Mazda Says Its Next-Generation Gasoline Engine Will Run Cleaner than an Electric Car

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Mazda claims that its new gas engine, the Skyactiv-3, will be as clean as an electric vehicle. The company is trying to increase the engine's thermal efficiency to roughly 56 percent, which would make it the first internal-combustion engine to turn the majority of its fuel’s energy into power.

Mazda's claim, that Skyactiv-3 would be cleaner to run than an all-electric vehicle, is a bold one, and requires some unpacking. Mazda bases the assertion on its estimates of "well-to-wheel" emissions, tallying the pollution generated by both fossil fuel production and utility electricity generation to compare Skyactiv-3 and EV emissions.
 
people can charge their ecars using solar panels on their garage?
 
Youn said:
people can charge their ecars using solar panels on their garage?
Click to expand...

Not a option for everyone, most of the world is still powered by coal. Still it's a damn lofty goal to hit 56% efficiency, it will be a major feat if they achieve it.
 
56% efficiency beats most smaller natural gas fired plants, and comes close to the larger combined cycle coal and natgas plants. And that's before you take into account T&D losses on the grid.

Solar... well, if you discount the real estate and such sure. If you wanted to charge a 100kWh battery every other day (what I am just going to assume is a pretty average use, I didn't look that up), you need (depending on your location) around 15kW DC of solar installed to do that. At 15W/sqft (that is a good average number), that's about 1,000 sqft of solar panels,. or using typical 265W residential panels, about 56 panels give or take. If you have the car port or rooftop to do that, and it's facing in the proper direction, great. But if you don't, 1,000 square feet is sizable chunk of land, and that is ~just~ to keep your car battery charged up - how's a guy in an apartment complex or condo going to swing that? That's before we consider cost (using average residential installation rate - about $60,000), or the environmental aspects of it (those panels only last 20-30 yrs, then what).

I'm not saying solar is bad, I own a solar system myself, but I hate it when people just say "Well solar is perfectly fuel efficient" and discount all other considerations about it.

I'm anticipating the drawback will be it's only available in a 0.8L 3cyl that makes about 56hp. Which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing - you put that in a hybrid system with a decently sized battery and electric motors and you could still hum down the highway at a good clip, and use this little guy to keep your batteries topped off. But this is Mazda, and I doubt they would do anything that makes that much sense.

Or it only hits that efficiency in sub-zero weather, and you have the heater cranked to max.... in which case most current engines probably get close to that efficiency anyway.

*edit* it's been proven here I can't do math, so take all those numbers with a lot of salt
 
Brian_B said:
I'm anticipating the drawback will be it's only available in a 0.8L 3cyl that makes about 56hp. Which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing - you put that in a hybrid system with a decently sized battery and electric motors and you could still hum down the highway at a good clip, and use this little guy to keep your batteries topped off. But this is Mazda, and I doubt they would do anything that makes that much sense.

Or it only hits that efficiency in sub-zero weather, and you have the heater cranked to max.... in which case most current engines probably get close to that efficiency anyway.

*edit* it's been proven here I can't do math, so take all those numbers with a lot of salt
Click to expand...
No. It must be forced induction therefore it will hardly be affected by the atmospheric conditions and easily make more than 56 HP if it's planned for a full size automobile.
 
ok, so what if i pair this Skyactiv-3 engine with a plug in electric motor? Wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?
 
95% of my power comes from hydroelectric (the 5% happens when the main lines are taken out, the backup comes from a coal plant in NV). So anyway there's no way this would apply here. But somewhere that gets its power 100% from coal, especially in places that don't regulate it very well, I could see that. But I'd sure want to see how this performed vs. an electric car. I'm used to a very good 0-60 in my pickup, so I'm hopeful for an electric 4x4 in the future though being on a rural power line presents some problems in limited amperage available (12 hour charges?).
 
this is the current "production" model, due end of this yearor early 2019 (SkyActive X):

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...on-ignition-gas-engine-prototype-drive-review

And the 3 intends to be 27% more efficient than that:

Speaking at an automotive technical conference, Mazda powertrain boss Mitsuo Hitomi confirmed plans for Skyactiv-3. The new mill will increase thermal efficiency, reducing the amount of combustion energy lost to heat. Compared to Skyactiv-X, Mazda wants to increase thermal efficiency by 27 percent to 56 percent. At this level, the engine can claim emission levels on par with an EV, Hitomi said.
Click to expand...
 
Megalith said:
Mazda claims that its new gas engine, the Skyactiv-3, will be as clean as an electric vehicle. The company is trying to increase the engine's thermal efficiency to roughly 56 percent, which would make it the first internal-combustion engine to turn the majority of its fuel’s energy into power.

