Future crash standards are going to add lots of extra weight to upcoming cars.

Let's brainstorm some smart ideas or affordable new tech materials and processes that will bring Camaro down to ponycar fighting weight.

 

I can’t think of anything right now that won’t raise cost or reduce driver comforts....hmmmmmm

And we really need to look at this problem form all three perspectives……

It has to lose weight….no “buts” about it…

We can’t make it cost much more at all….

And we still have to have a car that a girl would want to daily drive….

 

Its becoming painfuly obvious that cars ARE going to gain weight. Its limiting the weight they gain is what needs to be the goal.
Aluminum is already being used heavily on other cars in GM's deck.
Design of the cars is going to have to change, there for making the design of the car safter. Creating stronger steel and redeveloping cabin design. All this must be done and keep. Start from the basics of a stronger car, and then add the air bags and such.
Like I said before, Ill just buy a M1A1 and ride in that.

 

There's three ways to to it without reducing content.

1) Obsess over the weight of every single component down to the "can that bolt be a little shorter, there's some extra threads" level. Everything. This is the type of thing that makes cars like the Miata light.

2) Use more expensive but lighter materials. This makes some BMW's and Jags light.

3) Combination of 1 and 2. This makes the Z06 Light weight.

Given the Camaro's price point, #1 is the best option. But the question is - do they have the focus to do it? Most car companies don't. They nailed #3 with the Z06...can they do it without the exotic materials?

 

I think it would take a driven VLE to obsess over every pound or every ounce, but that's exactly what I hope we'll get.

 

Nerf Cars.

 

Brainstorming?

really?

Do you really think that doesn't happen within the halls of GM and Ford and DCX?

As I've said many times.....weight is a killer in many ways......one being CAFE averages......another being performance...........

you can be assured that it IS sweated.....with laser-like intensity.

Now......someone said something about making a bolt one or two threads shorter..........sounds like a grand idea.......except that we design to failure, then go back.

I know your intent is well-meaning, but it makes it sound like this is something that none of the manufacturers have ever thought of..........it's been on the radar big-time since-----oh......say the mid 70s???

(how DO you think we came up with the idea of balsa wood sandwiched between composite material in the Corvette?)

Also......keep something else in mind........we MUST bring a car in at a competitive price point. Yes, we can use materials that we use in Corvette....or BMW uses......but there goes the price point, friends.

In closing, be assured that this isn't something that we ignore....the weight thing........

 

Delete options for things like electric seats, power mirrors, heated seats.

OR GM could introduce a track version of the Camaro... something along the lines of a Porsche GT3 style vehicle that is based on the base 911 and stripped of its interior appointments to keep weight down mainly for track use. Although I believe it does come with a half-roll cage.

Btw, isn't Mustang handicapped with its engine(s)... the SOHC/DOHC Ford donks weigh substantially more than GM's LS2... like 200 lbs more?

 

I'm sure its not being ignored, and I know regulations make it difficult, but damn - cars are becoming major porkers again.

Kind of sucks.

 

One weight savings I expect is the Magnesium under dash supports. The Monte Carlo has had them since 2000 and it helps reduce weight while adding to better NVH values, a win-win situation.

 

"Ignore" is the wrong word, but improvement is certainly possible.

The core issue comes down to two areas:

1) A business case making a decision for the engineer. In other words, hitting a given mass target is financially out of line.

2) Poor engineering.


The more insidious of the two is issue #1. With the F4, there was the potential to offset the mass increase from more robust components in certain parts of the car with changes in other parts of the car - if the investment to do so was available.

I've harped on the second issue more times than I can count on this board and other places. GM in particular shoots itself square in the foot with their practices relative to the training and retention of top-flight engineers.

Over and over again the same mistakes are repeated... by a constantly rotating cast of new characters.

 

Honeycombs+Triangles. Lots of 'em.

 

CAFE, a point I was about to bring up. I love how the government has no problem saddling the auto industry with the diametrically opposed mandates of high occupant safety and increased MPG.....

Lets force you to add hundreds of pounds in structure and equipment to your cars and then bitch when CAFE averages go down across the board.......

Tree huggers as well as many left-leaners here on this forum have argued for years that Bush is just paying back his oil company friends by not forcing through a CAFE standards increase.

Well, with the state of affairs at Ford and GM now, do you guys really think that's still a good idea? Is a couple more MPG worth putting one or both into bankruptcy over? After all, with new technologies such as DOD and the proliferation of hybrids I think the manufacturers are working on increasing their CAFE just fine w/o a law to force them to do it.

 

It all comes down to money. It is money spent on reengineering the parts, money spent on more costly materials.

 

That's really the kinda stuff I'm talking about. It's easy to not have EVERYONE have the same kind of focus in an organization. Talk is cheap, but when the time comes to save 3 ounces or 10 pounds on some piece or system, I hope nobody involved is afraid to go the extra mile, (in effort not cost), for it.

That's where I think a really ball busting VLE would come in handy.