Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
NINETY EIGHT REGENCY

Tom Stephens Says GM's cars are too heavy: video

7 posts in this topic

Tom Stephens says GM's cars are too heavy. He shares what GM plans to do about this.

No he doesn't say anything. He says the cars are too heavy and GM is going to make them lighter. That tells us nothing about what he plans to do.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cheap steel is why they are heavy.

but you don't want to make them too light. i hate some of the furrin jobbies with their flexidoors and flexifenders. dents too easy.

the car should be heavy where it counts (structure). they don't need to make every part of the car like a brick though.

last thing i want GM to do is to make cars that can't survive winters or potholes or crashes very well , or simply wear over time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many ways to save mass, especially if you have that as your focus from the begininning instead of as an afterthought. And it doesn't necessarilly require exotic methods and materials. Look at Mazda's "Gram Strategy" for example, on the Miata.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cheap steel is why they are heavy.

but you don't want to make them too light. i hate some of the furrin jobbies with their flexidoors and flexifenders. dents too easy.

the car should be heavy where it counts (structure). they don't need to make every part of the car like a brick though.

last thing i want GM to do is to make cars that can't survive winters or potholes or crashes very well , or simply wear over time.

I agree that cheap steel is the reason, but weight has nothing to do with how the car wears over time, survives winters or handles potholes.

Even the structure doesn't have to be heavy, Jaguars are light and aluminum is 30% stiffer than steel. It probably comes down to other manufactures spending $2000 per car on lighter weight materials and GM spends $2000 per car on legacy costs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even the structure doesn't have to be heavy, Jaguars are light and aluminum is 30% stiffer than steel. It probably comes down to other manufactures spending $2000 per car on lighter weight materials and GM spends $2000 per car on legacy costs.

Tell me what you are smoking. Aluminum is NOT stiffer than steel. Young's modulus - which is standard of stiffness - for structural stainless steel normally used in cars is about 200 GPa (14,500 Tons/sq.inch). High strength Aluminum's Young Modulus is 70 GPa (5,000 Tons/sq. inch). So Aluminum stiffness is almost 30% of steel's stiffness. However, Aluminum weighs about a third of steel, so for comparably stiff vehicles there is a weight saving of about 10% if Aluminum is used instead of steel.

If Aluminum is added with Tungsten, Titanium or Zirconium the values of Young's Modulus may jump to 160-190 (GPa) but then you are looking at a cost which is almost 2.5 times more than regular aluminum. Now you know why your so called exotic Jag is million rupees more than a puny Chevrolet.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0