I'm afraid you're right, but hope you're wrong. Maybe my head's in the sand, but if the current price of oil is largely a buble market, when it bursts things may get a little more normal. The Iraq war instability drove up the price of oil to about $60/barrel but since then it's been mostly speculation and declining markets elsewhere (eg, housing). I don't know how true that is, but it makes some sense. If a new administration finds a way to leave Iraq, maybe things will calm down even more. I don't want to have to think about politics when I'm out driving around in my RX-8.

 

4 bucks a gallon is getting ready to change everything..

but it will be great to have what we have and play with it for fun.

btw, i hear carriabou make great turbo blankets!!!!



beers

 

the "real" leaders in America are trying to do a slow wean from gasoline by the general public. The price of gas will continue to rise--slowly--so to not cause chaos--but to cause an increasing difficulty in using it. This is to help motivate and change this gasoline dependance we now have. Keep your eye out for 2010.
Dont ask me how I became aware of this. But, also, dont say someone didnt did not warn you.
The rotary is dead as far as a mass appeal. The hydrogen concept is WAY off, mainly because of it costs more to produce and distribute than the it does with other fuels.
It is up to us to have fun while we can.
olddragger

 

If gas hits $4 a gallon I'm going to start riding a scooter or motorcycle to work and I get 35+ mpg in a Civic. Enough is enough. The RX-7 will forever remain a play car that rarely moves as a result.

 

Mazda Maniac makes some very good points, some I had not even thought of. The word is we are also seeing the last of the V8's in the current muscle cars. That being said, I'm a be fan of "Never say never" The Rotary is a natural for a high-bread. It's light weight helps negate the increase wight of the electrical drive system. It's lack of torque is well complemented by the eclectics high torque. The biggest problem is no one has ever put out a high bread aimed at the sports car market.

Another thought would be a way to recapture the heat lost through the exhaust. BMW is working on just such a system and with the rotaries higher exhaust temperature this would be a good fit.

Now I know these are all hypothetical suggestions and I do believe the future will belong to small displacement, FI, direct injected vehicles or diesel's but there is enough new ideas out there to keep hope alive as slime as it may be.

So from a completely hypothetical view I wounder about premixing and the x16.

 

outside of the discussion of whether the engine will see the light of day, Direct-injection greatly increases the PSI that the fuel is set to inject by, what effects would this have on Premix added to the system?

 

The rotary won't go on and it isn't dead. Not by a longshot. We will continue to see one. The real question is will we see one as the primay powerplant in future vehicles or will it be supplementary to a hybrid system?

 

It's ALREADY $4.00 + here in SoCal. Gas station down the street has premium at $4.07.

 

Thermoelectrics, look up Peltier and Seebeck effects. See this for some additional info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoelectric_effect

There was a company named Melcor (not sure if it is still around) that manufactured devices like this (they moved some of their manufacture to China, they were headquartered in NJ). There was another company in Houston (the name eludes me at the moment) as well as some additional manufacturers. This could be one of the ways (assuming it is not cost prohibitive) to re-use some of the exhaust heat and convert it back into electrical energy (somewhat of a hybrid system). However. the Seebeck effect is not very efficient.

 

Peltier is even worse. Gasoline is still more efficient.

Manufacturers, tinkerers and scientists have been playing a shell game with fuels and power sources for years.
It never ceases to amaze me how easily people are fooled (smart people too and, worse yet, our legislators) into believing the hype about one "alternative" or another without understanding net efficiency.

Hybrid cars in general are a good example.
Forget the actual function of the device - have you ever thought about the energy costs and the massive environmental impact of building a hybrid?
By the time the poisonous metals for the batteries are shipped across the Pacific twice to avoid environmental impact laws, you have already consumed more than twice the fuel the car will "save" and poisoned whole regions of China and North America to make the batteries.

 

Well of course gasoline is more efficient, however with using a thermoelectric device you are simply converting energy (heat) that would be exhausted to the atmosphere to electricity, potentially increasing the overall efficiency of the system. I was not comparing the efficiency of Seebeck to Gasoline (Carnot cycle, or any other similar cycle of your choice), but rather using Seebeck to complement the gasoline engine (reusing some of the waste heat). The system, in this case, is defined as the powering system for a vehicle. In reference to using waste heat to convert back to energy, you would be talking about the Seebeck effect, not Peltier. Peltier and Seebeck are, in a way, reciprocals of one another. The Peltier effect describes using current to create a heat pump whereas the Seebeck effect describes using the dT to create a current. In the sense of converting waste heat into electrical energy, you would be discussing the Seebeck effect. You could use an array of these devices to convert some of the waster exhaust heat back into electricity. Overall, yes the energy gained using these devices would not be very efficient. However, manufacturers must start somewhere. These devices are already in use in such things as satellites, using minute dT's to create minute amount of electrical energy.

