Follow this blog:
RSS

How race cars are inspiring efficiency in new cars

By | January 14, 2013, 6:42 AM PST

Auto racing is one big irony. Cars quickly burn through excessive amounts of fuel as they whiz around the track. But at the same time, fuel efficiency is one of the most crucial strategies in the sport.

Now, U.S. car companies are taking note of those fuel saving strategies as the U.S. government is requiring automakers to build fleets that average 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. The Wall Street Journal reports from the Detroit Auto Show:

For the past century, autos were made largely of steel. But pressed to produce cars and trucks that go farther on a gallon of gas, manufacturers gathering here this week for the Motor City’s annual auto show are cutting weight by substituting more plastics, aluminum and magnesium, including materials once found only in high-end race cars.

Only a handful of parts fashioned from new, lightweight materials are in current models—for example, the magnesium tailgate of the Explorer, the sport utility vehicle from Ford Motor Co. But in four to six years, car companies will roll out vehicles completely redesigned to use a wide mix of specialized materials.

It’s estimated that North American automakers will increase their average use of aluminum to 550 pounds (from 327 in 2009) and decrease their average weight by 400 pounds by the 2025 fuel standard deadline.

It seems like an obvious move by automakers, so what’s taken so long? These fuel reduction strategies have been used for years in race cars. The main reason? Cost. Aluminum is more expensive than steel and magnesium is more expensive than both. The other reason for this shift is more demand for fuel efficient vehicles as gas hit $4 a gallon. But it’s not a change that should be taken for granted:

The shift to lighter vehicles marks a significant industry change. Until 2010, car companies were waging a motor arms race, offering ever brawnier engines of 400 horsepower and more. Sating customer appetite for more power made fuel-economy gains difficult. Bigger engines require bigger engine mounts, heavier brakes, stiffer suspensions—adding weight and boosting fuel consumption.

Not long ago, many auto executives said little could be done to improve fuel-economy without adding massive costs. Then gas prices soared to $4 a gallon and consumers demanded more fuel-efficient cars.

That’s all changing, as Ford’s Matthew Zaluzec told WSJ“Today, we look at lightweighting anywhere we can.”

Detroit Sheds Pounds for Gas-Mileage Gains [Wall Street Journal]

Photo: Flickr/brett gullborg

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Tyler Falk

About Tyler Falk

Tyler Falk is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Tyler Falk

Tyler Falk

Contributing Editor

Tyler Falk freelance journalist based in Washington, D.C. Previously, he was with Smart Growth America and Grist. He holds a degree from Goshen College.

Follow him on Twitter.

Tyler Falk

Tyler Falk

Tyler does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what he covers.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
10
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+3 Votes
+ -
I call BS
There are Diesel engines that have been more fuel efficient than unleaded for years now. Even simply older cars, were often more fuel efficient than modern ones. Before inane and often useless additions were put in to vehicles to regulate other regulations and all that idiocy
Posted by jonrosen
15th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Body weight? What about weight of moving parts?
The attention to reducing automobile body weight is laudable. But a LOT more attentions should be paid to power plant. Nothing is such an extravagant waste of fuel energy as sending a relatively heavy piston/connecting rod combination shooting up a cylinder, stopping it dead and shooting it back down ... and doing that twice per power stroke, all multiplied by the number of cylinders.

That's one reason why electric cars are a step in the right direction: Even if the electric plant providing the electricity is coal-fired, the fact that it generates power using using a spinning turbine rather than a reciprocating internal combustion engine (ICE) means that carbon emissions per kilometre travelled by the car end up being lower (usually ... depending ...).

Range limitations make pure electric cars a somewhat unpopular option. That's why plug-in hybrids (PiH) that can do some distance on battery but use the engine when the battery runs out are so popular among people who want to achieve some improvement. But a very useful compromise would be to put a gas turbine engine in place of the ICE; that would make a PiH REALLY efficient. A small gas turbine engine -sort of like the engine driving the propeller in a turbo-prop airplane- is a good option in hybrid cars. Turbine engines are not usually a good technology fit where power has to be varied quickly and where there is a lot of idling and low power demand. But if their use is mediated by an electrical system that allows them to turn a generator at constant speed as long as there is a demand for electricity, they're great.

