Well, it’s official. Virgin Galactic has opened the worlds first spaceport in New Mexico. The $200m state funded project was agreed upon back in 2005 and covers a 27 sq. mile parcel of land known as “The Land of Enchantment”. This is pretty big news when you get right down to it, because billionaire businessman Richard Branson is now the first man to actually privatize space travel. Tickets are selling for a mere $200,000 a seat, and while that won’t get you to the moon, that will get you about 60 miles straight up where you’ll be able to float around weightless for a few minutes. Now while $200,000 may seem like a bunch of moola’ for most people, rest assured that there are plenty of people that will see this as a bargain and take full advantage of being one of the first private citizens in space.

The above video is nothing more than a dedication ceremony and comes off a little fruity in my opinion, but regardless, the idea of being able to buy a ticket and shoot for the stars is simply amazing.

By 2036, I think that most transportation will involve horses and ox carts, but Mercedes-Benz has a more pleasant and upbeat view of the future. Debuting at this week’s Frankfurt Auto Show is Mercedes’ F 125 Concept, which shows the possible future of motorized transportation, as interpreted by Mercedes Benz.

Power comes from four electric motors, fed by both lithium sulphur batteries and by a hydrogen-powered fuel cell. The onboard storage tanks hold enough hydrogen to give the car a (theoretical) range of around 620 miles, while emitting zero pollution in the process.

To keep weight down, the body is made from fiber-reinforced plastics, while the rest of the chassis is made from carbon fiber, aluminum and high-strength steel. As you’d expect of a car from the future, it can either be driven by a human operator or piloted (without error, of course) by onboard computers in a semi-autonomous mode. Forget buttons, switches and knobs, since the future is controlled by hand gestures.

In keeping with tradition, Mercedes has graced the F 125 with gullwing doors, a nod to both the SLS AMG and to the storied 300 SL Gullwing. The doors on the F 125 aren’t exactly stylish, though, since they may be the largest doors I’ve ever seen on a concept or production vehicle. I wouldn’t be overly concerned just yet, since Mercedes Benz still has 25 years to work out the styling bugs. And build the hydrogen infrastructure.

Source: Mercedes-Benz

Let’s face it: the inside of an engine is a pretty terrifying place, filled with explosions, violent movement and temperatures hot enough to melt lead. We’ve all seen animated clips of how engines work from the inside, but this one, created by Mobil 1, gives a slightly different perspective. If you’ve ever wondered what a molecule of motor oil sees after it gets sucked from the oil pan and travels through the top end, before returning to the oil pan, this animated short will give you a good idea.

Whether you opt to use a synthetic or petroleum oil, regular oil and filter changes are the key to long engine life. Think of it as inexpensive insurance, with a premium due every 5,000 miles or so.

When we think of printing we naturally think of the printers that we have at home or at work. They print in standard 2D and are great little machines, however their basic function hasn’t changed since the 1960′s. That’s where a company called the Z Company comes in. You see they’ve developed a printer that can actually print in 3 dimensions, in fact this sucker is so cool that it truly has the ability to revolutionize how certain items can be produced. The process starts by scanning in a 3D image of the item that you want replicated. Once into the system, the item is then slowly molded out of an epoxy powder into just about anything you can imagine. While not yet available on a mass scale, the 3D printer gives us all a little glimpse of what we could possibly see in the future.

As both a car guy and a firearms instructor, I cringe every time I see a car explode when it hits the base of a cliff, or when someone fires a round from a handgun or rifle into the gas tank. If cars were really as prone to explosions as Hollywood would like us to believe, we’d be driving past crispy hunks of metal on a daily basis. In the interest of science, Speed TV’s series “Car Science” pitted an expert shot (who, incidentally, looks pretty hot in tight leather pants) against a Fox-body Mustang. Will a .357 Magnum be enough to send the ‘Stang to the great wrecking yard in the sky? How about an M4 assault rifle or a .308 sniper rifle? I’m not going to give it away, but you may learn something by watching the video below.

