Earlier this month, Volkswagen AG announced that the seventh-generation Golf was 220 pounds lighter than its predecessor in part because it incorporated nearly 15 percent more high-strength steel.
General Motors Ventures, a GM subsidiary created to invest in innovative automotive technologies, announced in August that it was investing an undisclosed amount in the NanoSteel Co., a leading manufacturer of advanced high-strength steel.
Jon Lauckner, president of GM Ventures, said NanoSteel's nano-structured alloys are "a potential game-changer."
So far, crash tests show safety unchanged
But before they can transform the auto industry, both high-strength steel and aluminum have to address concerns that they are as safe as conventional steel parts.
The Department of Transportation and U.S. EPA wrote in the final rule for fuel economy standards from 2017-2025 that they expect lightweighting to play an increasingly important role in helping automakers meet the 54.5 mpg mark.
In federal crash tests, the agencies found that advanced lightweight materials -- in this case a mix of high-strength steel and aluminum, and a small amount of magnesium and composite material -- performed just as well as baseline vehicle models.
EPA and DOT's lightweighting studies showed that a baseline vehicle's mass could be reduced by about 20 percent without affecting its safety performance.
But at the same time, the agencies acknowledged that lightweighting techniques could create concerns that may require extra safety equipment, such as better air bags or seat belts.
Krupitzer admitted lightweight cars could pose safety risks in crash scenarios but said the steel industry has been able to engineer solutions that pass all the existing tests. Vehicles made with high-strength steel even perform better in side-impact and rollover situations, he said.
The aluminum industry has made the same assertions. According to Alcoa, automotive aluminum can maintain or even increase the size and strength of a vehicle's front- and back-end crumple zones, which absorb energy upon crash impact without increasing overall weight. Steel, the group says, cannot.
A palpable sense of competition has risen in the automotive materials industry along with the push for better mileage.
"I can guarantee our competition -- the aluminum, magnesium and plastics folks -- are working real hard to take some of the parts [currently made of steel] and acquire them," Krupitzer said. "And we're working at least as hard, if not harder, to improve on the parts we already have."
In discussions between automakers and Alcoa, Lowrey said that the car companies are deciding whether to bypass high-strength steel altogether and jump to aluminum, which provides better weight savings. They are asking, "Why don't we just get there faster?" he said.
But manufacturers indicated that a universal material substitution -- a complete switch from steel to aluminum in car bodies, for instance -- would not be viable in the 2017-2025 time frame because of cost and engineering barriers, according to EPA and DOT's technical assessment of technologies to meet higher fuel economy goals.
Carbon fiber moves off the race track
Most manufactures said they had already invested in high-strength steel to meet 2012-2016 fuel economy standards, but that a shift may be required to meet more aggressive goals. Most estimated that vehicle mass could be reduced by 10 to 15 percent between 2010 and 2025.
Other advanced materials like plastics, magnesium and carbon fiber may gain more of automakers' attention beyond the 2025 time frame and are already being adopted in parts of the industry.
Today, Ford announced it is collaborating with the company Weyerhaeuser to use plastic composite material car parts made of cellulose fibers from sustainably grown trees instead of fiberglass or mineral reinforcements. Ford research found that the cellulose-based plastic composite met its stringent durability requirements but weighs 10 percent less than the alternative.
See what we're tweeting about
13 Comments
Add CommentSounds like higher mileage at the cost of higher fatalities. is this the tradeoff we want?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiszsingerb,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou might find some basic information on the effects of using these lighter materials in an online article, like the one that is 3 inches above where you posted your comment.
If you don't believe lightweight cars can be safe - I suggest you google "F1 2012 crash Spa". If the tubs had been steel there would have been many deaths.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiszsingerb, HELLO?!!! OK, smart guy. Here is a question, just for you. If I take out 35% of the weight out of 2000lb car, it will be 700lbs lighter. And, according to this article, using better steel and aluminum or composite materials will not hurt the car's structural integrity with the reduction in weight. And if the car is just as strong and a 35% lighter vehicle crashes into it, then wouldn't that actually be A LOT safer. WOW!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat about dimpling the outside of cars as a golf ball, like Myth Busters showed helped reduce drag? I still haven't seen any cars being marketed this way for efficiency purposes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust 3 thoughts: 1. The people who are saying it will be "just as strong" are members of the industry who are trying to sell their new materials to the auto makers. I'd have felt a lot better if it had been members of the insurance testing institute. 2. A small change to lighter bumpers lead to better gas mileage but gave us astronomical repair bills for 5 mpg crashes. What will these changes mean? 3. Yes, but what if the vehicle that smashes into you is not one the new "whizbang" ligher cars but a 2010 Chevy Suburban? A base course in physics might tell you which vehicle you will want to be in.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat about the VW Golf? :>)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSorry, I just HAD to do it. (I apologize to all readers.)
Unfortunately, no. The VW Golf did not use dimpling.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"There are literally hundreds of different technologies that can be brought to bear to help improve fuel efficiency, but ALL OF THEM begin with lightweighting," said Kevin Lowery, a spokesman with the aluminum company Alcoa Inc.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisALL OF THEM? Only if you're willfully blind in order to sell a product.
I have an idea. Raise taxes on the giant SUV's and trucks on the road that people don't need and encourage them to buy smaller cars that will be perfectly adequate for their needs.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLike farmers, ranchers, handymen, delivery folks... and the poor who will be buying the big cars that the rich will put on the used car market after they buy their new, lighter, cars?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWill we have a federally mandated test to see if a smaller car will be "perfectly adequate for their needs"?
You have a good concept. Raising taxes has been attempted before. Every time the price of gas increases that spike is in essence a tax. Behavior of drivers indicates that the tax isn't high enough to get people to convert to more fuel efficient vehicles. We still observe drivers using the drive through lanes. When we see the drive through lines disappear then we will know we have reached the tipping point for the gas price tax.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree. The ones who get hit the hardest with additional gas taxes are the ones I listed in #11... the ones who mostly have little choice on larger vehicles and often can least afford more taxes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think your point is, correctly, that the folks well off enough to drive the big vehicles as a choice and who may not "need" them (by other people's judgement) are seldom affected by those tax increases and continue to drive big cars/trucks anyway.
It is an extremely complex problem and sound bite style one-liners on either side will not get it done. I applaud real "all of the above" solutions like lightening cars. I just worry about the costs in human lives and additional repair bills (see my bumper example in #6 above) if we only focus on mileage increases.