wow.

 

That's awfully kind semantics.

 

Whenever the forum needs to incite a panic riot, the forum knows where to go.

 

I have yet to see one on the road. Tesla Roadster is a sharp looking car.

 

Dudes, that Tesla Roadster is the most awesome thing I've seen in a long time. Go Rotary! With some Mickey Mouse math I roughly figured I'd be paying about $5 for the equivalent of a fill-up vs. $40.

Makes that $98,000 price tag seem almost reasonable. And Lotus is putting them together? Sweet.

 

Actually, the Teslamotors and GM Volt development could indirectly boost the development and sales of rotary engines.

The batteries of the Tesla weigh 450 kg (roughly 1000 pounds) which is enough to reach a range of over 200 miles.
Most trips are less than 50 miles, so a battery weighing only 200 kg is more than sufficient for 90% of the trips.

For longer trips an internal combustion engine is needed that constantly recharges the battery.
The rotary engne Aixro XR50 provides 31 kW at a weight of only 15 kg
http://www.aixro.de/


So if one managed to build an entire power unit with generator of roughly 50 - 100 kg (rotary engine & generator) and add a fuel tank with an additional 50 kg, the Tesla Roadster would still be at least 100 kg lighter and have a range of over 600 miles.

GM actually developed a gas turbine powered power unit for its EV 1 which produced about 40 kW at a weight of 100 kg.
http://www.autoworld.com/news/GMC/Series_Hybrid.htm

(1969 GM also developed a similar concept based on a stirling engine:
http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?p=560417 )

A rotary engine can be made just as small and powerful as this gas turbine, but should be less costly. Also rotary APUs for aircrafts have been produced and successfully been applied (running even on diesel fuel !) .
http://cp_www.tripod.com/rotary/pg08.htm

Two major disadvantages of the rotary engine are:
1. It is inefficient on short trips.
2. It is inefficient on low loads.
Fortunately, in this application the rotary engine would never be operated on short trips or low loads. Besides efficiency of the combustion engine is of less importance, since the vehicle is mostly driven electric (grid power). So weight, size and low vibration of the engine are fare more important than efficiency.

Of course, Teslamotors probably won't consider this option because they wrote "No compromises" on their banner - but someone else might.

 

ASH8, Its all good. I had the same thing happen to a friend of mine that posted something about a test engine floating around town, and have had the same happen to me a few times in the past. Many of the posters on here are a bit more caution in person. Truste me I meet many on here. After all its the internet what do you expect. But all in all its all just speculation till Mazda puts the final word out who knows what there cooking
-Gil

 

What if this IC engine were H powered? Then you would have the power/performance of the electirc motor with the range increase of an IC engine still w/o the emmisions. That may be the best direction to take hydrogen engines...

 

the new big engine...

http://rotarynews.com/node/view/949

-Bern

 

Even though it's the same article as in the other thread, it's still pwnage!

 

woohoo 16X

https://www.rx8club.com/rx-8-media-news-11/taiki-rotary-sportscar-concept-unveiled-tokyo-auto-show-128043/#post2079934

 

True and this has been done as well at least with a H2 fuel cell. However, a H2 powered IC engine is not quite as clean as a fuel cell and for instance still produces NOx.
A gasoline engine is just as clean as a H2 IC engine and mainly produces CO2 and H2O (just like humans) and both gases are essentially non-toxic. CO2 is only a problem if it is not 'recycled'.

If you were to run the same small rotary engine with H2 you'd probably only get 15 kW instead of 31 kW. So you have to make a bigger, heavier and costlier engine. Even worse is the fact, that if you wanted to substitute that 50 kg gasoline tank I mentioned, you'd need at much larger, heavier and costlier hydrogen tank. And then you still need to find a hydrogen gas station.
The concept regarding the Hybrid Teslamotors is developable and utilizable in a couple of years. All the components required are available now.

As far as Hydrogen goes:
I don't think, we'll move away from a hydrocarbon based economy anytime soon.

If we move away from the hydrocarbon based economy at all, we'll see more and more hybrids running with an increased 'electric only' range and thus significantly reduce dependence on hydrocarbons. Once a battery with a high energy density has been developed, all the hydrogen discussions will be over.
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/e..._ultracap.html

Here are the reasons in short:
Hydrogen distribution is not there.
Hydrogen power is not really there.
Hydrogen overall efficiency is not really there.
Hydrogen storage is not really there. (The BMW H2 tank is empty after a week - if you don't even drive it).
Hydrogen costs are not there.

However:
Gasoline, Diesel and Electricity distribution is there.
Electric efficiency is there.
Gasoline and Diesel storage is there.
Gasoline, Diesel and Electric power is there.
Gasoline, Diesel and Electricity costs are there.
Gasoline, Diesel and Electric reliability is proven.

Let's face it, with a plug-in hybrid with an electric range of 100 miles you might get 200 mpg (because all the commuting is done on 100% electric power) and at that point, it's really irrelevant whether you run your 'emergency IC engine' occasionally on gasoline or H2.

 

People always forget how cheap gasoline really is and how difficult it therefore is for an alternative fuel source to take over.

Example:
Assuming there's a car that gets 40 mpg.
Now the same brand delivers the exact same car but gets 80 mpg.
Assuming a potential buyer makes 20'000 miles a year and gas prices are $3 a gallon on average for the years to come.

If this potential buyer has to pay more than $5000 for that more efficient model, he'll lose money - despite the gas savings. And therefore probably won't buy it either.

Car manufacturers can easily increase gasoline efficiency if consumers are willing to pay the extra costs (which they're usually not).
It's also much easier for a car manufacturer to increase gasoline efficiency than to switch to an alternative fuel.

Hydrogen cars are mainly good for PR and since there's no H2 distribution, car manufacturers cannot be held responsible if it can't be sold. Nobody will ever make a movie: "Who killed the hydrogen car?"

 

Mazda is attempting to do just this with the Premacy (Mazda5) RE H2 electric hybrid. They've seemed to have crossed some of the obstacles, but still have a little work to do to make it practical.

see the bottom of RN.COM press relaease.

-Bern

 

I was watching a older 'This Old House' where some folks were using solar voltaics to power the house and stored the excess energy in hydrogen gas split from water instead of batteries.

Anyway, a home hydrogen system could produce all you need (if you are not crossing the country) on a daily basis. Who needs distribution outlets at that point? Water is cheap, and if somehow you have some cheap electricity, you are all done for your daily commute. Hook it up nightly for refill like an electric car.

Use gasoline for your zoom-zoom fix.

 

Of course, a Hydrogen economy would be possible, but storing electric energy in a battery is more efficient and less expensive - even at home. If one stacks a bunch of lead acid batteries in the back of the garage, one can store enough energy for nights to come. (The garage doesn't mind the weight of the lead acid batteries).
For many enthusiasts however, lead acid batteries are not quite as appealing as hydrogen - since lead is toxic and water isn't.

Hydrogen mixed with water also produces acid - which is also an issue to keep in mind.

 

Wow. Now what will FI do to that