AD #3064 – Repair Costs Were Down Last Year; Toyota Developing Hydrogen-Powered ICE; Volkswagen Shows New Polo

April 22nd, 2021 at 11:47am

ZF 468 x 60 driving intelligence March 29 2021

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #3064 – Repair Costs Were Down Last Year; Toyota Developing Hydrogen-Powered ICE; Volkswagen Shows New Polo” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 10:02

0:07 Biden Announces Global Climate Summit
0:37 EV Automaker’s Stocks Jump
1:10 Repair Costs Down Last Year
2:50 Toyota Teams with Chevron on Hydrogen Economy
3:15 Toyota Takes Hydrogen-Powered ICE Racing
4:08 New EV Racing Series Under Development
6:00 Ferrari Shows Special Edition 812 Superfast
7:31 Volkswagen Reveals New Polo
8:04 Ford Makes Driving at Night Easier

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: BorgWarner, Bridgestone, Intrepid Control Systems and ZF.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

40 Comments to “AD #3064 – Repair Costs Were Down Last Year; Toyota Developing Hydrogen-Powered ICE; Volkswagen Shows New Polo”

  1. wmb Says:

    Hydrogen may be a good solution for heavy equipment, in the march total EV’s. Again this change should happen naturally and not be forced by fixing a date to ban ICE’s.

    While I’m not a racing fan, electric or other wise, I wonder if the the potential for fire in a crash is more or less likely with EV’s verses ICE race cars, or vise versa?

  2. ChuckGrenci Says:

    And continuing with wmb #1; that superfast charging in the pits, could this be a fire (or otherwise) hazard. I suppose preventions will be adhered to but just trying to add another possible problem. And I’d surely miss that engine roar (sound) of the traditional ICE cars.

  3. Kit Gerhart Says:

    I’d think there could be a spectacular mechanical explosion from the 10,000 psi tanks in a hydrogen race car crash, along with a short duration big fire.

  4. George Ricci Says:

    EV racing’s big problem is the sound. Yes having multiple kinds of cars will help some, but without the right sounds its still not going to make it. I think for auto racing to survive they will need to move to carbon neutral fuels.

  5. Buzzerd Says:

    Like everything there is a positive and a negative. Lack of engine sound is a negative in creating that excitement while viewing but is a positive in operating racetracks. Many have closed, had racing limited or haven’t been opened because of noise concerns.

  6. Kevin A Says:

    One of the problems with hydrogen fires is also that they are near invisible.

  7. Jim Haines Says:

    Biden is out to destroy the American economy

  8. Rey Says:

    Toyota must know something BMW did not know about hydrogen powered ICE cars, , still believing in the “fuel of the future” , Toyota forever flogging tha Hydrogen future, must be nice to have unlimited cash for hydrogen.LOL

  9. Kit Gerhart Says:

    The minimum weight of the electric race cars is unlikely to be much of a factor, if the teams go for the maximum allowable battery capacity, which will weigh about 1200 pounds. I suspect different teams will take different approaches with battery capacity vs. weight saving, and two vs. four wheel drive. The biggest advantage of four wheel drive might be ability to do regen. The rules will allow 700kW peak regen, which you are not likely to have traction to harvest through rear tires alone.

  10. Rey Says:

    I wonder if a Hydrogen bomb going off from an ICE car crashing will gather as much attention as a Tesla car crash.
    Oh that Texas car crash news all over the media was mostly refuted as false news by the attending Fire Chief,of course its about Tesla , an ICE car crash would never make the evening news, they are so routine.

  11. Lex Says:

    I hope the Biden Administration is going to give out hefty government tax credits and vouchers to fund his proposed elimination of ICE vehicles.

    These tax credits / vouchers need to be able available to all tax payers at the time of purchase and or lease so that buyers and dealers can take fully advantage of the program.

  12. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Regarding sound of race cars, I remember seeing/hearing the STP turbine powered car at Indy in the 1967 qualifications. The turbine engine produced some whistling sound, but overall, was very quiet compared to the other engines of the time. At the time, a lot of people seemed to like the “novelty” of the relatively quiet race car, with the sound of wind flowing over the car probably the bulk of what you heard from the stands.

  13. WineGeek Says:

    I still think the future is Hydrogen. It has some real benefits, practically no emissions after the vehicle is produced, quick refueling rivalling gasoline in refueling times, a downside that engineering can fix is the vaunted “Hydrogen bomb” mentioned in #10. I’m sure that American engineering ingenuity can make this less likely than a gasoline bomb going off in a rear end collision in a gasoline powered car of today.

  14. George Ricci Says:

    12. Having a couple of cars in the field making very little sound is very different than all the cars making sucking sounds.

