Top gear & Jay Leno review fuel cell car (Honda Clarity)

Looks like the Honda Clarity is toast.
Honda Ends Three Green Models For 2015: Insight, Fit EV, FCX Clarity

 

Like the Fit Ev, the Clarity lease program was a limited one for research purposes, and compared to the Hyundai and upcoming Toyota FCEV, the car was dated in terms of technology. I think Honda is bringing a new Clarity or successor to California.

Many would like to see the Fit EV come back for sale, but if Honda only saw it as a compliance car, they may not do so if they have a FCEV for that purpose.

In hindsight, the Insight2 shouldn't have been done, and Honda should have released the Fit hybrid in more markets.

 

The original Insight was a smaller and lighter car. Its engine wouldn't have worked as well in the Insight2. The performance would likely have made the car less sellable. Developing a new engine would've worked against the goal of making a more affordable hybrid. That's why the Insight2 was developed off of the Fit hybrid.

Toyota still might let people actually buy their FCEV in the US. If CARB is willing to let the public see how much the hydrogen actually costs.

 

1)The weight difference between the original Insight and the Insight would leave Honda's 1L engine for the first under powered for the second. The 2 had similar acceleration performance to the O with the larger 4 cylinder engine. It is a 98hp to 67hp comparison.

2)Ford ups the power output of their 1L 3 cylinder by using direct injection and turbocharging. The one in the Mondeo puts out 125hp. Honda is behind in implementing either technology into a consumer engine.

In order to meet price goals, Honda didn't use every hybrid and efficiency trick that they had used on the Civic hybrid. Developing the Insight2 its own engine wasn't going to happen.

 

Its good to see that the hydrogen hype has not changed, while plug-ins have changed completely.

In the time between when top gear said the fuel cell clarity was the future, and the tesla roadster was a gimmick, the autocompanies have produced dozens of fcvs. That's right, not hundreds, not thousands, but dozens. The worlds auto-companies have produced and sold over half a million plug-ins during that time. Just looking at the 170,000+ leafs and volts, they have travelled over a billion electric miles. The tesla S is the best car many magazines have ever tested. The next gen clarity, well its grown a 5th seat because the tanks are twice the preassure and could be made smaller.

Leno ragged on the prius, well, I guess sales of that prius in an hour are probably more than all the fuel cell cars sold up until now.

 

Consumer Reports has noted the small turbo engine in Fusion (1.6L) is a reliability dog. Actually, both C-Max's, and Fusions are much worse than average reliability according to CR.

Insight II has what, 98HP total?

What would it have been with a 1.0L? 75 HP?

 

I almost missed this because I filter out the OP but it reads like you've handled his predictable nonsense quite nicely:

It really comes down to a question of quantities. I knew the fool-cell programs were a fraud and a decade and a half has shown that remains the case. So seeing them used as an 'entrance fee' to the CARB market, why should I care?

In a year or so the 150 mile Leaf should be available at the local dealer. By then, our 2003 Prius will be at over 175,000 miles. The only question is when, not if, the Leaf replaces the Prius. As for the fuel cell vehicles, we'll have fun teasing the automotive press reporters. You' all have fun playing with the OP.

Bob Wilson

 

Absolutely but they would at least need to use some of the di cyclinder design tricks in earth dreams to boost hp for the extra weight. They didn't have the earth dreams valving and di until 2012, after the new insight was developed.
Honda Earth Dreams Technology Engines Named Among Ward's 10 Best Engines for 2013 - Honda.com

From above the honda earth dreams 2.4 liter has 185 hp, they should be able to do a 1 liter 3cylinder with that technology with 70 hp with 12.5:1 compression (mostly otto shifting to atkinson with valving) add 28 hp flywheel motor and battery (honda could do this easily) and you get the same hp). That set up would definitely have improved city mpg, but I'm not sure about hwy.

As for the ecoboost 1.6 liter, there was a flaw that casused overheating. A recall was issued in november to fix it. Other ecoboosts like the 1L don't appeaer to have that problem. Swithcing to a miller cycle di turbo 1L may add $1K to the price, and most would prefer a 4 cyclinder n/a, but honda can produce an earth dreams 3 cyclinder.

