Stray Kat Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 2 hours ago, rperez817 said: In terms of benefits to customers of mass produced cars and trucks and to automakers' bottom line, that is correct. silvrsvt posted a good article on Ford's use of a variety of steels with different microstructures on 2020 Escape. Like 2020 Explorer, new Escape uses a smart "mixed materials" strategy. http://fordauthority.com/2019/07/2020-ford-escape-uses-different-types-of-steel-and-boron/ If this is true then Ford either didn’t foresee the future or they really laid an egg. The aluminum body is what separates the Ford products from the lesser make by a mile. The other thing is the EcoBoost power. General Motors and Ram are 5 years minimum behind Ford in my opinion with Ram really resting on the interior of its trucks to gain market share. The oldest of the three (Ford) is still leaps and bounds ahead (again in my opinion) in the areas that are tough like power train and body structure. I don’t know of any airplanes that are made from steel anymore to save weight. If anything there is a threshold of vehicle size that makes aluminum a great and viable body material. The Ford and Lincoln aluminum full-size SUV’s are eating into GM’s dominance of the category. This is a “Trump” card pun fully intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Stray Kat said: If this is true then Ford either didn’t foresee the future or they really laid an egg. Probably both. Using an aluminum intensive body is the easy, low effort route to mass reduction. But it's expensive. Ford's profitability has been negatively affected by this strategy for F-Series and some other models. https://www.autoblog.com/2018/01/24/ford-profits-hurt-aluminum-costs/ Additionally, in the past 5 years alone, technological advancements with other materials such as steels, plastics, composites, etc. along with computer aided design and prototyping have been dramatic. Mixed materials strategy requires more engineering effort up front. But it's worth it. That's how Ford was able to achieve mass reduction targets for 2020 Explorer and Escape, yet at the same time keeping costs in line especially over the long term. Edited July 17, 2019 by rperez817 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 45 minutes ago, rperez817 said: Using an aluminum intensive body is the easy, low effort route to mass reduction. It was neither easy nor low effort. Now you're being ridiculous. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotRunrGuy Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 On 7/15/2019 at 1:00 PM, jasonj80 said: They actually catch fire a lot. Hahaha, this postal site has a column on the right side of the page listing recent fires,,,,, https://www.postaltimes.com/ HRG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 2 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said: Hahaha, this postal site has a column on the right side of the page listing recent fires,,,,, https://www.postaltimes.com/ HRG If the postal vehicle had been sold to consumers it would have been recalled years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 (edited) Knowing why Ford does and doesn't use aluminum is the key to understanding why only the heaviest of Ford's vehicles use it Aluminum was essential to Ford being able to build as many 4x4 Crew cab F150s as customers could order and still meet CAFE, the difference in weight before/after aluminum, allowed it to load even more accessories into the new truck (Moon Roof). Carrying that aluminum construction across the rest of F Series and including Expedition/Navigator just increased scale of economy. You'll notice that the new Explorer increased its wheelbase by almost seven inches without any weight penalty Not only did that change improve space efficiency, it also changed the CAFE "footprint" of Explorer/Aviator giving both more breathing space in regards to the minimum fuel economy required. Edited July 23, 2019 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 24, 2019 Author Share Posted July 24, 2019 11 hours ago, jpd80 said: You'll notice that the new Explorer increased its wheelbase by almost seven inches without any weight penalty Not only did that change improve space efficiency, it also changed the CAFE "footprint" of Explorer/Aviator giving both more breathing space in regards to the minimum fuel economy required. I was under the impression that the overall vehicle size affected CAFE, not wheelbase-the new Explorer is roughly the same size as the old one-I think it might be 2 inches longer now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 8 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: I was under the impression that the overall vehicle size affected CAFE, not wheelbase-the new Explorer is roughly the same size as the old one-I think it might be 2 inches longer now? The "footprint" is in sq ft and defined as the Track x wheelbase, not body Length x body width. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.