http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage2251.html
I'd buy it if it isn't gonna be way too expensive, looks kinda fun they say it will be able to reach 100mph when the final model comes out. I'd rather drive that than one of those DR suzuki dualsports. It's as loud as your computer at full throttle so they are trying to put a fake engine sound on it to make it loud enough that people can hear it comming. :dunno:
Dont u mean 100kmph?
http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage2379.html
The 50mph top speed of the prototype models was chosen to demonstrate a scooter-style bike, but the technology can produce a 100mph version.
I doubt we'll see a fast fuel cell bike until after we see fuel cell bikes catch on. Wind resistance increases with the cube of the velocity. Since 100 kph is a common max comuter speed, it's a natrual design limit.
I'm glad the technology is maturing. I predict it'll take $6/USGallon gas before sales become more than a California status symbol.
$6 a gallon.....Oh! I wish. I'm paying about a dollar fity per litre now so there might already be a market here.
Check this earlier post of mine for more info and pics of the ENV bikes. :thumb:
http://www.gstwins.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20110
I really doubt that people that are interested in this size of motorcycles have any concerns with the fuel economy that their bike achieve now....i mean 60 mpg, how much better do you want it to get.....much less if this bike is going to be more expensive then the internal combustion counter part
I think's it kind of obvious that it won't be a huge hit in say California, but think about overseas in China where bicycles are they're main source of transportation, and having off-road capabilities as well as on road makes it more useable.
Okay, looking at its acceleration andtop speed, it seems to be about as powerful as a 50cc Vespa, and it probably costs ~$10,000. No thanks.
Most of motorcycling technology is still in the 1980s, and people seem to like it that way. Most people on this board have done something to their bike to make it less environmentally friendly. It's more fun that way, and still better than a car, and that's enough for us.
Plus, I saw a good show on fuel cells on the Discovery Channel a few weeks ago, and the upshot seemed to be that fuel cell vehicles just ain't gonna happen. Not in the next 50-100 years anyway. The need for a good power-to-weight ratio, the need for fast acceleration, the need for a long range between refueling... I can't remember or explain the physics of it, but fuel cells just don't produce power that way. Different power sources have different uses; that's why you don't see cities powered by massive four-stroke combustion engines, or fission-powered motorcycles.
Fuel cells are apparently best for powering things the size of buildings, where they don't have to move around or accelerate anything, they can just sit in the basement and hum. They'll be used as backup generators, or as an efficient alternative to extending expensive power grids to rural areas without many customers.
But talking about fuel cell cars is great for marketing, because you can spend your whole Con Ed bill on two tanks of gas in your car. It gets people talking, and gets people investing.
To me, I see it more as a proof of concept. Alternative thinking with alternative fuels. Yeah, it may be pricey now, but let's see what's happening a decade from now.
We riders are so far off the end of the relative "fuel efficiency" scale, that what we ride isn't going to make a difference. Even with cars, the impact of changes like hybrid engines is modest. Compared to the fuel used by gas-guzzling vehicles, motorcycles and even small cars are just a blip in the graph.
That said, cars like the Prius have been valuable as a demonstration. Their success is setting-up a wave of changes in SUV efficiency, which could finally make a noticable difference in national fuel consumption. A fuel cell motorcycle could be a similar catalyst, even if it is small, slow and expensive.
As for Hybrids, all well and good, but they never factor in the cost of replacing the batteries on Hybrid vehicles (typically after 7 years, at a huge cost, plus disposal of the used cells) so the cost per mile and the mpg are artificial.
The very small cars I grew up with typically got over 40 mpg carrying 4, and my 49cc 1952 BSA Wingwheel got around 100mpg with only the spark changed in 5 years.
Back to the future, sez me. Mr Bono understands this.
This step up in price should be a wake-up call, especially to North American Each increase is a greater reason to be more responsible and efficient with energy.
This is the first year where the change in cost has been obvious. I predict it will take several years before the general public will discard their SUV's and move to smaller and more efficient cars.
Agree with Rema and Traveler that bikes are not as big a problem as cars. Cars are the better focus right now. I hope Detroit can match buyer preference fast enough. At 50 mpg on my GS500 (short trip city riding), I smile every gas station I pass.
Hey if they come out with something that goes as good as my car I have now and doesnt look all stupid Im all for it, I really wish someone would come out with something so we could tell the gas companies and all of the f***heads that are involved in the process of setting the price of gas where to go. Ive heard alot of stories about new things coming out to help with the mileage your car gets but in the end the gas companies buy up those inventions so they get all the money in the end.
Gas companies have their hand in everything, they're a pretty vital part of the first world economy so while I'm not happy about paying so much for gas there are reasons whys its so high, and reasons that paying so much isn't all that bad in the long term. I wish the gas companies would just hurry up and buy out all the hybrid car projects and get working on them, might not save us any money for the next two decades lol but it'll certainly reduce the smog warnings heh.