I will
be writing in red as this could get confusing pretty quick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
Compare 2 identical cars...
Let's do
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
faster
Any car will be faster when weight is removed. Unless you do something stupid, like removing the control arms to cut weight.
That is generally true. Correct. Also remember that a faster car isn't necessarily the one that gets the quicker E.T.'s (
control arms).
Let's not just talk about 1/4 mile racing. Faster in and out of a corner is harder to do in a heavier car. Just something else to consider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
handle better
Any car will handle better when weight is removed. Again, with the exception of removing the control arms.
Not necessarily. A certain amount of weight is needed to plant (previous post).
Again, let's not just look at drag racing. As weight increases, so does its inertia. Bottom line is the car is less responsive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
queiter
more weight can help, but my opinion is that this extra sound deadening should be an option for those who want it. More likely though the option would be removal of the sound deadening.
You think sound deadening should be an option...are you kidding me? You know 99% of the people that buy their cars aren't turning them into lightweight beast right? What about the poor woman with 4 kids that needs an economical vehicle but to save money elects not to get the option of sound deadening. That is just a crazy thought IMO. It isn't all about race cars...right?
As I stated it would be more likely to get the option to remove sound deadening (or maybe just some of it similar to the 93 Cobra R). And I don't think a woman with 4 kids is going to buy a Mustang anyway, so who cares?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
More comfortable
I would argue that comfort does not need to be heavy. Comfort level is mostly determined by seat quality/ergonomics and a little suspension. Weight does not need to be a contradicting quality.
It comes with it's price. If we spend all this money on make lightweight comfort on titanium seat brackets or those of the like...it is going to hit us in the wallets. It is a balance act man...you know that.
The comfort is also into the
suspension. Of course we could go with titanium everything (for example) to lighten up parts but it isn't in the budget or market of the car in question and 99% of them either. Think about it...
You only bring up Ti. There are hundreds (maybe thousands) of composites that would be much better than steel. My point is that regardless of which material is used there are better options than steel. Steel is not necessarry for comfort. I will address the cost issue in another point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
Brake better
Any car will brake better when weight is removed.
Sure, but it isn't that simple. The new cars brake setup overcomes their 2-300lb difference (which is like having a bigger passenger with you...whoopdy do
). It well overcomes it and can easily afford the extra "pig" weight.
Actually it is that simple. Simple Physics. No getting around it. Lighten up todays cars (with their better brake systems) and you will see an improvement in braking performance. Being able to afford the extra weight for the same braking ability does not concern me. My point is that less weight = better braking performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
Safety
A heavier vehicle does not mean a safer vehicle. More weight (consider an SUV) just provides different safety strengths and weaknesses. Race cars are much safer than what we drive, and the driver is safer at high speed, than we are at highway speeds.
I never said nor meant to say that. That wasn't the point. Newer cars are simply safter in a wreck with their technology. Driver/passenger/and side air bags have weight. Plus extra wreckage supports. It is a price I would like to pay both out of the wallet and in weight so I have a better chance of surviving the price of life. Don't you think
There is a difference between a race car and daily driver. Comfort becomes a big factor in that. "It is a balancing act". No need to compare to different cars when you put above "Let's compare 2 identical cars."
The new technology that you are mentioning is really just unimaginative extensions of what had been done before. There have been no major changes to crush structures or supports in quite a while. They are all steel which is heavy for its strength (compared to composites), and does not provide as good of a ride down as CFRP can. I agree that continuous improvement to safety standards should be a goal. The problem I have is that most of todays improvements have been unimaginitive continuations of old technology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
My point is just that an increase in weight is not necessarry to improve in any of these categories, with the possible exception of "quieter".
So who is going to pay for the R&D in acheiving that point of equilibrium between the two (business/customer). If you can tell me who is...then you "win". I think you'll have a little trouble with this one. One of them is going to have to pocket the price. Either way it will effect either one of them. You can't deny or get around that for sure.
I don't need to deny or get around this at all. The R&D has already been done. I worked on a crash safety vehicle last year that was fabricated from CFRP. Only a little steel tubing for the suspension. This car was built at a university; designed by 2 professors and built by a rag-tag team of students. This was done without the help of the auto manufacturers, just cumulative knowledge from the university.
My point is that there has not been a decision to move to the more advanced materials and manufacturing processes. Make a full scale move, and the increase in cost would not be near as much as you make it out to be.
In case my materials knowledge is in question, I test structural materials for Aerospace applications.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
In my opinion there is too much of an emphasis on cost to build, and not enough emphasis on developing new production methods. Building cars almost exclusively from steel is a little outdated. Even crush structures can be made from polymers now. For example Carbon fiber honeycomb actually provides better ride down characteristics than steel, and is much better than Al.
Well developing new production methods cost money as well...so who do you think is going to get hit. Us at the bottom of the economical food chain. Yes, that is us again. We keep complaining about why they don't do this and that...but if they do, do "this and that" we will complain anyways because it will hit our wallets in one way or another. Very simple.
Carbonfiber R&D will cost more. So and yet it hits our wallets again. We will complain and the cycle will continue between old school and new school.
CFRP R&D has been going on for a long time. The material costs involved (for automotive grade CFRP) are not too far from those of high quality fiberglass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vristang
Of course, that's just my opinion...I could be wrong.
Could be...
Could be...
I hope you don't take personal offense to any of this, as I am just enjoying the discussion.
Wow, that ate up my entire lunch break.
jason
__________________