Post by: netcoyote on July 26, 2012, 01:10:50 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303612804577531282227138686.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303612804577531282227138686.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories)
July 26, 2012, 3:36 p.m. ET
Ford Plans New Pickup With Aluminum Body to Boost Mileage
ALLEN PARK, Mich.—In this suburb just west of Detroit, Ford Motor Co. F -0.17% is working on one of the biggest gambles in its 108-year history: a pickup truck with a largely aluminum body.
The radical redesign will help meet tougher federal fuel-economy targets now starting to have wide-ranging effects on Detroit's auto makers. But Ford will have to overcome a host of manufacturing obstacles, plus convince die-hard pickup buyers that aluminum is as tough as steel.
Ford is hoping the switch to the lighter metal will cut the weight of its F-150 truck by about 700 pounds, according to Ford executives familiar with the company's plans. That is roughly a 15% reduction for the F-150, which is the company's most popular pickup in the U.S., favored by farmers and suburbanites alike. Such a reduction would enable Ford's trucks to go farther on a gallon of gasoline, and open the door to other changes, such as the use of smaller engines, that can further boost fuel economy. Along with the aluminum makeover, the new F-150 also is getting a more muscular look, according to one Ford designer.
In the summer of 2011, the Obama administration pushed through new fuel-economy regulations that would require the U.S. vehicle fleet to average 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. The requirements ramp up fuel economy goals for vehicles of different sizes each year.
The new Ford truck is being designed to come out in 2014 capable of hitting the increasing fuel economy standards through 2020, one of the executives familiar with its plans said. That would equate to roughly a 25% improvement in fuel economy. One of Ford's most popular trucks, the 2012 F-150 four-wheel drive with the 3.5-liter V6 engine, now gets 17 miles per gallon combined city and highway mileage.
The aluminum body is being used for the F-150 only; the larger F-250 and other Ford heavy trucks don't fall under the new fuel-economy standards.
There are currently 10 different versions of the F-150, starting in price from $23,500 to $49,030. Last year, Ford sold 584,917 F-series trucks of all stripes in the U.S. Ford doesn't break out sales of the F-150 from other F-series models, but the F-150 accounts for about 75% of the total, according to registration data collected by Experian Automotive.
Ford isn't giving details on the next F-150, including how much aluminum will be used. "Aluminum is certainly a big opportunity for weight reduction," on the F-150, Raj Nair, the global chief of product development, said in an interview earlier this year. "We have been public that weight reduction is going to be a big part of our strategy."
Using aluminum could put Ford in a tough competitive position against GM and Chrysler Group LLC, the other heavyweights in pickup trucks. Aluminum is more expensive than steel, and extensive use could drive up costs, cut the F-series' hefty profit margins, or push away price-sensitive customers. Aluminum also is trickier to work with. The switch will require investment in hundreds of millions of dollars in new manufacturing equipment, and the use of auto-assembly techniques that pose challenges in high-volume production.
There is also risk that Ford will offend pickup purists who want the toughest truck around, not necessarily the lightest truck around. Doug Scott, the F-150 marketing manager, said durability and reliability will be a key in the next truck, just as they are in the current model. A Ford spokesman noted Ford already uses aluminum control arms on its F-150 SVT Raptor, a four-wheel-drive truck designed for the most punishing off-road use.
Mike Shaw, who owns more than a dozen dealerships in Colorado, including those selling Chevrolet, GMC and Ford, said his truck buyers might balk at first at a truck with a lot of aluminum parts. "There is going to be a certain percentage of the people that will going to bitch and complain, but they will ultimately get that vehicle," he said. "They may hold off for a little and keep their old ones longer. Then they will buy a new one."
Post by: quadrafire on July 26, 2012, 01:17:06 PM
Post by: whacker1 on July 26, 2012, 02:01:30 PM
is it more flexible to prevent small dents or more ridgid causing more creases?
is it going to be louder or quiter with respects to road noise?
I can almost gaurantee that it will cost more to repair once damaged
lighter weight is typically better for off road applications in addition to the fuel economy, tire wear, brake wear, and suspension wear.
will it hold paint? We don't need spotted vehicles from the Flaky Ford, Chevy, and Dodges of the 80"s
Can you polish it like huntphools boat? :chuckle:
Post by: Curly on July 26, 2012, 02:26:17 PM
Post by: whacker1 on July 26, 2012, 02:41:27 PM
Someday congress will figure out that emission requirements per gall of fuel does not make sense unless you balance it against mileage. 50% cleaner emissions does not balance if you are required to burn 50% more fuel to achieve those emissions.
Why does a 1984 Chevy Citation get 32 mpg and yet the current advertisements for vehicles are 32 mpg?
This is my favorite argument for despising government, and i will step down off my soap box now...
Post by: JimmyHoffa on July 26, 2012, 02:55:21 PM
As for paint, I'd imagine they could just do the anodized paint for it; any idea what the costs for a body panel would be to anodize (just a primer base)?
Post by: jeepasaurusrex on July 26, 2012, 03:05:33 PM
Post by: magnanimous_j on July 26, 2012, 03:09:47 PM
Why does a 1984 Chevy Citation get 32 mpg and yet the current advertisements for vehicles are 32 mpg?
Race a 1984 Chevy Citation against a 2012 Ford Focus with 19" alloys, full electronics suite, AC blasting. Notice how smoother and quieter the ride in the focus is, how you just smoked the Citation and then see how much cleaner the emissions are.
More to the story than straight MPG.
Post by: whacker1 on July 26, 2012, 03:28:21 PM
Why does a 1984 Chevy Citation get 32 mpg and yet the current advertisements for vehicles are 32 mpg?
