Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now

Now available from EcoModder: ScanGauge II fuel economy gauge.  Click for details.  

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-06-2012, 04:02 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Miami FL
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Only metal foam crumple zones can provide the biggest mpg advantage!

IMO the biggest factor affecting mileage is vehicle weight.
Unless you use exotic materials a lighter large-sized vehicle will tend to be fragile.

Thus we need rollcage style rigidity around the cabin. No problem here so far as race homologated rollcages only weight a few hundred pounds, yet they withstand spectacular accidents.

The problem comes in crumple zones.
Even if optimally shaped sheet metal is a poor material for crumple zones: not elastic and heavy.

This is where foam metal will come to play.
They offer exceptional shock absorbance for its light weight and small volume.
For example you can google titanium and aluminum foam crumple zone reasearch.

Thus IMO the mpg futures is in foam metal crumple zones.


(Support Ecomodder.com & get rid of these annoying ads!)      
 
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2012, 08:54 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Boise Idaho
Posts: 705
Thanks: 38
Thanked 63 Times in 53 Posts
Cars have been doing this for 20 years plus. Plastic and foam have been front and back of many cars, including hondas, since the early 90's.

The weight of the crumple zones is not very much.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2012, 12:35 PM   #3 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Miami FL
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by drmiller100 View Post
Cars have been doing this for 20 years plus. Plastic and foam have been front and back of many cars, including hondas, since the early 90's.

The weight of the crumple zones is not very much.
Foam crumple zones are designed for low speeds.
They offer little protection at 55mph or 110 mph (you are traveling at 55mph and you crash head on with an incoming 55mph vehicle).
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2012, 06:54 PM   #4 (permalink)
EcoModding Newb
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 376

Acura TSX - '06 TSX
90 day: 29.95 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 CBR600 F4i
90 day: 43.18 mpg (US)

Jeep - '02 Liberty Sport
90 day: 18.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 63
Thanked 32 Times in 22 Posts
I disagree with weight being the most significant mpg factor. Regardless of weight, my mpgs don't fluctuate much. In stop and go driving weight is the supreme factor, but at any sustained speed, aero is king.

That said, I still would like to see weight reduced because vehicles are more peppy and fun to drive the lighter they get.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
Frank Lee (01-10-2012), TEiN (01-12-2012)
Old 01-10-2012, 09:44 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 3,940

Mica Blue - '05 xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 48.22 mpg (US)

Josepha - '08 xD
90 day: 30.76 mpg (US)
Thanks: 513
Thanked 501 Times in 306 Posts
Drivetrain efficiency is most important. Second is aerodynamic drag. Third most important is weight, and last is all other rolling drag.
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to NeilBlanchard For This Useful Post:
Frank Lee (01-11-2012), mcrews (01-11-2012)
Old 01-10-2012, 10:48 PM   #6 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Boise Idaho
Posts: 705
Thanks: 38
Thanked 63 Times in 53 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
Drivetrain efficiency is most important. Second is aerodynamic drag. Third most important is weight, and last is all other rolling drag.
weight is THE easiest changed factor in the first, third, and fourth item in your list.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2012, 10:49 PM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Boise Idaho
Posts: 705
Thanks: 38
Thanked 63 Times in 53 Posts
also interesting is you don't have accelerating the car as significant. Must be a pretty nice commute where you never have to accelerate the car at all.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 06:28 AM   #8 (permalink)
Eco-ventor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: sweden
Posts: 579

Princess - '92 MX-3 GS
House of Tudor
90 day: 33.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 113 Times in 79 Posts
Send a message via MSN to jakobnev
You know the energy needed to accelerate isn't lost, right?
__________________



Remember, even if you win the rat race - you're still a rat.

2010: 454.92L for 5313.90km => 8.56L/100km (27.5MPG US) (5 months)
2011: 606.11L for 7754.04km => 7.82L/100km (30.1MPG US) (Full year)
2012: 170.10L for 2405.00km => 7.07L/100km (33.3MPG US) (In progress)
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jakobnev For This Useful Post:
NeilBlanchard (01-11-2012)
Old 01-11-2012, 08:29 AM   #9 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 3,940

Mica Blue - '05 xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 48.22 mpg (US)

Josepha - '08 xD
90 day: 30.76 mpg (US)
Thanks: 513
Thanked 501 Times in 306 Posts
Right -- weight *helps* with coasting, and if you have an EV or hybrid, you can also "get back" some of the invested energy in acceleration. Also, acceleration is much worse for an ICE powered vehicle (they lose about 75% of the energy vs about 10-15%), so for a "city" vehicle you should have an EV and light weight, with aero moving down to third.

Back on topic: a larger crumple zone with lower weight and good aero all are desirable. But if you throw it all away with a low efficiency drivetrain, then lower weight is more important.
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 10:32 AM   #10 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Miami FL
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
In stop and go driving weight is the supreme factor, but at any sustained speed, aero is king.

That said, I still would like to see weight reduced because vehicles are more peppy and fun to drive the lighter they get.
As traffic keeps increasing most driving will become stop 'n go.
And I agree with lightweight.


(Support Ecomodder.com & get rid of these annoying ads!)      
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com