Hydrogen Camaro?

There is a rumor on gminsidenews.com that 2009 NAIAS may be the stage at which a Hydrogen Camaro Concept debuts...what do you guys think?

Would you buy a Hydrogen Camaro if the performance was right?
What kind of performance would it need to produce to be "worthy" of the Camaro name?

I think they should make a camaro that runs on the blood of tree huggin' liberal hippies!

The last time Hydrogen was used as a means for transportation....

http://www.vidicom-tv.com/home/images/vidicom-main-hindenburg.jpg

Seriously though, I am not opposed to an alternative fuel. I am realistic and understand that the oil supply isn't going to last forever. As long at the alternative fuel offers the same performance benefits as Gasoline and is safe to have in a car.

With that said, I don't think Hydrogen is our best alternative. The tanks are big and bulky and if I remember right, hydrogen only has about 1/4 the energy as gasoline and diesel.

I think the best alternative is Bio diesel. It can already be used as a direct substitute to diesel on all newer engines with little to no modification and it has a HIGHER energy potential than does regular diesel and gasoline.

IMO hydrogen is still decades away from becoming a viable alternative.

There is a rumor on gminsidenews.com that 2009 NAIAS may be the stage at which a Hydrogen Camaro Concept debuts...what do you guys think?

Would you buy a Hydrogen Camaro if the performance was right?
What kind of performance would it need to produce to be "worthy" of the Camaro name?

I think you should be able to mod it. If it come with 350 hp and you can't mod it what good is it? Can you mix hydrogen and Nos?:confused:

The last time Hydrogen was used as a means for transportation....

http://www.vidicom-tv.com/home/images/vidicom-main-hindenburg.jpg

Hydrogen didnt start that fire. When the ropes hit the ground in that electrical storm for the US Navy guys to grab it grounded. Static electricity arcing from the frame to the heat shield caught the heat shield on fire. One of the things the heat shield was made up was aluminum oxide. It was close to rocket fuel. A NASA scientist figured it out, and also that the Nazis knew it and covered it up for insurance purposes.

And to answer the question, no.

Surely a 350hp, non-modable, and incredibly fuel efficient Hydrogen Camaro is more worthy of the Camaro name than say an Iron Duke Camaro or a 4th gen with the 3.4?

I don't think that I'd want a high performance Hydrogen Camaro, but if it were to supplant the 6 cylinder version then more power to GM

Hydrogen didnt start that fire. When the ropes hit the ground in that electrical storm for the US Navy guys to grab it grounded. Static electricity arcing from the frame to the heat shield caught the heat shield on fire. One of the things the heat shield was made up was aluminum oxide. It was close to rocket fuel. A NASA scientist figured it out, and also that the Nazis knew it and covered it up for insurance purposes.

And to answer the question, no.

I understand that, it was a joke. I edited my response to include a real answer to the question.

If you look at some of the stuff the Germans are doing I think a diesel/bio-diesel car would work.

What's not to like about Audi's 700bhp V12 diesel?

http://www.hydrogen-boost.com/index.html :D

lol, what a scam!

350 HP from a hydrogen powered engine in a small passenger car is currently a pipe dream. With a 5000 ft/sec flame front, and significantly less energy per pound than gasoline, it takes forced induction to get power levels that approach just 75% of their naturally aspirated gas powered relatives. Hydrogen has a nasty habit of creating a super-hot combustion event, especially when you run it at stoichiometric and the result is a lot of NOX. Therefore you need to run a hydrogen powered i.c. engine at either very lean mixtures, or very rich mixtures. The result is lean-burn for cruising (with very little available power), or rich-burn for power (with very little available fuel reserve).

You have to store hydrogen in one of two storage systems: Either in a highly pressurized fuel tank with PSI ranging from 3000 to 5000 PSI, or else in liquid form, where the fuel temperature is -265 degrees F or so. Both fuel storage systems present drawbacks: Highly pressurized systems are bulky and hard to recharge: You can't just pump and dump like you can with gasoline. Low-temperature systems also present their own technical challenges, because the fuel must be allowed to evaporate in order to maintain its liquid form. Thus, low-temp delivery systems can boil off their entire liquid contents over the course of just a week. Fuel efficiency is, therefore, a matter of not only how far you drive, but how long you let your car sit in the parking lot between drives.