Source: Speed Engine Block on Streetfire.net

According to Sebastian Thrun, the engineer behind Google’s driverless car project, up to one million lives could be saved in the United States each year if we just left the driving to sensor equipped, computer controlled pods. Humans, it seems, aren’t very good at mastering the complex processes (like paying attention to traffic ahead, or yielding the left lane) required to operate a motor vehicle in today’s fast-paced society. Keeping in constant contact with our peers via Twitter and instant messaging has become more important than mastering the skills required to drive a car proficiently, so one or the other has to go. Thrun insists that driverless cars would not only save lives, but would ensure quicker and more efficient transportation, reduce fuel consumption (and hence, pollution) and eliminate traffic jams. His ideas were presented at the recent TED Talks conference, and were backed up by data accumulated over 140,00 miles of autonomous, robot driving.

Come to think of it, how many lives could be saved each year if we banned saturated fat, red meat and alcohol? While we’re at it, cigarettes have to go and so does anything with a high sodium content. Since skin cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer deaths, we should probably ban all outside activities as well, unless the participants wear SPF 80 sunscreen, reapplied at federally-mandated 15 minute intervals. Do you like the brave new world we’re headed for, where all your decisions are made for you as society strives to protect citizens from all dangers, both real and perceived? Do you really want to live in a world without tire-shredding burnouts, speed-limit-be-damned runs up your favorite canyon or the ability to drive a car without robot guidance? Couldn’t a similar number of lives be saved if we actually embraced driver training in this country instead of largely ignoring it? How can we hand down a passion for driving and motorsports to the next generation if the closest they get to driving a real car is on a video game console? I’m not sure there’s a place for me in Thrun’s vision of a perfect society, and that’s more than a little frightening.

Source: Autoguide

If you’ve ever turned wrenches on a car or a bike, chances are good that you’ve upgraded an exhaust system at one time or another. The cheap and easy way to do this is to replace the muffler, or (better yet) the exhaust system from the catalytic converter on back. The real horsepower gains come from replacing stock exhaust manifolds with headers, then replacing the entire exhaust system with a less restrictive one. Dyno data shows this to be an effective way to add horsepower to almost any vehicle, but do you know why this works? The video below shows how it works and even (briefly) explains why; think of it as science class for those of us with dirt under our fingernails.

Announcing that you’ve just invented synthetic fuel that produces zero carbon emissions and costs just $1.50 a gallon is a great way to get oil company commandos to burn down your house. But that’s just what a company in the U.K. has done. Cella Energy, an advanced materials lab, says it can turn hydrogen into a fuel that’ll free the world from grasp of fossil fuels.Not surprisingly, the announcement has been viewed with some skepticism. In all honesty, it’s like saying you’ve developed a cure for cancer that uses distilled teddy bear kisses.

So what, exactly, has Cella developed? Tiny, tiny little bubbles that can trap hydrogen. As we all know, hydrogen goes boom really well when you put a match to it. But it’s nearly impossible to store. It’s the lightest and smallest element around and likes to squeeze through the tiniest cracks or even push through porous materials. The best hydrogen tanks leak, there’s simply no way around it. Until now. Cella uses a nanostructuring technique called coaxial electrospraying to trap hydrogen in tiny bubbles. These bubbles are so small that when you put a ton of them in a vial, teacup, or gas tank, they act like a liquid. That liquid burns just like gasoline in an internal combustion engine. And you can store it at room temperature in uncompressed tanks.

It sounds too good to be true. One question pops into my mind: What are the bubbles made of? What happens when you burn them? Well, the bubbles are themselves made up of hydrogen compounds, so they combust with the gaseous hydrogen within them. And when you burn hydrogen, the resulting exhaust consists of nothing more than water vapor.

