Hydrogen or Electric Ft-86
 

So I've just been thinking, what if in the far future a hydrogen powered or electric version of our cars exist. Would you buy it?

In my opinion, it'll be a very fun car. It'll be very similar to a tesla roadster imo. With the electric motors still situated low in the car, our car's COG will still be quite low. On top of that, weight distribution will be better.

Lets ignore mileage for this conversation.

The car will retain its handling characteristic, It'll have that torque people have been thirstin for. Zero Emissions.

So would you guys buy it? Also, which do you guys think is the future, hydrogen or electric?

No trolls please, just want to hear your opinions.

Weight. Tons of tons of weight will be added for batteries. This is very contrary to the basic formula of the car. Do not like.

The Tesla Roadster is about 600 pounds heavier than the lotus elise (probably adds less for the twins). That is rather significant and there's no getting around that for now. That'll actually put our car at about the same weight as the WRX.

But do you think its worth it for the power gain and weight distribution? It will change the characteristic of the car but a good amount of us are already slapping turbos on the car as we speak.

Are you talking EPA mileage or distance the car can travel? An all electric car you and I can afford is lucky to do 75kms a charge. No good for me

Hydrogen, because fuel cells take up a fraction of the space that is needed to power the car, unlike pure electrics. Electrics and hybrids are not the future. Hydrogen powered cars will be driven by electricity, but it will be on-demand as opposed to stored.

I'm talking about distance. I sort of want to keep this conversation theoretical about the future. If you want you can assume it has a range of 250 kms, which makes real life distance about 200 kms

I will still take my gas engine because of the sounds I can make it scream :burnrubber:

How much weight will hydrogen save compared to a battery. I used to be a huge proponent on hydrogen due to convenience, but with supercharging technology, it's not really a valid argument.

Totally agree. But there's something about that whine I love. Also stealthy power is quite sexy at times. Makes it feel like you're flying.

Only if nano-batteries are made affordable..

I wouldn't be able to give you a number, but the bigger the fuel cell, the more current you can generate, and the more power you can make. Pound for pound, given equal power, I think that the fuel cell vehicle (including fuel and cell) would end up being lighter than an electric, but I could be wrong. Need an engineer who is working on these things right now if you want a good answer.

Supercharging is cool, but still not as fast as a hydrogen fillup. Plus the infrastructure necessary for those SC stations is still more than it would take to convert existing stations from petrol to hydrogen (albeit needing more safety equipment, so once again I could be wrong).

I'm all for alternative fuel sources. The problem is simply the platforms offered simply do not tingle my nethers in the slightest. I'm honestly just waiting for the day the world steps it's battery game up, then I'll make the switch for sure.

Seriously though, how is it that we now can produce circuit boards so small you can't see them with the naked eye, but for some dumb reason our battery tech has lagged so far behind that I still have to power my flashlight with four big ass D-cells?

From what I'm learning in my ECE classes is that the reason technology became so microscopic was mainly due to the existence of transistors. Previously resistors were prohibiting us from minimizing these boards. Nowadays CPUs are being limited by silicon.

I'm not too sure about batteries but supercapacitors seem pretty promising.

Moore's law?

It's all about the material they use for making the batteries. Most batteries are made with the cheaper metal: steel, zinc, manganese and potassium. You can only make these batteries so small using these material.