RE: Is this the future of Mercedes-Benz?
Discussion
mechsympathy said:
The Article said:
making the F-CELL completely emission-free.
Apart from the enormous amounts of energy used to produce the hydrogen? Seems a shame for PH to be peddling eco-nonsense.1. Electricity (What we are aiming for)
2. Heat (Fuel cells get quite hot in operation, in fact its the main energy loss and efficiency issue with a fuel cell)
3. Water vapor,
This is the main gripe I have with this 'zero emission' crap, according to the theory stating that Human CO2 emissions are causing global warming,
CO2 emitted into the atmosphere causes water vapor to stay in the atmosphere and absorb more energy from the sun. Causing a rise in atmospheric temperature and hence global warming.
Now if our cars are emitting water vapor (assuming the energy is coming from a 'clean' source), then ok the CO2 is reduced and has less retention in the atmosphere, but if we are emitting more water vapor anyway, it defeats the object.
Really shows you how BS is spouted around.
350Matt said:
this took 150 people a year!!!
I hope they were doing something else as well
This would of been a broad Design brief and everthing from the power scource to the material of the seats would of had there own team. Most probrably a Team of half a dozen just to design it astheticly, a team if 20 -50 on the power scource even a design I nterior team of half a dozen just to pick the color of the seats.I hope they were doing something else as well
Ahh I need to get back into Automotive Design
www.cardesignnews.com
or grab yourself Car Design yearbook volume 1-7
ewenm said:
kambites said:
HowMuchLonger said:
Surely this is ultra light with little rotating mass; in which case why such poor performance? Or was it simply a design study concentrating on aesthetics?
Because it has 1.2kw - that's slightly under 2bhp.
The 24-hour 'mixed' record for a tandem tricycle (the closest format to this Mercedes) was set in 1993 by M Brooking & Miss J Ramsdale, who covered 401.22 miles. For a more typical 10 mile 'out & back' (so five miles in each direction) the tandem record is 18 minutes 28 seconds - close to 32.5mph. A well ridden tandem pair can exceed 50mph on the downhill slope of a well surfaced dual-carriageway (and overtake caravans...).
If this is the car's future, then start training. You'll be faster, have more range and a top end carbon bike will cost less than any Merc.
annodomini2 said:
...Now if our cars are emitting water vapor (assuming the energy is coming from a 'clean' source), then ok the CO2 is reduced and has less retention in the atmosphere, but if we are emitting more water vapor anyway, it defeats the object.
Really shows you how BS is spouted around.
Err, I'm not being funny here but I really don't understand your point. You've explained exactly why it should work in order to claim it wouldn't. Really shows you how BS is spouted around.
OJ said:
Arj said:
OJ said:
A pony would probably have a better power to weight... carbon neutral too
Don't they produce methane? 
Edited by Arj on Thursday 26th March 12:26
noogie said:
'Is this the future of Mercedes-Benz?'
Um, no.
It very possible could be. If it was a choice of this or walking it will be an easy decision! Solar powered unltra light vehicles will be one way to pay zero running costs. Not even labour could tax the sun! It may all look a bit mad now, but I think you have to imagine a very different future ahead... ie no petrol, mega high taxes on all alternative fuels...Um, no.
".........and although it will never see the light of day its good to know there’s an exciting crop of talent waiting in the wings over at Mercedes."
Talent, for making an utterly pointless vehicle? All that range, emissions free, as big as a proper car. Yet I could just about jog faster. Meaning, well, I might as well hot foot it to wherever it is im going instead? Looks like id be about as well protected from the elements too..
P,
Talent, for making an utterly pointless vehicle? All that range, emissions free, as big as a proper car. Yet I could just about jog faster. Meaning, well, I might as well hot foot it to wherever it is im going instead? Looks like id be about as well protected from the elements too..
P,
durbster said:
annodomini2 said:
...Now if our cars are emitting water vapor (assuming the energy is coming from a 'clean' source), then ok the CO2 is reduced and has less retention in the atmosphere, but if we are emitting more water vapor anyway, it defeats the object.
Really shows you how BS is spouted around.
Err, I'm not being funny here but I really don't understand your point. You've explained exactly why it should work in order to claim it wouldn't. Really shows you how BS is spouted around.
The ironic part is is we completely removed the human CO2 emissions into the atmosphere, global CO2 emissions would drop by about 4%.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff