Jump to content
  • Custom Search


Sign in to follow this  
silvrsvt

2020 Ford Explorer Didn't Need Aluminum To Shave Weight

Recommended Posts

Didn't "need" it, but it certainly helps.  The hood was said to be aluminum, wondering if maybe the liftgate might also be as well or some other composite material. It is good the new one is lighter, for Ford bragging about all aluminum and weight savings and such in the F150, it has allowed all the other vehicles to grow up to be porkers.  Escape seems to have lost 200lbs which helps too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ANTAUS said:

Didn't "need" it, but it certainly helps.  The hood was said to be aluminum, wondering if maybe the liftgate might also be as well or some other composite material. It is good the new one is lighter, for Ford bragging about all aluminum and weight savings and such in the F150, it has allowed all the other vehicles to grow up to be porkers.  Escape seems to have lost 200lbs which helps too.

Maybe the outer shell of the liftgate but not the inner structure. Haven't heard or read anything about that though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big question is what will the next generation F series be made from!

The weight savings of the aluminum F-150 was significant over the previous design for certain models (I never saw a straight comparison of models similarly equipped, it seemed that the aluminum example always had an Ecoboost, the steel version usually had a 6.2L).  The Super Duty was even more confusing, as Ford claimed the body weight savings was 'spent' on making the chassis heavier, so overall the truck weighed about the same.  HOWEVER, compared to GM and Ram, the aluminum Fords seem to weight as much as competing trucks.  I doubt the boxed frame of the current Super Duty weighs any more than the boxed frame of the current GM HD trucks.  GVW's are similar, but certain Super Duty configurations have embarrassingly low payload ratings.  If that isn't due to tires, one has to wonder.

Mixed metals makes a lot of sense, I am not seeing a big advantage to 100% aluminum.  No doubt aluminum body construction is eating Ford's margins a bit. 

   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2019 at 8:23 PM, 7Mary3 said:

Mixed metals makes a lot of sense, I am not seeing a big advantage to 100% aluminum.  No doubt aluminum body construction is eating Ford's margins a bit.

Most definitely 7Mary3 sir. 100% aluminum construction has zero advantages for consumers of mass produced cars and trucks and is giant money suck for automakers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rperez817 said:

Most definitely 7Mary3 sir. 100% aluminum construction has zero advantages for consumers of mass produced cars and trucks and is giant money suck for automakers.

Evidently there is an advantage to the consumer. Have you seen the full size truck crash tests?  There must be some benefit If Audi, MB, Cadillac, Jaguar, Land Rover are all wasting money using aluminum on frames and on bodies. 

https://www.aluminum.org/product-markets/automotive

I wonder how much cost benefit they do receive from being able to recycle the scrap aluminum from production waste. 

Edited by fordtech1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 7:23 PM, 7Mary3 said:

Mixed metals makes a lot of sense, I am not seeing a big advantage to 100% aluminum.  No doubt aluminum body construction is eating Ford's margins a bit. 

Any attempt at 100% of any metal doesn't make sense from an engineering point of view.  Different areas have different stresses, functions and needs.  Different safety objectives at different parts of the chassis and body.  If they go 100% I'd guess it was more for marketing and public perception than functional advantage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aluminum may be best in some areas, steel (of various alloys) in others, plastics in others.   I wouldn't guess aluminum recycle is any more lucrative than steel recycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, NYinTex said:

Aluminum may be best in some areas, steel (of various alloys) in others, plastics in others.   I wouldn't guess aluminum recycle is any more lucrative than steel recycle.

http://www.metalrecyclersusa.com/advantages-reusing-aluminum.html

I knew aluminum is easier to recycle than steel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, fordtech1 said:

Evidently there is an advantage to the consumer. Have you seen the full size truck crash tests?  There must be some benefit If Audi, MB, Cadillac, Jaguar, Land Rover are all wasting money using aluminum on frames and on bodies.

I own a car that uses predominantly aluminum construction. X260 Jaguar XF. While it did well in Euro NCAP crash testing with a 5 star rating, other vehicles in its class that are less aluminum intensive have done just as well.

Performance and fuel economy of the gasoline powered versions of the XF aren't much better than competitors either. In some cases the XF is worse on those measures.

If there are any advantages to using aluminum so extensively in my XF, compared to a well engineered mixed materials approach, I haven't experienced them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2019 at 8:23 PM, 7Mary3 said:

...I am not seeing a big advantage to 100% aluminum.

When was the last time you saw one of these rotted out? 🤣
image.png.b43b1ca157dea5c41c47de2dbfab7a05.png

Edited by twintornados

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, twintornados said:

When was the last time you saw one of these rotted out? 🤣
image.png.b43b1ca157dea5c41c47de2dbfab7a05.png

It’s too bad someone doesn’t make a modern “skateboard” to slide under the LLV shells and update them. 

I do wonder what the chassis looks like underneath. I imagine some are more “oxide” than steel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sullynd said:

It’s too bad someone doesn’t make a modern “skateboard” to slide under the LLV shells and update them. 

I do wonder what the chassis looks like underneath. I imagine some are more “oxide” than steel. 

The issue with the Grumman LLV is that when it was first designed, US Postal needs were not as "package focused" as it is today so the limitations of the original design is outdated. I have a buddy that works for the postal service and he says that they have a supplier of the original S-10 frames as that is about the only thing that rusts out. There was a company that was located in the business park in the city were I live that was going to convert the Grumman to battery power, but the venture fizzled out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, twintornados said:

When was the last time you saw one of these rotted out? 🤣
image.png.b43b1ca157dea5c41c47de2dbfab7a05.png

That's a good point, but these days I see a lot of trucks that don't have a lot of body rot but have so much chassis and suspension rust they are junk just the same! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a second here, now you’re telling me that aluminum bodied vehicles offer no or negligible advantages over steel?

After Ford revolutionized the industry by mass producing large pickups and suv’s and now it was all for nothing? 

I think that is bunk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×