal brakes.