Why doesn't any auto company build.....

[NoCreativity]

Larger hybrid vehicles. If you want hybrid you are pretty much stuck with compact or mid-sized vehicles, with some exceptions. What about minivans and trucks? Not worth the loss of cargo space?

 

[Midwayman]

I'm just wondering why weight doesn't seem like a priority for anyone these days. I remember seeing articles years ago on how we'd be driving bonded aluminum or carbon fiber framed cars soon. None of that has happened. Weight just keeps going up and up despite it hurting fuel economy and every performance statistic.

 

[JCH13]

Larger hybrid vehicles. If you want hybrid you are pretty much stuck with compact or mid-sized vehicles, with some exceptions. What about minivans and trucks? Not worth the loss of cargo space?

Look at cost. "Hybridizing" a compact car adds, what, 20-30% to the cost? Corolla is $17k base, Prius is $24k base as a data point...

A Sienna starts at $27k and goes up to $40k. If they were priced at $35k-$52K the market size would shrink considerably. Not to mention (like you say) the tremendous loss of cargo space and addition of mass (the battery pack would have to be proportionally larger) and compounded mass gains (bigger brakes, better crash structures, etc).

 

[monkeydelmagico]

It's not silly if you consider more than the single semi-true factoid you just mentioned. A vast majority of people interested in sports cars prefer to shift manually, why design an AT for the very small market share that wants it?

I think the mythical "most people" being cited by numerous posters in this thread really should be "car nuts like me."

The simple fact of the matter is that our current car selection is due to mostly market demand, a bit of crash safety and other regulations, and a dash of lawyer-ing.

Why don't we see mid-engined cars anymore? Your average driver will tend to spin a mid-engine car, likely resulting in a lawsuit. Requires a whole new vehicle platform to be developed for a small market segment. It is difficult to pass modern crash safety requirements with an engine behind the driver instead of in front. Pick one.

Why isn't there a small diesel truck yet? Fuel is still relatively cheap here. Large trucks command large profits. Diesel engines have had a rough time passing emissions in the US lately.

Why don't we see diesel hybrids? Price point, do you really think people are willing to pay a premium for a diesel engine and then another premium for a hybrid driveline? See above for issues getting diesel engines legal in the US.

Why don't we see high-powered RWD coupes with few or no options? No one outside of a few thousand (hundred?) track nuts would ever want one AND have the disposable income to buy a brand-new car whose only utility is track driving. It would still be porky and complicated compared to old cars given modern crash safety and emissions regulations.

Why don't we see high-powered BRZ-type cars? Too much power, too easy to wreck the car without further investment in ESC systems (see interviews with BRZ/FRS designer). Also price-point. All that power comes at the cost of cash, weight, and reliability. Then it's competing with the Mustang, 370Z, etc instead of filling it's own niche.

Why no turbine cars? Idling efficiency.

Why no ultra-light modestly powered kit-car-like cars? Crash safety regulations.

Bet your fun at parties eh? Quit trying to substitute reality for our fantasy killjoy

 

[JCH13]

I'm just wondering why weight doesn't seem like a priority for anyone these days. I remember seeing articles years ago on how we'd be driving bonded aluminum or carbon fiber framed cars soon. None of that has happened. Weight just keeps going up and up despite it hurting fuel economy and every performance statistic.

Cost. Cost. Cost. Even for the consumer's fuel cost it's just not worth it. With the increasing popularity of high-strength steels it's even less likely we'll ever seen exotics like CF.

(BTW: I'm balls-deep in a vehicle light-weighting study ATM)

 

[JCH13]

Bet your fun at parties eh? Quit trying to substitute reality for our fantasy killjoy

Hehe... yeah... sorry to ruin everything for everyone :awe:

I resent the implication in all of these posts that automotive engineers are stupid and aren't making cars that people want.

Like I said above, I'm in the middle of a large vehicle study at work, specifically working on light-weighting and mass de-compounding and the economic benefits associated with them. Thus I have a rare look into the decision making processes of auto manufacturers.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

I resent the implication in all of these posts that automotive engineers are stupid and aren't making cars that people want. .

Nah, the engineers are golden in my book. Cars these days are mostly good. It's the beancounters that are responsible for making mass appeal soul-less cars. How dare a car company try to make a profit. Pfffttt.

 

[Viper GTS]

Cost. Cost. Cost. Even for the consumer's fuel cost it's just not worth it. With the increasing popularity of high-strength steels it's even less likely we'll ever seen exotics like CF.

Can you expand on this? It seems to me (admittedly an outsider) that CF tubbed cars have dropped dramatically in price in the last 5 years, with two examples now below $60k with further price reductions rumored.

Obviously it's not going to be as cheap as steel any time soon, but how much of a premium can be sustained based on purely economic factors (TCO parity essentially) vs the performance/vanity segment the 4C/i3 currently reside in?

Viper GTS

 

[manimal]

one liter 4 cyl two stroke with modern tech in a configuration similar to the nissan Delta Wing.


hell make it a two liter! Restrict the shit out of it so it gets decent mileage and is really slow for its tests.