Cella says the most likely use for its fuel is as an additive to existing gasoline or diesel fuels. Cella hydrogen additive would reduce carbon emissions drastically. What about pure Cella hydrogen fuels? Not likely. Extracting pure hydrogen from water or other hydrocarbons like natural gas is energy intensive and expensive. Of course, those processes may become more efficient and cost effective in the future. And remember, the resulting pure hydrogen Cella fuel just needs to be cheaper or the same price as gasoline, which isn’t getting any cheaper.

Source: Cella Energy

It’s just as we’ve always suspected: Uninspiring automotive appliances and arrow-straight, hyper-safe roads drive commuters to sheer boredom, turning driving into a chore and making drivers inattentive and dangerous on the road. The cure? Make cars and roads dangerous again.

Source: Autoblog, Toronto Sun

Researchers at Newcastle University asked 1,563 drivers a series of questions about their habits behind the wheel. They were asked to rate statements such as, “I find slow traffic really boring,” “I often drive fast,” and “(I) often can’t remember the road section I have just been driving along.”

The results are as expected. Thirty-one percent were rated as “inattentive and dangerous.” They get bored driving and are more likely to be offended by other drivers. They also drive faster than most, resulting in more accidents. Another 35 percent were rated as “enthusiastic and attentive.” These enthusiasts drove faster than the average speed, but were less likely to get into accidents. Yet another 21 percent simply dislike driving and drive more slowly than average. Thirteen percent were described as “safe and slow.” They paid more attention behind the wheel and drove more slowly than average. What does it mean?

From the Tornoto Sun article:

“As cars come fitted with more gadgets to make driving easier and planners remove more of the distractions, it comes as no surprise to me that people are finding the pleasure of driving has become rather a chore. With that comes an increase in the risks drivers take as they mentally switch-off instead of focusing on the road,” professor of transport Edmund King said in a release about the study.

Lead researcher Dr. Joan Harvey said while it would be nice to train people to be better drivers, those who would benefit the most from it are the least likely to take part.

“We may need to start considering some radical schemes such as putting bends back into roads or introducing the concept of shared space as it would force motorists to think about their driving and pedestrians to think about cars,” Harvey said.

Make roads more curvy. Make cars roar and quake and shimmy like the world’s falling apart. Make them overwhelmingly engaging. It’s just what the driving public needs.

Want to buy a muscle car? Don't wait too much longer. Photo: Ford Motor Company

One of the more interesting topics in pit lane conversation during last weekend’s CTS-V driving event was the growth of hybrid offerings from virtually all car manufacturers. As enthusiasts, most of us had a common opinion: hybrids were a knee-jerk reaction from manufacturers, scrambling to comply with upcoming Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements. The new standards set by the current administration call for a CAFE of 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016; to put things in perspective, current CAFE requirements call for 30.2 mpg for passenger cars and 24.1 mpg for light trucks. Fines for manufacturers who don’t meet these standards (Porsche or Ferrari, for example) are reasonable today, but will rise to as much as $10,000 per vehicle sold by 2016. In other words, hybrids are seen as the best way to meet these Draconian standards in just four years. One problem: to an enthusiast, current production hybrids aren’t nearly as satisfying or entertaining to drive as their fossil-fuel-only siblings.

Enter the Consumer Federation of America (CFA), a group that Autoevolution tells us is petitioning the Obama administration for even stricter fuel economy standards. How strict? The CFA wants to mandate a CAFE of 60 mpg by 2025. Ironically, they’re pushing this standard because it will “save consumers money”, despite the fact that achieving these numbers would require the use of technologies and materials that are cost prohibitive today. Would anyone buy a Toyota Prius that got 75 mph if it cost $150,000? Probably not.

The Obama administration will publish their notice of intent for 2017 – 2025 fuel economy standards on September 30. If you like to drive, I suspect you’ll be in for some seriously bad news; in ten years, a current Toyota Camry may seem like a sports car compared to the new vehicle choices we’ll have. I’ve seen the future, and I sure as hell don’t like it.