This seems terrably off topic. 3 cyclinders do appear to be good choices for plug-in hybrids, but only bmw has done this, and in a very expensive car (i8). PHEVs, if you can get methanol or m85 as a flex fuel, seem to solve all the problems that the fcv was trying to solve, at a much lower cost to governments.[/QUOTE]

 

Honda and Toyota see the future. And the future is the hydrogen fuel cell car.

1. The Honda Insight is old technology. It's hybrid model is replaced by the Honda Accord's much much better hybrid engine.
2. The Fit EV is old technology. Batteries simply will be unattractive as fuel storage for cars.
3. The FCX Clarity is an experimental car. Honda will be out with new models just like Toyota is.

What is so interesting about Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars is:
1. They use electric motors exclusively - just like on the Tesla, Chevrolet Volt.
2. They use liquid hydrogen as fuel - just like gas cars use liquid gasoline as fuel
3. They use fuel cells to generate electricity for the electric motors by electrochemical reaction - just like batteries, and unlike gas cars or the Volt.
4. Unlike batteries, fuel cells can be refilled very quickly and conveniently with liquid hydrogen fuel so they can keep going. Batteries have to be recharged for hours or be mass-replaced like Tesla would like.
5. Every gas station can be refitted to also provide liquid hydrogen fuel. Therefore, one doesn't have any range anxiety. One has freedom in fuel cell cars.
6. Liquid hydrogen fuel is completely clean. Unlike gas hybrids or alcohol-fuels, the only emission is water.
7. Hydrogen is the most abundant fuel in the world. We will never run out of it - unlike gas.
8. Hydrogen fuel can be made as cheaply as gas.

You can view a hydrogen fuel cell car as the ultimate hybrid since it uses a liquid fuel, converts it to electricity to run electric motors, with completely clean emissions.

Toyota is placing its bets on Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars. I bet Honda will come back with several.

Unlike Tesla, the hydrogen fuel cell car makers won't have a difficult time getting oil companies and states to add hydrogen fuel to gas stations. It will probably become mandatory. And oil companies are capable of spending their billions to make and sell you hydrogen fuel.

I bet Tesla will even convert to hydrogen fuel cells. They are simply far more convenient than charging stations, limited range batteries, and 5000 pound whole-replacement batteries. 5000 pounds of hydrogen fuel cell will certainly go father than a Tesla battery can go.

 

They use compressed hydrogen not liquid. Whole different set of physics. Easier to store compressed hydrogen than liquid. But I agree with most of your statements. They will replace the expensive platinum core with better performing polymer ones. That research is already producing the desired results. But still a few years away. Which is why Toyota is proceeding cautiously.

 

Thanks for the correction.

It is a chicken and egg problem. Manufacturers are cautious when there aren't enough fuel stations for hydrogen fuel cell cars.

But California is leading the way by creating hydrogen fuel cell refueling stations all over the state.

Station map | California Fuel Cell Partnership

Once these are in place, the future of automobiles is clearly here. And more stations will come.

This is like the early days of diesel cars. I remember Mercedes Benz in the 1970s giving us maps so we can find the diesel stations for our 300Ds so we wouldn't run out of fuel.

Hydrogen fuel cell cars are hybrid cars.

They simply are a better idea that existing manufacturers and petroleum companies can join - unlike electric cars. And they are so much more convenient to use than battery-powered cars - they are just like our current gas / hybrid cars.

With hydrogen fuel cell cars, we get our cake and get to eat it too. Its a win-win proposition.

 

They use compressed hydrogen at 700 bar. This requires expensive fueling equipmnt, and expensive tanks on the cars.

California has spent between $1M and $9M on each of its 10 hydrogen fueling stations. Most current stations can handle only 25 vehicles per day or less. With cost estimates of around $2 for each additional station, tax payers will need to shoulder up a great deal to get rid of range anxiety. I expect that won't happen politically, and California will have only about 100 hydrogen stations a decade from now. In the mean time there are tens of thousands of public chargers.

This is california fuel cell lobby properganda. hydrogen is only as clean as its source, so if you are anti-fracking it does put out all the fracking pollution. It is "cleaner" than oil sands gasoline. Hydrogen is an energy carrier, that costs around twice as much as gasoline today. There may be technical breakthroughs that reduce cost, but it likely will remain more expensive than methanol and gasoline until those breakthroughs come.