  15. Lex Says:

    I hope Washington’s new definition of “Infrastructure” includes “Mass Transit” and “High Speed Rail”!

    I would like to see Washington develop and implement a plan for High Speed Rail between all major cities in the continental US, and not just along the East Coast.

    High Speed Rail from Washington to NYC to Boston all ready has roots with Amtrak.

    Linking Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo, Rochester and Binghamton NY within NYS would become a model for other states to develop similar “infrastructure”. This would reduce carbon emissions generated by New Yorkers.

  16. Lex Says:

    The whining sound generated by the Knight Industries Two Thousand sounds like a good start to me for EV’s.

    You would want a pleasant humming sound which alerts pedestrians that a vehicle is approaching.

    This is especially necessary for the blind and visually impaired.

  17. George Ricci Says:

    Hydrogen maybe the future, but for that to happen someone with have to come up with a more efficient way of make it. Today 95% of all hydrogen is made by burning fossil fuels. US government is funding studies in number of different approaches and lot of people are working on it, but many years have gone by and no solution has been found. So don’t hold you breath.

    In the mean time, the amount of renewable energy needed to make enough hydrogen to fill a hydrogen vehicle for 320 miles could be used to recharge an EV multiple times and go over 1000 miles. Which one makes more sense?

  18. Kit Gerhart Says:

    14 My experience was with the car running alone on the track for qualifying, and running with only a few other cars during practice. I didn’t go to the race. Yeah, the “sound of the race” wouldn’t be affected much by one quiet car running with 32 ICE cars.

  19. Kit Gerhart Says:

    15 I’d like to see high speed rail between central Florida and central Indiana. Actually, any rail would be nice. Now, taking a train from the Orlando area to Indianapolis takes about 27 hours, and goes through D.C.

  20. Kit Gerhart Says:

    17 Yep, hydrogen makes no sense at all for powering vehicles, unless the hydrogen comes from electrolyzing water using renewable power.

    Is that 320 miles for a hydrogen powered ICE vehicle, rather than fuel cell? If so, the electricity used to produce hydrogen for a fuel cell might be about the same, per mile, as for a BEV.

  21. Kit Gerhart Says:

    15,19 It’s worse than I said. From what I’m finding, it takes 36 hours for a train from Orlando to Indianapolis.

  22. Sean McElroy Says:

    @Kit in reference to your comment in #9 and charging, the press release also included this “The charging network will be developed to meet the fast charging requirements and depending on the venue, will include elements of permanent and temporary infrastructure.” That last bit had me interested. It’s likely just referring to the charging stations, but I think it’d be cool if the FIA were considering inductive charging under the surface of the track. I don’t know if a car could go a whole race without recharging but it would extend range.

  23. cwolf Says:

    I think and hope high speed train is in consideration. I took the train from Toledo to both Chicago and D.C. It was nice not having to drive but the train took longer to get there than by car. The whole train service doesn’t seem very efficient as it is today.

  24. XA351GT Says:

    War against climate change ? That’ll go about as well as the war on drugs ,because the biggest offenders of both won’t agree (at least not behind the scenes) China is the biggest polluter going and also the source of much of the illegal drug trade that poisons this country. They’ll play along all the while still doing what they do now. Until every country is held to the exact same standards this will be a farce. just something else for politicians to throw money at at collect it back through the back channels.

  25. XA351GT Says:

    a question for those of you wanting high speed rail service. What tracks are they going to use? If this requires new tracks that would be just another governmental boondoggle that would wind up stealing people’s land and wind up being as well run as AMTRASH.

  26. Kit Gerhart Says:

    22 It will be interesting to see how things actually turn out with the “new” electric racing. As far as inductive charging, it is horribly inefficient, at least with phones, but there is nothing very “efficient” about motor racing.

    Something that will be interesting is how they manage pit stops. In F1, a 2 second difference in pit stop time can make a big difference. In this electric racing, with 4 minute pit stops, there will probably be 30 second differences in stop time. This will be a lot different type of racing.

  27. Kit Gerhart Says:

    24 China is the biggest greenhouse gas emitter in raw numbers, but the US emissions are much higher per capita. Yeah, just that, will make serious international agreements very difficult, when it will be difficult to even define, in your words, “exact same standards.”

  28. Kit Gerhart Says:

    25 I rode Amtrak from DC to Orlando a few years ago, and other than being no faster than driving, it was fine. A bigger problem with Amtrak, and US passenger rail in general, it that it barely exists. Most “third world” countries have much better rail networks.

  29. Albemarle Says:

    There’s a lot to be said for making hydrogen from natural gas. There are a number of companies that can produce it in volume while sequestering the carbon. While not as ‘pure’ as hydrogen produced from renewable electricity, it would go a long way to reduce greenhouse gases. As well and equally important, it would allow the continued existence of a large industry employing many thousands. We don’t have to stop doing everything in order to change.
    With fuel cell efficiency at 80% and ICE efficiency approaching 45%, the much lower cost and existing ICE infrastructure could be a cost effective solution; at least for a decade or so.