Problems with gas turbine engine include very high exhaust gas temperatures and noise. Both of these issues can be managed if a proper commitment is made. A waste heat recovery and noise suppression unit might possibly improve the vehicles efficiency even further. It might be a little bit bulky, but it wouldn't be heavy. Weight is a bigger problem.
Posted by waltpalmer
15th Jan
+1 Vote
+ -
The Batmobile
The old-school one. Yes. I want. happy
Posted by dmm99
15th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Great in concept
But small gas turbines are less efficient than large ones. Lots of investment would have to be made to make them truly energy efficient. I think you could get similar efficiency with less cost looking at a linear combustion engine with the alternator an integral part of the housing and piston. This way much of the inertia could be recovered through the alternator and compressing the next stroke charge.
Posted by colinnwn
15th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Jaguar C-X75
Jaguar C-X75 is an hybrid-electric, two-seat, concept car from Jaguar which debuted at the 2010 Paris Motor Show. The C-X75 concept produces 778 horsepower through four electric motors, each of which drives one of the four wheels. The batteries driving these motors are recharged using two diesel-fed micro gas turbines instead of a conventional four-stroke engine.
Posted by mfinca
24th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Race cars & consumer cars
Ok, but this is again a bit ignorant of a long history -- our two old Jaguars have engines based on 1919 racing designs -- the '68 Jaguar XJ6 was the 1st production car to have double-overhead cams, hemispherical combustion chambers (the hemi wasn't Chrysler invention) and It even pioneered IRS, which it also sold to Aston Martin so hey could make James Bond's 1st car.

So,as is common in Interweb pipes & tubes today, ignorance of the past leads to silly belief in present superiorities and amazements.

Intelligence means looking into the past as well as the future for good ideas.
Posted by DrAlexC
15th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
opposite of truth
I do not follow the racing industry, but as far as I know, race cars have always been against innovation in cars. I believe they have strict limits on what is allowed, such as engine size, engine type, frame dimensions, etc. They restrict any innovation. When turbine cars with 4 wheel drive and automatic transmissions outperformed conventional racing cars, they were immediately banned from competition. To say race cars inspire anything in new cars is ridiculous and opposite of the truth!
Posted by stans67
15th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
You are right, you don't follow the racing industry.
Limiting engine size fosters innovation in that you need to get more power out of the same size engine, rather than just plonking a larger engine in. Hence things like multiple overhead cams, turbocharging, variable valve geometry, unibody construction, disk brakes and modern tire formulations have all come from racing. When I learned to drive tires did not have anywhere near the grip of modern tires and did not last very long either. Modern all wheel drive systems ( as opposed to the WWII jeep system) were developed for the rally circuit and are still used extensively there. Turbine cars were a freaking disaster, they had a tendency to melt the front end of the car behind them as well as gas the driver into consciousnesses. Most of the limits are designed to keep speed down and are the direct result of horrendous crashes; in spite of the governing bodies best efforts, speeds creep up year after year due to intense innovation by the race teams and manufacturer sponsors. Fuel economy is golden to a racer, if you can make one less pit stop than the other drivers, you have a huge advantage over them (assuming your speed is competitive with them so you can take advantage of the time they are sitting still gassing up). So maybe you don't know much about the racing industry.
Posted by don3605
21st Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Why do we need racing for this?
They say they get the tech from racing, I say, if the car companies gave a crap, they would have been researching this stuff themselves for decades. (The 70's energy crisis is still fresh in my mind!) Instead, they ignored fuel efficiency until they had the law breathing down their backs, so now they turn to racing tech for a fast fix because it is easier than pulling their thumbs out of you know where!

I have heard the same thing about safety tech coming from the race industry. Because it would have killed some auto exec to have researched it themselves? They have factories, they have tracks, they have engineers on payroll...
Posted by michaellashinsky@...
24th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Automobile Lightweighting
Thanks for a great write-up, Tyler Falk! I think that the closing statement from Fords Matthew Zaluzec about automobile lightweighting is reflective of the entire auto industrys efforts to use plastics and other lightweight materials to reduce vehicle weight and boost fuel efficiency; not only because of the CAFE requirements (54.5 mpg by 2025), but also because of consumers increasing demands to drive cars that are green. And although the article mentions that using these lightweight materials can be costly, new developments like the ability to process model long GLASS fiber in Moldflow - the precursor to similar processes now being researched by the DOE for carbon fiber injection molded plastics of the future are allowing for quick and inexpensive carbon fiber mass production in the near future. This means even more lightweight structural parts and larger volume mass production models, without the longer cycle-times in production!

For more on carbon fiber car parts, visit: http://www.facebook.com/plasticcar and http://www.plastics-car.com/Resources/Resource-Library/Long-Glass-Fiber-Molding.html

Rob Krebs, Market Innovations, American Chemistry Council
Posted by Rob-Krebs
3rd Feb
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!