how to tackle the 'new car' issue? How can we change manufacturers minds?

[some_other_dave]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

b) make as much profit on each car as possible.

Don't forget that one large component of "b" is the cost to produce the vehicle. That's one huge reason that luxo-SUVs were so very popular early on--it was cheaper to build a truck than a car (lower safety standards, expectation of lower-tech suspensions and so forth), and people were willing to pay top dollar for a cheap-to-build truck if you changed the bed for a passenger compartment and loaded it up with leather seats, sound deadening, and cup-holders.

I suspect that's another reason that the F-150 has been so popular; it used to cost Ford less to make than a Taurus and they could sell it for a similar price.

-soD

[Big Dave]

Sounds to me like the cures are worse than the disease.

[Arragonis]

I'm trying to think why we don't see ads like these any more ?



Apart from the obvious that the cars don't exist. Even economy cars don't seem to have their MPG figures featured.

EDIT - From the story where the pic came from :

The HLE, high economy model was further developed, Austin-Rover being locked in a battle with Renault and its 5GTL to produce 'Europe's Most Economical car'. The '83 version of the HLE was to have and MG-style rear aerodynamic spoiler and engine/gearbox modifications. The optimum A-Plus engine was the 1275cc version, so unlike the original economy model, this engine was used with a higher final drive on the gearbox – obviously, a 5-speed gearbox would have been used if the company had an existing one that could fit in the A-Series sump (as there was no money to develop such an item).

There doesn't seem to be the desire to compete like this on economy anymore.

[320touring]

Good find Arragonis!

How do we shift from "OOOOH, shiney alloy wheels and Sat nav" to

"It does 55MPG?Awesome!"


Could we tie higher MPG into being ble to afford otional extras? "my car bought me a satnav!" (based on the £150ish I saved driving the Scaab)

[Arragonis]

I have been pondering further. Oh no I hear you all cry. Are we discussing the idea of makers targeting high FE, and what do we want them to do about it ? Are we thinking :

- better efficiency through lower weight (plastic panels, better design), better aero (grills blocked, mirrors, gaps sealed, wheel covers) etc. ?

- better FE through technology - Hybrids, size reduced engines (1.2-1.4 Turbos instead of 1.6-2.0s), diesels or a combination of other tech ?

- something else I haven't pondered ?

Would we be willing to pay a premium ?

Would we be tempted to buy new if (like me) you don't at the moment ?

[PaleMelanesian]

I'm thinking better efficiency by doing the obvious things. Things like:
- lower weight (as you said)
- better aero - not hard to do
- better gear ratios
- smaller engines

If you're redesigning a car already, these things don't have to cost anything.

[320touring]

Originally Posted by PaleMelanesian

I'm thinking better efficiency by doing the obvious things. Things like:
- lower weight (as you said)
- better aero - not hard to do
- better gear ratios
- smaller engines

If you're redesigning a car already, these things don't have to cost anything.

Lower weight- yes fror "town driven cars", not so much of a concern for Highway?

Better Aero- damn straight- I cant believe how much interior space the "ideal aero template" would provide, even if the Kamm element was "chopped"

Gearing and engines

issues there around maintaining the "acceptible rate of accelleration" desired by the public, and smaller engines. smaller lumps need shorter gears to keep levels up?

Could the adoption of an "Eco 5th" to ALL cars drop highway/A road consumption?

[PaleMelanesian]

Originally Posted by 320touring

Lower weight- yes fror "town driven cars", not so much of a concern for Highway?

True, but how many cars are only highway drivers?

issues there around maintaining the "acceptible rate of accelleration" desired by the public, and smaller engines. smaller lumps need shorter gears to keep levels up?

Could the adoption of an "Eco 5th" to ALL cars drop highway/A road consumption?

Now that many are offering 6-speeds, there's no reason you can't have both.

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by 320touring

Gearing and engines issues there around maintaining the "acceptible rate of accelleration" desired by the public, and smaller engines. smaller lumps need shorter gears to keep levels up?

Could the adoption of an "Eco 5th" to ALL cars drop highway/A road consumption?

According to something random I came across a while ago it takes just 18hp to push a Ford Sierra along at 70mph. It takes many times that much to accelerate or climb hills, and nothing at all to descend. So for a mid-sized car (say Ford Mundano in the UK / Ford Fusion in the states) I think the changes could be :

1. Lower weight for composite panels, lighter seats etc etc.
2. Smaller engine - TSI style 1.4 Turbo, 120-170hp.
3. 6 Speed gearbox with loooong 6th.
4. Free-wheel, like old Rovers and SAABs used to have for built in coasting ability.

Take the three states a car typically runs in.

Flat cruise - engine runs like a 1.4 NA with long gearing.
Accelerate / Climb - turbo adds torque required temporarily.
Decelerate / Descend - free wheel allows engine to drop to idle.

For the last one if the box is auto or semi auto then maybe the box could slip into a long gear to go into DFCO mode depending on the rate of deceleration.

None of this is expensive and all of it exists / could be made easily.

Someone could even do it as a project here.

* What is the cost of a turbo vs Hybrid stuff in terms of weight and money ?
* What is the power / torque output of a 1.4 petrol at idle ?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by 320touring

Lower weight- yes fror "town driven cars", not so much of a concern for Highway?

Depends on what you think of as a highway. If you drive where "highways" are straight and flat (and probably divided), then weight may not be much of a concern. If much of your driving (like mine) is done on roads that wiggle around and go up and down 6% or greater grades, then weight's a much greater factor.

And oddly enough, yesterday I did see a billboard advertising some car (only caught it out of the corner of my eye, so I don't know which) as "50 mpg class".