Then make it easy to uncork

 

[Fritzo]

one liter 4 cyl two stroke with modern tech in a configuration similar to the nissan Delta Wing.


hell make it a two liter! Restrict the shit out of it so it gets decent mileage and is really slow for its tests.

Then make it easy to uncork

Have you seen the Ecotec engine from Ford? I think the block is the length of a legal pad.

 

[Midwayman]

Cost. Cost. Cost. Even for the consumer's fuel cost it's just not worth it. With the increasing popularity of high-strength steels it's even less likely we'll ever seen exotics like CF.

(BTW: I'm balls-deep in a vehicle light-weighting study ATM)

I remember seeing this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AScfESzQzIQ
and thinking that maybe mass production CF wasn't far off.

 

[Midwayman]

Nah, the engineers are golden in my book. Cars these days are mostly good. It's the beancounters that are responsible for making mass appeal soul-less cars. How dare a car company try to make a profit. Pfffttt.

Don't forget the lawyers for making them dumb down everything.

 

[JCH13]

Can you expand on this? It seems to me (admittedly an outsider) that CF tubbed cars have dropped dramatically in price in the last 5 years, with two examples now below $60k with further price reductions rumored.

Obviously it's not going to be as cheap as steel any time soon, but how much of a premium can be sustained based on purely economic factors (TCO parity essentially) vs the performance/vanity segment the 4C/i3 currently reside in?

Viper GTS

The basic fuel cost calculation is fairly straight-forward: for every 10% of the GVW eliminated a 7% fuel savings is realized (this number can be between about 5% and 8%, but 7% is a decent rule of thumb). Take a car that gets 30mpg (average mid-size sedan, ish) gets driven 15k/year (maybe a little above average) gas that costs $4/gallon (a little higher than what I see) and lets say it weighs 3500lbs.

Doing a bunch of math, that car consumes 500 gallons/year at a cost of $2k/year. If the car is light-weighted by 1lb it saves $0.40/year. Over a 15year life-cycle, assuming a 5% rate of return (i.e. a conservative rate of return on an investment like a 401k) that first light-weighted pound has a net present value of $4.34. That is to say if you could lose that pound for an initial cost of $4.34 or less, you would re-coupe the investment within 15 years. Note that I did this with VERY CONSERVATIVE inputs. If one assumes a 10% rate of return and a lifetime of 10 years the NPV of light-weighting drops to $2.30/lb.

Speaking in very rough numbers:

It would take about 1lb of titanium @ $25/lb (raw material) to replace 2lb of steel for a net savings of 1lb at a cost of $25. Not worth it. Applications where corrosion is a limiting factor (exhaust) or reducing reciprocating mass is essential (i.e. connecting rods, valves, valve springs) may be viable, but require very careful analysis.

It would take 3lbs of 5xxx aluminum @ $3.50/lb (raw material) to replace 4lbs of steel for a net savings of 1lb, at a cost of $10+. Not worth it generally, but depending on the use of cheaper Al alloys, removal of other manufacturing processes such as painting and galvanizing, etc. it can be worth light-weighting with aluminum.

It would take 1lb of HSS (high strength steel) @ $0.50/lb to replace 2lbs or so of 'normal' mild steel, at a cost of $0.50/lb of material removed. Very much worth it in virtually all structural applications except where limited formability of HSS prohibits part manufacture.

I haven't done much work in light-weighting with CF, but this study has: http://www.rmi.org/RFGraph-carbonfiber_vs_steel_manufacturing

Ostensibly CF would have to cost less than $4-5/lb to be cost-competitive with steel, excluding its lack of repair-ability, panache for catastrophic failure, and issues with galvanic corrosion of adjacent metallic components. Right now it costs around $16/lb, so it has a LONG way to go.

Now... there are more things to consider that just fuel economy, but for passenger vehicles it tells most of the story. I am obviously over-simplifying some things (i.e. there are some niche applications where more exotic materials may be cost-effective over a long life-cycle) but this is general gist of the economic arguments for light-weighting right now. That is to say: HSSs are great, aluminum can be useful, but any material much over $4/lb (CF, titanium, MMCs, high-end Al alloys, etc) is only used for cache or media hype, or where the customer is willing to pay a premium for the performance benefit and doesn't really care about fuel economy (and despite what all of us car guys want, this is a very small market segment).

 

[sandorski]

Why doesn't any auto company build a car with the looks of a supercar, but keep it cheap? I'm totally convinced that the average person buys a car 90% based on looks. So why not just make something absolutely stunning? What makes these supercars super-priced are the exotic materials, go-fast goodies, and the prestigious name/badge that goes along with it. Literally none of those are needed for the look that people like.

Dodge should bring back the Stealth. Make it a miniaturized sports car loosely based on the Viper. Give it 200-250 HP and with low enough weight to make it attractive for the Performance minded.

 

[exar333]

Dodge should bring back the Stealth. Make it a miniaturized sports car loosely based on the Viper. Give it 200-250 HP and with low enough weight to make it attractive for the Performance minded.

This would have been awesome 10 years ago with the SRT Neons's 2.4T MT drivetrain. I'm not a mopar guy, but that was a great tune-able engine with a robust transmission. Make it ~2800-2900lbs and it could have been a modern 240sx.