I guess you could, but in many ways a phev is more ultimate, and they sell at much higher volume today.

Tesla super charger network will be comlete at the end of 2016, so they don't need oil companies to do it, it is being done internally, although it looks like they may soom have help from bmw and/or nissan. In california the oil companies sued when the state tried to force then to open hyrogen stations. I don't see any that are promoting a national roll out.I'm sure if the federal govermenent paid them $50B there would be more hydrogen stations, but given the disadvantages compared to plug-ins and the costs of fcv I don't see the congress doubling down the bet they made on hydrogen in the past.

Tesla predicts in far less than a decade batteries will cost less than $100/kwh. That would make the entire battery in the tesla S 85 kwh cost $8500. How much do the stack and fuel tanks in the toyota fcv cost? It is many times more for less than half the power. Its a race to cut the costs, and fcv are not doing so well. That is why we get these promises every few years. In 2016 tesla expects to sell 100,000 bevs world wide, while toyota expects to sell 10,000 or less fcv, with a maximum of less than 2500 in the US.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

Only because CARB changed the rules to favor fuel cells. The Fit EV was a more affordable car that could be sold across the country. They had a shot of being successful without heavy government subsidies.

Luckily, they aren't using liquid hydrogen. The liquid requires venting to keep cold. BMW's bi-fuel hydrogen car's tank would run dry sitting parked for a week.

Or as Phinergy has shown, and Tesla already patented, a Al-air battery can simply be added to a BEV to extend range and combat range anxiety. refueling with distilled water is even easier than with high pressure compressed gas.

That will cost billions, and no car maker that wants to sell FCEVs is serious about investing in it themselves. They want us to pay for it. While also helping to pay for the cost of the car in amounts greater than any plug in are getting.

Every supermarket already has distilled water.

Hydrogen is not a fuel. It is just an energy carrier. There are no hydrogen mines on the Earth. Being abundant doesn't matter much when you need to expend energy to get the pure element. The kWh of electricity used in the hydrolysis of water will take a plug in further miles than a FCEV.

A BEV has no emissions. The electric generation has them, but so does the hydrogen generation.

If hydrogen can be made as cheaply as gasoline, why won't California let hydrogen stations charge FCEV drivers at the pump for the gas?

FCEVs are electric vehicles handicapped to one energy source, hydrogen. They can be called hybrid by some because of the battery they need for an energy buffer. But that makes a bi-fuel gasoline/CNG car more of a hybrid. It actually has two different energy inputs. The FCEV has one.

 

Trollbait - you wait 'n see, we'll all be driving affordable hydrogen cars (according to Toyota's president) in only 15 years . . . . just like the industry has been promising - ever since the 1970's.

.

 

The car of the future . . . and always will be.

Bob Wilson

 

It took 100+ years for BEVs to get where it is now.

FCVs came a long way in shorter period of time. Toyota cut the cost down to 1/20th what was 6 years. Honda and Hyundai probably did the same as they are coming out with production vehicles soon.

There is now a standard (J2601) to refuel hydrogen. Hydrogen stations are expanding. It is within the reach of realization.

I am optimistic. Gen1 FCVs that launched in 2015 might be for early adopters. Gen2 in 2020 is the one to watch for as there is a huge room for improvement.

 

question when was the first fuel cell car
With Toyota in its rearview mirror, GM talks fuel-cell cars (Q&A) - CNET

What makes them expensive?

Note hyundai figured out how to remove the compressor.
Is it time to start selling these beasts in volume?

doesn't sound like a good bet in california. Here is one comment

In green car race, Toyota adds muscle with fuel-cell launch| Reuters
Lest we assume toyota is way ahead of gm in reducing precious metal

Indeed platinum for toyota, hydundai, honda, gm is about the same. Danish researchers think they can drop it down to gm's 10 grams.

Toyota and honda do have some cost advantages as the japanese market is fairly closed, and the massive government spending and easier infrastructure makes higher volume likely. GM though will likely get these cost advantages through its partnership with honda, ford may get some through its partnership with mercedes and nissan but that partnership seems lower in terms of intellectual property.