houstonRX8

That's the thing, I don't know if what he is saying is true or not. If it isn't, just let it go and ignore it. Why justify it with an answer? I actually should have included you (hercules) in the people who have helped me. I know that I have asked some pretty basic, and to a lot of the guys here- stupid questions; just laugh it off, and move on to the next thread.

Who cares?

And from now on, if I ask a dumb question, please let me know. At least then I know, that I'm being laughed at.....

:D :D :D :D :D

Hercules

You're a better man than me, I just get irritated and must lash out :P

But yes, I'm also in that minority that doesn't care so much about 0-60 times, because how often are you going to drop the clutch to get out of a red light? Almost never. But I'm happy cruising in a car that is fun to drive, lightweight, agile and tossable.

That's what I'm looking for in the RX-8.

NOTA V6

Remember folks: It's okay to disagree, but let's not get insulting or to aggressive about our opinions.

And while I agree that stoplight/street racing is a bad idea, I would like to hear any one of us say that we have never done it, or that we never wished our NA rotaries packed more punch. I'd be prone to thinking that person has brown eyes from being so full of excrement. :D

Let's not hate the kids because they are kids. I'll bet most of us hated adults with that attitude when we were kids. IMHO, bringing them into the fold and educating them in a non-condescending way is preferable to chastising them into never coming back here to learn anything.

So, let's all calm down, and remember that intelligent neutrally balanced discussion is the reason this forum is so great. And let's also remember to lurk and search to find out if our conversations are repeats of last weeks heated argument. Can everyone live with that?

SPDFRK

Altough you guys may hate to realize it but stop light racing is a good measure of the performance of a car and it is the only way the 95% of the people Grimace spoke of are gonna be exposed to the potential of the 8. You can be quick to write that off but I would take it seriously because if we want this car and Mazda for that matter to succeed we need a good number of those 95%'ers to buy this car.

If you are a true racer you know the importance of straight line performance because you can HAUL A$$ through the infield but when you hit the straitaway and get passed by a Z then waist the entire lap trying to catch him through the corners and then get walked on the next straight it would really annoy the hell out of me!! *

* Disclaimer: I don't feel this is the case, the 8 shouldn't have any problem holding its own especially when the renesis starts sreamin' to 9k when the VQ whatever is shifting at 6200. But out of a tight chicane or hairpin it could be a issue.

Grimace

Herc: I'm not a better man, I'm a slower typer. I get irritated too, and usually start to type a smart-*** response, but a few lines into my response I tire of it. Being a slow typer is like counting to ten. :D

Hercules

>90 WPM here :D

NOTA V6

Dude, you need to switch to decaf!

Hercules

I don't drink coffee or tea

I do have an occasional diet soda though.. that diet pepsi twist is not too bad

Immi

That Pepsi blue sucks.

Hercules

I swear they just bottled up toilet water..

wakeech

uh, guys... this is an RX-8 forum....

ya, Pepsi blue sucks!! :D

stan11003

I think you guys are being a little harsh...

I think if a MPS version with 300 HP (turboed or tweaked) came out the smae time as the the RX-8 model you would chose the one with more horspower. Sure a RX-8 will be better than a 350Z but no one here is going to complain if Mazda added some extra HP.

BTW HIGH torque is not every thing and it may not even be safe or economical but it is a lot of FUN!!!!!!!

Grimace

I wouldn't. 0-60 in 6 with 250 HP is fine with me. I don't want to spend huge amounts of money either. The regular RX-8 holds more appeal to me. Would make a better daily driver.
Now, if Mazda came out with a more fuel efficient RX-8 vs. a 250 HP RX-8, that'd be something else to consider...

wakeech

or how about a "Zero" emissions steam (water spray and hydrogen) powered 8?? eh?? EH???

i could see it... well, if the silly US Gov't signs onto the Kyoto accord...

Grimace

Funny you mention that. I read the rotary engine is THE best candidate for conversion to hydrogen, even compared to a piston engine.

fuz

I still don't see any practical method of storing hydrogen though.