Mazda's claim, that Skyactiv-3 would be cleaner to run than an all-electric vehicle, is a bold one, and requires some unpacking. Mazda bases the assertion on its estimates of "well-to-wheel" emissions, tallying the pollution generated by both fossil fuel production and utility electricity generation to compare Skyactiv-3 and EV emissions.
Click to expand...
http://www.thedrive.com/tech/14286/...ked-50-percent-thermal-efficiency-report-says

Not the first internal combustion engine to do this. The first in a consumer vehicle however.
 
viscountalpha said:
What's the catch, there's always a catch. Anyone who says otherwise is lying through their teeth.
Click to expand...

Cost, probably. There's not always a "catch" as in a downside to something that increases efficiency, but it often just takes better engineering, more advanced materials, and so on and thus costs more. A simple example is computer power supplies. You can quite easily get supplies that range from about 85% peak efficiency to about 94% peak efficiency from the same vendor, in the same size. There's no Faustian bargain for the more efficient ones, they don't die faster or burn out your computer or anything like that, in fact they tend to last longer and produce cleaner power. The downside is cost, they require more and higher end components to get their efficiency. So for example $59 gets you a 620 watt Bronze (84%) PSU from Seasonic. They sell a 650 watt Titanium (94%) PSU that's the same size and form factor... for $150. You really can get a 10%ish improvement, you just have to spend.

Now we'll see if they can reach this lofty claim in reality in a car, but it is something that is possible, at least in theory. We have heat engines that are that efficient, they are just much larger (and run much hotter, efficiency is heavily relates to the temperature differential between the hot and cold sides).
 
Gigus Fire said:
True, but wouldn't the electric motor's efficiency for low speed acceleration work to it's advantage by giving it better efficiency?
Click to expand...
I expect the answer will be: if they do it, then yes, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. I've never been real sold on hybrids though, but that's probably because I'm prejudiced ;). And as Sycraft points out the cost might be a problem too (and adding in a second motor might price it right out of the market).
 
Megalith said:
Mazda claims that its new gas engine, the Skyactiv-3, will be as clean as an electric vehicle. The company is trying to increase the engine's thermal efficiency to roughly 56 percent, which would make it the first internal-combustion engine to turn the majority of its fuel’s energy into power.

Mazda's claim, that Skyactiv-3 would be cleaner to run than an all-electric vehicle, is a bold one, and requires some unpacking. Mazda bases the assertion on its estimates of "well-to-wheel" emissions, tallying the pollution generated by both fossil fuel production and utility electricity generation to compare Skyactiv-3 and EV emissions.
Click to expand...

Mercedes F1 engine achieve above 50% efficiency, and there are tens of different examples of working reliable examples.
Let's say, it'll be first consumer grade engine with above 50% efficiency ? :)
 
Been reading up on this for a while. Seems like it would be pretty cool if they can pull it off in a mass production vehicle.

Picked up a 2017 Mazda 3 last year and I like it a lot. They took a 2003 Hyundai Accent with blown brake lines and a failed exhaust off my hands after some haggling. ;)

I could see getting another Mazda, esp if they pull off something like this and its reliable.
 
Let me translate the statement:

"HEY look, at us, we still exist! We don't have anything interesting market ready yet, but we can make outlandish claims to try an remain relevant!" - Mazda
 
M76 said:
Let me translate the statement:

"HEY look, at us, we still exist! We don't have anything interesting market ready yet, but we can make outlandish claims to try an remain relevant!" - Mazda
Click to expand...
They're totally owned by ford. There's no real reason for them to stand out or explore new changes.
 
Let me know when second gen drops. I'm all for improvements in technology that make sense, but I'm not one of those folks who have to be the first one on the block with the new hotness.
 
SamuraiInBlack said:
Let me know when second gen drops. I'm all for improvements in technology that make sense, but I'm not one of those folks who have to be the first one on the block with the new hotness.
Click to expand...
I think the internal combustion engine is proven technology by now :-D

BTW I'd not be surprised if their solution would include freevalve technology as developed by koenigsegg, or at least a derivation of that. No push rods, no timing chain, or belt, but electronically or hydraulically actuated intake and exhaust valves. Which gives completely unrestricted control of valve opening and much quicker opening and closing at that. The increase in efficiency from that just about corresponds with what they're claiming.
 
M76 said:
I think the internal combustion engine is proven technology by now :-D

BTW I'd not be surprised if their solution would include freevalve technology as developed by koenigsegg, or at least a derivation of that. No push rods, no timing chain, or belt, but electronically or hydraulically actuated intake and exhaust valves. Which gives completely unrestricted control of valve opening and much quicker opening and closing at that. The increase in efficiency from that just about corresponds with what they're claiming.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that have more failure rate ?
 
MMitch said:
Doesn't that have more failure rate ?
Click to expand...
It hasn't been used in any production car yet afaik. But it has less moving parts, and even the experimental engines were much smaller and lighter than regular ones. So I don't see why it would have more failures. It also needs less maintenance, no more timing gear to replace or adjust.
 
Gigus Fire said:
They're totally owned by ford. There's no real reason for them to stand out or explore new changes.
Click to expand...

Ford owned 50% of Mazda, Mazda bought it all back. Ford have nothing to do with Mazda at all.