The battery issue you discuss is another issue, although a very scientific view of approaching the issue (cost/benefit). I am not arguing for/against the practical use of Seebeck/Peltier devices, but merely throwing out an idea. Smart people being "fooled" depends on your sense of perspective. Copernicus would have once been considered a smart person that had been "fooled". In some instances they turn out to be pioneers and, in others, simply smart people that have been fooled. But that is neither here nor there. This idea is only one of countless that could yield efficiency "increases" through technological development. The question is whether or not it is practical (cost/benefit, etc.). Just ideas to toy with....

 

Yet the technology advances from increased demand. Lithium Ion batteries are relatively non toxic and a new "Extend Lithium Ion" (not to be confused with the marketing term) Battery is on the way in the next year or two. These batteries use a nano silicon string to increase energy store by a factor of 10. Here is an article on a similar nano battery technology in the works.

http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=5210.php

At present I think that turbo diesel are far better alternatives but the hybrids are driving the technology forward and in time the energy consumption issues of production and shipment will shift.

As for poisoning the land you are correct but there are changes under foot. Pollution is starting to cost the Chinese more in health issues then they benefit from ignoring it so they are changing. One of my staff's fathers owns a battery factory in China and gave up making NiCa batteries a couple of years ago because of the backlash the toxins were causing.

You make good point but I don't think you can condemn a whole technology in its infancy. We need to give it some time to mature.

 

But as it matures, so does gasoline technology - and at a faster rate.
There is a four-fold increase in efficiency available in gasoline just waiting to be unlocked.

 

You are right MM--and the world in not short of oil. That is not the issue. The issue is dependence, the issue is greed and the issue is not having yet to maximize the product profit.
olddragger

 

Yeah, there is PLENTY of oil. There is enough within the US territories to completely end our dependence on the stone-age fiefdoms of the Middle East.
But Capitalism has its down-side and commodities like fuel are a major source of abuse - especially when the Government interferes with the market the way it does.

There is NOTHING out there with the potential of gasoline at the moment or in the near future.
That is NOT to say that we shouldn't be researching a replacement.
But to ignore the possibilities of the one most-researched and most-developed solution is irresponsible.

 

Say hello to the near future

http://www.motortrend.com/av/roadtes...roadster_video

 

Nope. Batteries.
Batteries are the most polluting, dangerous and inefficient energy storage devices.

 

Nano tube capacitors! Back yard solar/thermal plants!

And the 8 will be a collectors item!

Who knows what problems nano particles will cause. Perhaps as much as the miracle of chemicals. No good thing goes uncorrupted.

The price of gas has nowhere to go but up. If it falls due to availability, the same guys calling for a gas tax holiday will raise taxes to promote efficiency. We are going to have European prices, and we will develop their driving habits.

Won't stop the Ferrari owners, and I will save up to drive my 8. Meanwhile I am shopping for a good scooter....

 

That's a broad statement. Maybe throwaway batteries. Maybe not something that will store energy through 100,000 mile service life and beyond, and isn't toxic waste....

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/?p=66

keep in mind the pollution generated by exploration, drilling, pumping, transporting, refining, and combustion of petroleum necessary to power an internal combustion car for 100,000 miles.

 

... Still doesn't exceed the power potential of the results.
The waste accrued in the creation of batteries does.

 

Somebody doesn't watch SPEED channel

 

We get most of our oil from nearby countries. We only care about oil in the middle east because oil is sold/speculated on the global market, so if they produce more, we get lower prices.

Here's the top 10 countries the united states gets oil from:

It would be funny if we sat around not drilling for oil on our own soil till after the other countries ran dry. Maybe the USD will be worth something again. But by then, I kinda doubt the United States will still exist in it's current form.

 

Only when they run the Koni Challenge or the Rolex series.
I can only stand "Pinks" with a bottle of tequila and a Browning semi-auto.

I was talking about main-stream TV where the dollars are really spent, not on specialty cable.
Even on Discovery/Comedy Central/NatGeo/Hitler Channel they only run ads for the 3 and CX-9.

 

Lighten up man. Seriously.

I thought pinks was on TNT or TBS or one of the obscure middle channels?

 

I don't think the 16X will kill premixing. They would program the ECU to inject the minimum amount of oil to pass EPA tests.

So you would need another ECU flash to get back more oil or premixing to adequately protect your engine.

I agree with the point that Mazda may look at some type of system to trap particulates and pass EPA emissions. A system that cleans up exhausts enough to pass EPA standards, seems interesting. I've been curious why we have not seen more work on exhaust filters. It also would seem that car companies can leverage this as a way to get more money out of drivers, it they are the one selling and replacing them.

I think Mazda CAN do it, but it would require R&D and internal battles at Mazda. It is hard to say if the Rotary Samurai at Mazda could win out against the bean counters and Anti-Rotary crowd in their company.