PatrickB

That's still the big problem - storing enough to give a car a decent range.

wakeech

in the steam powered application, one wouldn't need much hydrogen to energize the water mist to boil...

but actually, i saw a few years ago of a tank in which was "grown" (sort of just chemically created) a dense matrix of carbon which made little holes to hold hydrogen molecules in VERY close proximity, thus eliminating the storage problem... but yes, that method is BLOODY EXPENSIVE...

i think the biggest deterrant to hydrogen power today is simply lack of facilities (which comes from no one actually owning a hydrogen powered vehicle), and total vacancy of tax incentives for people with "Zero" emissions vehicles, thus no one wants to buy a hydrogen powered vehicle...
so here lies this circular problem... Honda already designed a hydrogen electrolysis refueling station (solar powered, hydrogen from the city water...), but i don't know of anyone building them because people aren't buying the hydrogen powered cars which don't yet exist... <<sigh>>

I WANT ONE NOW... but alas... governments are slow, and the US's is especially short sighted, as far as environmental policy is concerned...

fuz

Fuel cell is probably a better alternative than running a chemical fuel into a mechnical energy converer as you lose one of the conversions of energy, drastically increasing efficency. Basically like comparing a filament bulb to an LED.

Of course, that means no more motor; the asthetics and idea of a car would be very different.

wakeech

not to mention the price tag: i'm not willing to pay for a platinum + carbon fiber sandwich ($$) which is only more efficient at combusting (oxydising) a clean energy source (hydrogen) anyways... that difference in consumption of a COMPLETELY RENEWABLE AND REALLY CLEAN energy source simply isn't worth it (IMO)...
and the benefit of the rotary "Zero" emissions steam powered engine (the hydrogen only plays a small part in energizing the water droplets into vapor) can make REAL power and torque, is light, simple, and MAKES SOME NOISE!! :D
the idea of a $100 000 sports car that's silent and slower than my echo doesn't appeal to me...
now, ya ya, electric motors aren't THAT bad... i know, but i'm just saying that the rotary is a better solution, all factors considered...

think of a world in which every other car is rotary powered... "I TOLD YOU SO" would be the anthem of Mazda and rotary enthusiast drivers everywhere... :p

fuz

Actually the storage of hydrogen is extremely difficult unless you can keep it at absolute zero (expensive and difficult), or in magnetic stasis (heavy, expensive, and power hungry). Hydrogen is so small it would leak though all but the most ridiculously dense material, making a normal tank or drum, far to heavy and large to be practical. I think at best, we can hold hydrogen at near absolute zero, in a thick insulated tank, but it still cost a lot to make the tank, get that amount of hydrogen into liquid form, and half of it still leaks through every 24 hours.

I think steam powered is a far-fetched idea. Sure, it makes a lot of power, but first you have to burn the hydrogen to make heat, then you convert the heated water to mechanical energy. Doesn't sound too bad, but considering the difficulty of obtaining any significant amount of hydrogen, this is far too inefficient and I suppose, impossible to support without a very heavy refueling infrastructure. Gas is only converted to mechanical, but with a lot of waste heat so it's fairly efficient; fuel cell works at the atomic level to covert H to electricity, then to mechanical energy, but is very efficient as there is little waste. (It does provide more power than a battery at least.) Every time you make an energy conversion, you lose a lot of the energy that you put in. e.g. Put in 100W into a laser, and only 1W makes it out as light--mostly due to the unused energy byproducts.

The size and mass of equipment needed would surely affect the efficiency of a steam engine to move something small like a car. It’s ability to operate in temperature extremes at such a size would be questionable, particularly in hot environments where the radiator would be in question, unless made extremely large, yet still must support the high pressure of its contents.

Starting up a steam engine would also be rather comical, as you’d have to sit and wait as the water started boiling and the pressure rose high enough to drive. This is not quite practical in cold environments, where you would need to burn excessive amounts of hydrogen to get the engine started and maintained at proper temperature. Sitting at a stoplight, or in traffic would waste tremendous amounts of energy as you can’t really just lower the hydrogen burned, as you have to maintain water temperature.

To deal with variable temperatures, you need a variable heat exchange system. Then we have the hydrogen tank, the burner, the piping, the insulation, etc. Maintenance of such a mechanically complex system would be nightmare, if it could fit.

I'd place my bets on bio-diesel rather than anything hydrogen powered. The long carbon chains hold a lot of energy in the bonds (like regular gas), no storage problem, fairly cheap to make fairly quickly (unlike H), runs in today’s engines, and we'd be the best suppliers in the world (until global warming turns the great plains into desert). Unfortunately, I don't think a rotary will run bio-diesel too well. And I think a turbine would run steam much better than a rotary. You could run piston, like an old locomotive, but turbine is vastly more efficient.