I'm sick of Mazda fussing over efficiency, bring back the Mazdaspeed/MPS series of vehicles!
 
This is called marketing. All it takes is an asterisk and you can bend that statement like overcooked spaghetti.
 
Gigus Fire said:
They're totally owned by ford. There's no real reason for them to stand out or explore new changes.
Click to expand...

Ford did buy big into Mazda, starting in 1979. At one point, Ford was up to 33% owner of Mazda, but they sold 20% of that off during 2008 (part of a lot of selloffs by Ford to avoid needing bailout money), and then Ford got out of Mazda entirely in 2015.

Mazda today is all Mazda, baby. Although they did, shortly after parting ways with Ford, sign a cross-licensing deal with Toyota to provide them with SkyActiv technology in exchange for Toytoa hydrogen fuel cell development.
 
ole-m said:
Mercedes F1 engine achieve above 50% efficiency, and there are tens of different examples of working reliable examples.
Let's say, it'll be first consumer grade engine with above 50% efficiency ? :)
Click to expand...
isn't that because they use the turbo to charge the hybrid battery instead of blowing off the boost?

and it revs at like 15k rpm and is a 1.6 litre v6?
 
This isn't really difficult to imagine when you consider most people don't understand just how inefficient most clean energy still is, especially Personal Solar. People have this notion of "I'll buy an EV and a few solar panels to charge it and never pay for gas!" and that just isn't realistic by any stretch of the imagination. Talk to anyone who homesteads and is actually attempting to be off grid...Solar is massively inefficient by the time you get usable power.
 
ICE still has tons of untapped potential. You've got higher compression ratios and boost levels that we could push. You've also got the elimination of the camshaft which is going to happen soon which will also bring a nice efficiency/performance boost.

Unless you're charging your car from your own personal solar panels / hydro-electric more modern and sophisticated ICE designs will prove better for the environment.
 
Gigus Fire said:
They're totally owned by ford. There's no real reason for them to stand out or explore new changes.
Click to expand...
Damn man, 30 seconds on Wikipedia... that's all it would have taken...

Where did this silly myth come from that Ford owns Mazda? Because of cross investment and platform dev?
 
Dekoth-E- said:
This isn't really difficult to imagine when you consider most people don't understand just how inefficient most clean energy still is, especially Personal Solar. People have this notion of "I'll buy an EV and a few solar panels to charge it and never pay for gas!" and that just isn't realistic by any stretch of the imagination. Talk to anyone who homesteads and is actually attempting to be off grid...Solar is massively inefficient by the time you get usable power.
Click to expand...

The price of solar panels is dropping exponentially as is the price of battery backup. Something you heard 5 years ago is ancient knowledge with exponential technologies. It's become much easier to be off the grid if desired.



https://www.tesla.com/powerwall
 
travisty said:
The price of solar panels is dropping exponentially as is the price of battery backup. Something you heard 5 years ago is ancient knowledge with exponential technologies. It's become much easier to be off the grid if desired.



https://www.tesla.com/powerwall
Click to expand...


Cost isn't what I was discussing. Cost is irrelevant when you are on average getting 5%-8% efficiency out of the panels. Some of the best panels on the market max out around 25% and that is in PERFECT conditions..Those conditions almost never happen so you end up with days where you get almost no power at all out of them. So in this example (Made up numbers to make a point) If my car requires 1000 watts to fully charge and I have a 4000 watt solar setup that is only getting 8% efficiency that day..that is only 320 watts of charge I'm getting out of them. That is going to be a bit of a problem if I need to go somewhere far. That is the reality of home quality alternative energy at this stage. You have to massively over build things which may or may not be an option due to the really horrible efficiency. This is why nearly any homesteader runs ALOT of generators.
 
viscountalpha said:
What's the catch, there's always a catch. Anyone who says otherwise is lying through their teeth.
Click to expand...

I would imagine it has regenerative braking in those equations. And that is only fair since electric vehicle efficiency relies on the same tech.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Cost isn't what I was discussing. Cost is irrelevant when you are on average getting 5%-8% efficiency out of the panels. Some of the best panels on the market max out around 25% and that is in PERFECT conditions..Those conditions almost never happen so you end up with days where you get almost no power at all out of them. So in this example (Made up numbers to make a point) If my car requires 1000 watts to fully charge and I have a 4000 watt solar setup that is only getting 8% efficiency that day..that is only 320 watts of charge I'm getting out of them. That is going to be a bit of a problem if I need to go somewhere far. That is the reality of home quality alternative energy at this stage. You have to massively over build things which may or may not be an option due to the really horrible efficiency. This is why nearly any homesteader runs ALOT of generators.
Click to expand...

I'll agree mostly with this sentiment. Most roof panels are targeted around 15% efficiency max. The better ones have a lower roi ratio.

It varies depending on state and local but the average payback is about 7 to 10 years if you are just powering your house. With a car that amount can double or triple+ if you paid cash and not a loan. God help you if you live in Seattle in the fall/winter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top