Hydrogen power may make sense in some transportation applications, but not others: A public transportation vehicle, such as a police car, taxi, bus, or shuttle could certainly take advantage of hydrogen because they require moderate amounts of performance and have long duty cycles where the engines are nearly always running. However, currently I do not think it makes sense to attempt to use Hydrogen as a fuel choice in a car that will see only occasional use.

I'd rather see a production ready Volt.

I think they should make a camaro that runs on the blood of tree huggin' liberal hippies!

*Stands and applauds.*
I can name a few I'd like to squeeze for my next fill up. Kerry, Hillary, Gore, Murtha, for starters. It would serve two purposes. I'd have fuel, and more importantly, it would make the world a better place. :usa:

Hydrogen is a ruse.

Actually I heard Dr Emmett Brown was seen lurking around the Holden engineering complex... something about a flux capacitor.

:)

There may be a future use for hydrogen... but it's a long way off.

FWIW, here some local "greenies" are paying to install a hydrogen refueling station at one of our transit stations. It will use hydrogen to produce electricity for shared-use vehicles, something that is being pushed in our local urban markets. We're putting a lot of requirements on them to make it safe.

http://www.innovativemobility.org/research/lowspeed/lowspeed_description.htm
http://www.path.berkeley.edu/

actually I'm all FOR a Hydrogen car if it can perform like a muscle car. But could we still bleed the liberals?? You know, for fun?

Are we talking hydrogen ICE like BMW is working on, or hydrogen fuel cell like the Equinox hydrogen vehicle?

Are we talking hydrogen ICE like BMW is working on, or hydrogen fuel cell like the Equinox hydrogen vehicle?

I would think the hydrogen fuel cell since that is the technology in which GM is invested.

I think one think aeveryone is doing is comparing apples to oranges... If Hydrogen becomes big, then you have to determine the performance differences between all hydrogen platforms.. You can not compare different types of fuels in order to get any meaningful outcome. The only thing that can come out of those comparisons is how efficient they are compared to the other. however all that efficiency is not even really a point if ALL cars at using that fuel... And at some point all the gas/diesel will be so High priced that a car running on hydrogen or whatever and gets a 20 second or 30 second quarter mile will be fast compared to alot of the rest. With a different fuel you have to redefine you ideals of what fast is, since it is all comparable. as well as performance. just think.. in the early 1900's a car that could go 30mph was a speed demon... and the accel time would make people cry these days...

If alternate fuel sources help the image of the Camaro as being a fuel friendly car and results in better sales, I am for it.

Hydrogen or Natural gas both make good power.. Hydrogen has almost NO emissions. I studied this in Auto Tech school and I honestly don't know why it hasn't been more popular...

As far as the safety, they have a great setup for it. The tank is ultra thick and protected. Might be a little heavy, but hey... safety is safety...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4563676/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_vehicle

Yeah. And I'm sure you'll be the first in line for a 4500 lb, 250 bhp Camaro that has zero possibility of getting faster through aftermarket mods.

If I wanted to drive a bone stock '75 Monte, I'd buy one.

You know, I think that everyone should have their own opinion, but I thought this was a Camaro forum and not a political forum. Think before you speak.

Anyway as far as the original question goes, I think keep the Camaro a gas burner. (I mean the LSx engines get good mpg's for what they are) If they can get the Volt out, looking like it does, and with the tech that they say it has, well way to go GM. Hot new trucks, Hot new Camaro, and a hot new Volt (a hot car in the hybrid/electric department???). Long live GM. Now if you will excuse me I'm going to go hug a tree. Just my two cents.

If you're referring to my post, I didn't think I was political. I thought I was being anti-slow and heavy. My understanding of current hydrogen fueled or fuel-cell technology is that a car powered by these sources would be heavier than a traditional motor, provide less power, and be almost impossible to modify for faster driving.

I'll admit to not being as informed as I should be, but I'm not attacking anybody's politics. In fact, I think a Prius-style hybrid is worth looking at. It would provide better fuel economy than an 8 for the same performance, but we could still mod the gas motor.

No Mjolnir, your post was fine. I was talking about the ones on back that seem to want to "bleed" people. Your post did scare me a bit though. "A 4500 lbs 250bhp Camaro" :confused: Dont say such things. You could give someone heart failure.