 

[Sattern]

I think the auto companies should invest in creating cars with the previous gadgets, i'm not a fan of the touch screen features so they should at least offer the option to not have it.

 

[dguy6789]

I think the auto companies should invest in creating cars with the previous gadgets, i'm not a fan of the touch screen features so they should at least offer the option to not have it.

Agreed. Personally I like having displays and screens in cars but I don't like them being touch.

Actual buttons and knobs work way better when you need to keep your eye on the road and want to change something on feel alone.

 

[foghorn67]

A bare-bones RWD car with a somewhat meager but acceptable amount of power. Kinda like a V6 Mustang or Camaro, but less of a big, bloated, ugly, overpriced turd.

Closest thing we have is the BR-Z/FR-S. And it's like...25k starting price...really? It's basically a RWD version of compact cars that you can buy for over $5,000 less. I refuse to accept that making it RWD costs that much. Shit, you could build a rear-mounted transmission and half-shafts for little more than what the FWD counterpart costs. So your only additional costs would be a driveshaft/torque tube, and BAM, Corollavette.

That's my 'enthusiast' option. My efficiency option would be:

Plug-in hybrid with all electric drive system, with a tiny turbodiesel being used as the APU to charge the batteries when needed.

Or a gas turbine hybrid.

Is anything you write not a cussing rant? You need to be punched in the mouth with a bar of soap.

There's a line between asking someone nicely if they need to swear and making a personal attack. Saying they "need to be punched in the mouth" crosses that line.

Zenmervolt - AnandTech Moderator

 

[reallyscrued]

I'm sure its been covered, but:

Base model:

Inline 5 (much smoother than four because of some stroke overlap but not nearly as complex or expensive as a 6) rear wheel drive.

Hydraulic steering, clutch, cable throttle.

Hand crank windows, no A/C, at about 2800 pounds.

Throw in a stereo/nav system that's already pieced together from decent aftermarket parts while they're at it and not gouge customers.

At $19,995 MSRP.

Allow addition of options like power windows, locks, heated seats, leather, sunroof, alloy wheels, LED/HID headlights, LSD, turbo, etc - ALL options, piecemeal, and be able to spec the car out to an upper range of $40,000.


But maybe I'm a socialist.

 

[Linflas]

Luxury cars with a no leather option.

 

[tweakmonkey]

https://www.tradecarview.com/used_car/japan car/mazda/az-1/14889654/

 

[GoodRevrnd]

Luxury cars with a no leather option.

They have this, like that BMW Sensatec stuff. Do you mean fabric instead? Although I think I was in a Lexus IS once that had some sort of fabric seats.

 

[Jeff7181]

... a reliable, good looking, fun car for under 20k.

My Nissan Altima Coupes (leased a 2008 and 2010) were the closest things I could find to this, but they were underpowered (with the 2.5) and overweight for a coupe.

My 2009 Jetta wasn't terrible. It was economical. Nothing special, though, not fun to drive... just transportation.

My 2013 Fusion with 1.6L Ecoboost looks great (IMHO), is pretty economical, drives well for a FWD car, but I'm concerned about reliability. The transmission shifts funny, it's got quite the knock (piston slap, I believe) when cold and the dash rattles.

I haven't even had the Fusion for 6 months and I'm already considering when I'll be able to afford to get something else.

 

[MiataNC]

... a reliable, good looking, fun car for under 20k.

Civic/Fit
Fiesta/Focus
Mazda3/Mazda2
Kia Soul/Forte/Rio/etc
Hyundai Elantra (and variants)
Corolla
Dart
Cruze/Sonic/Spark

All of the above (and more) start under $20K new and are reliable. "Good looking" and "fun" is subjective. If you can't find what you want under $20K, you may need to lower your expectations.

 

[Jeff7181]

Civic/Fit
Fiesta/Focus
Mazda3/Mazda2
Kia Soul/Forte/Rio/etc
Hyundai Elantra (and variants)
Corolla
Dart
Cruze/Sonic/Spark

All of the above (and more) start under $20K new and are reliable. "Good looking" and "fun" is subjective. If you can't find what you want under $20K, you may need to lower your expectations.

The Civic/Fit - not fun or good looking... they're just meh.
The Fiesta/Focus - just smaller Fords, but still a Ford and no higher quality than what I have.
The Mazda3/Mazda2 - maybe the Mazda 3, but the look never really did anything for me.
The Kia Soul/Forte/Rio - not fun, not good looking... and something as small as the Rio doesn't fit me. My ex-girlfriend has a Rio and the seats were so small I had zero upper body/shoulder support. May as well have literally had a bench as a seat.
Hyundai Elantra - not fun, I had one as a rental car for a couple weeks
Corolla - see Civic/Fit
Dart - Dodge.
Cruze/Sonic/Spark - not good looking, not fun, questionable reliability.

I think you're right... I either need to open my wallet more, or just accept that the dash is going to rattle... I'm going to have to fight a service manager to perform warranty work... and it's not going to be a terribly enjoyable drive.