  30. Lambo2015 Says:

    The problem with train service is they typically have too many stops along the way. So even if its not a high speed train but one that could achieve 70 mph the constant stops make any trip longer than just driving.
    If someone would develop a train that could have detaching and attaching cars on the fly like an on-off ramps of the hwy so the main train didn’t need to slow down and cars could be removed or added along the way then they would have the advantage. Thought about this before and if passengers could move about the train and you know your stop is coming up you make your way to the rear car doors close and it detaches and slows down and a switch brings it into the station while a new car is brought up to speed and joins the main train from behind. Constantly dropping and adding the rear car for each stop without having to actually stop or slow down.
    Then if they did the same thing at 200 MPH you could get out to LA from NY in like 14 hours. Or Detroit to Miami in like 7 hours. Now that would be nice and better than flying or driving.

  31. Kit Gerhart Says:

    30 Yep, the train I was on, “Silver Meteor” made a lot of stops at stations that were a single trailer, or maybe double wides. I don’t remember the actual trip time, but it was overnight, so I slept part of the time. I suspect going between Orlando and Boston, the train might be quicker than driving, because traffic tends to be a real mess in the northeast. Also, the train stations in the cities are well located if your destination is a northeastern city.

  32. Kit Gerhart Says:

    30,31 I looked it up, 17 stops between DC Union Station and Orlando. No wonder it seemed like a lot of stops.

  33. XA351GT Says:

    28 that is because people would rather have their privacy and their own time table. This is the same reason the only people that use public transit are those that have no other viable option. Once a year I ride SEPTA into Philly for the auto show. Cost wise it’s no different than if I drove it’s just parking would be the issue . If parking wasn’t a problem along with the theft and vandalism that happens I’d rather drive. I built the A/c units in the then brand new SEPTA V transit cars and to see how bad they are damaged after a short period of time is frustrating also having to smell urine from people using the floor as a bathroom was not appealing at all.

  34. Kit Gerhart Says:

    33 Trains are great for city-to-city travel, when done right, for the reason you use the train to the Philly auto show. If we had an actual, good passenger rail system, the issues you encounter wouldn’t happen.

  35. cwolf Says:

    One can worry about making emission standards fair, but that cannot happen until someone leads the way. This president seems to have that ambition, but the opposition cannot see past its own regardless if it is the wishes of the majority of citizens or for the common good for all. That’s really pittiful!

  36. Sean Wagner Says:

    I once was mere meters away from F1 cars zooming around Monaco on their training rounds – while extremely exciting, the pandemonium unleashed by WWII aircraft engines remains my yardstick for sheer awesomeness.

    My dad remembered how he was nearly blown clear of a fence when a Douglas Invader revved up.

    Coming back to Monaco, during the evening the road course was reopened and hordes of little cars went howling around, which was not a little comical and also somewhat scary to witness, not least in the long tunnel lounging the ocean.

    HIGH SPEED Trains – I think you want some density to create practicable corridors, which works excellently in Europe. I’ve zipped to Paris and Berlin in corporeal and cyber comfort. Alight in the city center, walk or ride to the hotel in no time. Especially when

    PUBLIC Transit works so well. To look at the New York City system pre-war, with trams, subways, and inter-modal hubs in the metropolitan vicinity, it resembled what there is now in Europe.

  37. Kit Gerhart Says:

    36 I agree that WWII airplanes engines, both the V-12s, and maybe more so, big radials, are the most awesome sounding piston engines ever.

    The last time I heard F1 engines “in person” was at Indianapolis in 2007. They were naturally aspirated, 2.4 litre V-8s. They are impressive, but the high pitch sound of a V-8 running 20,000 rpm is not that appealing to me.

  38. Lambo2015 Says:

    Probably the largest obstacle in the US for a fast pedestrian train is a viable rail system. For one it doesn’t exist as the curves shape of the current rail system wouldn’t work for high speed. Not to mention its still being used for cargo and not like you can just pass another train. Trying to buy the property and build another track that’s wider and could handle 200mph would be a phenomenal cost.
    I think their best option at this point would be to develop a lighter train that could be elevated and placed in the median of most major highways. Even that is very unlikely to happen so guess we wait for EV drones..

  39. Lambo2015 Says:

    Kit don’t suppose you saw the launch of the SpaceX rocket that took off at 5:50am. I guess that’s the first tie they reused both a rocket and booster.

  40. Kit Gerhart Says:

    39 I didn’t see it, but I heard it. The first stage booster and the “crew dragon” capsule were reused.