I know this was long, but I still can’t fill all the info I want. However I think the thread is officially hijacked.

Grimace

Not only is it extremely difficult to cool something to absolute zero, its physically impossible. :D The best you can do is approach absolute zero, but never achieve it. I think they've gotten within a 1/10 of a degree or so under laboratory conditions. Anyhoo, I digress.

But I don't know where you are getting this hydrogen leaking out of contrainer stuff from. BMW has been running around with experimental hydrogen 7-series cars for years. If even a tiny amount leaked out of the compression cylinders, the car would be a smoking crater once a spark landed near the leak.
The hydrogen doesn't have to be cooled. You can store it in a gaseous state, uncompressed, in a cylinder quite happily. However, you'd get a vehicle range of about 1 mile. Therefore it is compressed to pressures of ~3000 psi (you can go more but its against gov't regulations) to get more H2 into the cylinder. Once compressed in the cylinder, you don't have to cool it using any kind of on-board cryogenics or anything. The container will sit at room temperature no problem. If you were super-duper compressing it (thats the technical term), then yes, you'd have to cool it or else BOOM! 3-6 ksi is fine though.

I think people forget though that hydrogen, while it is the most abundant stuff on earth, is a real pain in the yoohoo to dissociate with the other most abundant stuff on earth, oxygen. The energy required to seperate H and O2 is immense, and where does that power come from? Coal, oil, and nuclear power plants. There is no free lunch. :D

Prices of fuel cells are coming down, and output is going up. It'll still be 20 years until they reach reasonable levels though. A power cell is 70x more expensive than a gas engine per kW of power. If they ever get them perfected, watch out Wakeech! I'll be scooting past everyone in my silent electric car. Plus, electric motors should shut-up everyone who wants more low-end torque. How does maximum torque at zero RPM grab ya? :D I would miss the sound of the engine though...

wakeech

yes, exactly... hydrogen leakage out of a metal tank wouldn't be very fast at all... think of the Hindenburg... i mean, it DID go pretty far before the thermite on the outside went kablooey (another technical term... did i spell it right Grimmy??)

oh, btw, why are do you make hydrogen up to be like this super dangerous i'd-rather-use-nitroglycerin-to-power-my-car stuff?? it's not so bad... in fact, gasoline is more dangerous in many ways...

and Grims, i did say that Honda had come up with a hydrogen refuelling station which implements (huge) solar panels to power the dissociation process, and with big *** tanks using city power only as a necessary back-up, the hydrogen could be cheap and pretty damn clean to produce (better than gas anyways...)

yes fuz, trying to use a steam powered car in a climate where the propellant (water) would freeze in the tank would be rather stupid... but i'm not sure you have a handle on what my proposition was for a steam powered rotary...
the water doesn't have to boil or warm up before it's injected: it just has to be liquid. with a temp sensor a computer chip could modulate the amount of hydrogen injected and burned to vaporize the water droplets in the combustion chamber, just using a lot of hydrogen at start up if it's very cold or something: there are ways around it. not to mention that because of the heat-soaking factor that your hydrogen use to maintain temp in the combustion chamber would reduce as the block and rotor itself reached operating temp.

and as for your arguement that a steam powered rotary would be too thermally inefficient, just think about how efficient even the best engines these days are... what, maybe just over 20%?? i'd be amazed if it was even that high. this inefficiency, again, means nothing as the fuel you're using is so damn cheap and clean anyways, so who cares how inefficient it is if you can still operate the car at a price comparative to the gasoline alternative (although eventually operating costs would be lower by virtue of an uncontrolled and perfectly competetive fuel)??

even though costs of fuel cells are coming down, they're still effin' expensive. and ya, that what i mean about "MAKES SOME NOISE!!" :D

Hercules

Let me throw out the fact that BMW did crash tests on its 740HL vehicles (hydrogen vehicles) from the rear end, and in EVERY test (at varying speeds) the hydrogen just seeped out and dissipated into the atmosphere.

I think hydrogen is the way of the future, because electric engines don't have good enough fuel cell technology to last on long trips.

wakeech

hey, good point about biodesiel... i read a thing in my student newspaper about a student at the other local university (UBC) who makes this stuff in a barn or something, and runs his own car on it... apparently it smells like french fries...
but yes, it would be a big step in reducing carcinogens and the like in desiel emissions, as it doesn't have all that sulphorous crap in it (coming from used cooking oil... at least that's how he's making his stuff)