Race a 1984 Chevy Citation against a 2012 Ford Focus with 19" alloys, full electronics suite, AC blasting. Notice how smoother and quieter the ride in the focus is, how you just smoked the Citation and then see how much cleaner the emissions are.
More to the story than straight MPG.
I don't disagree with your analysis.
But take a 2011 F-250 6.7 Powerstroke and drop the 9 feet of emissions off the exhaust, add a programmer and pick up 100-150 hp and 200-250 foot lbs of torque and add 4.5 miles per gallon on average. 500+ hp and 1000 foot lbs of torque. 18-19 mpg in town and 22-24 mpg on the highway.
This emmissions argument needs the priorities re-focussed. Emissions are important, but at what cost?
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 27, 2012, 10:12:49 AM
Post by: Atroxus on July 27, 2012, 10:37:12 AM
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 27, 2012, 10:56:51 AM
If it's good enough to use in aircraft, I don't see any reason not to use it in cars/trucks. :dunno:
I think it can be used in places where it is not exposed to corrosion. I recently sols a 1995 Miata that had an aluminum hood, mainly to keep the weight/balance of the car as close to 50%x50% front to rear axle as possible. This was so critical to the handling characteristics of the car that owners were warned that if the hood needed to be replaced, not to accept the cost-saving steel replacement hood, as it would make the car drive like a truck. OK for a truck, but not a sports car. :chuckle:
Post by: Miles on July 27, 2012, 10:59:33 AM
If it's good enough to use in aircraft, I don't see any reason not to use it in cars/trucks. :dunno:
I think it can be used in places where it is not exposed to corrosion. I recently sols a 1995 Miata that had an aluminum hood, mainly to keep the weight/balance of the car as close to 50%x50% front to rear axle as possible. This was so critical to the handling characteristics of the car that owners were warned that if the hood needed to be replaced, not to accept the cost-saving steel replacement hood, as it would make the car drive like a truck. OK for a truck, but not a sports car. :chuckle:
Are you implying that the Miata is a sports car? :chuckle:
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 27, 2012, 11:10:52 AM
If it's good enough to use in aircraft, I don't see any reason not to use it in cars/trucks. :dunno:
I think it can be used in places where it is not exposed to corrosion. I recently sols a 1995 Miata that had an aluminum hood, mainly to keep the weight/balance of the car as close to 50%x50% front to rear axle as possible. This was so critical to the handling characteristics of the car that owners were warned that if the hood needed to be replaced, not to accept the cost-saving steel replacement hood, as it would make the car drive like a truck. OK for a truck, but not a sports car. :chuckle:
Are you implying that the Miata is a sports car? :chuckle:
Yup, 4 cylinder engine, rear wheel drive, and with the right tires it cornered like it had Velcro on the wheels. Put a tubocharger and suspension kit on it and you had the performance of a Honda S, and still had $1,000 in your pocket. Not much of an off-road vehicle, though. :chuckle: Sold it to the wife of a friend who had an MG years ago. She loves it. :tup:
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on July 27, 2012, 12:13:03 PM
Yeah, body work is probably going to be real expensive..............thus insurance rates maybe expensive as well. Too bad they can't simply use diesel motors like they use overseas and get 30+ mpg.........
Then they would have to raise fuel taxes to cover the loss of revenue and no politician wants to take credit for raising the cost of an already over priced commodity.
Post by: Dhoey07 on July 27, 2012, 12:20:56 PM
If it's good enough to use in aircraft, I don't see any reason not to use it in cars/trucks. :dunno:
I think it can be used in places where it is not exposed to corrosion. I recently sols a 1995 Miata that had an aluminum hood, mainly to keep the weight/balance of the car as close to 50%x50% front to rear axle as possible. This was so critical to the handling characteristics of the car that owners were warned that if the hood needed to be replaced, not to accept the cost-saving steel replacement hood, as it would make the car drive like a truck. OK for a truck, but not a sports car. :chuckle:
Are you implying that the Miata is a sports car? :chuckle:
Yup, 4 cylinder engine, rear wheel drive, and with the right tires it cornered like it had Velcro on the wheels. Put a tubocharger and suspension kit on it and you had the performance of a Honda S, and still had $1,000 in your pocket. Not much of an off-road vehicle, though. :chuckle: Sold it to the wife of a friend who had an MG years ago. She loves it. :tup:
Sounds cool.......Except it's a miata :chuckle:
Post by: NRA4LIFE on July 27, 2012, 12:23:38 PM
Post by: jeepasaurusrex on July 27, 2012, 01:19:11 PM
Post by: bearpaw on July 27, 2012, 01:51:48 PM
Post by: whacker1 on July 27, 2012, 01:55:09 PM
I would like to see a 4x4 pickup that gets 30+ mpg, I don't care what it's made of as long as it is reliable and cheap to operate. It really upsets me when I go to NZ/AU and everyone is driving new diesel toyota and nissan pickups that get 30+ and they can't sell them in the USA. :bash:
:yeah:
Post by: farmin4u_98948 on July 27, 2012, 04:26:20 PM
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 27, 2012, 07:11:45 PM
Isn't the Miata the official pace vehicle for the gay pride parade? :chuckle: :chuckle:
No, Subaru takes all honors as the vehicle of choice for the gays and lesbians! :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: wraithen on July 28, 2012, 09:56:16 AM
Post by: washelkhunter on July 28, 2012, 10:26:30 AM
:yeah:I would like to see a 4x4 pickup that gets 30+ mpg, I don't care what it's made of as long as it is reliable and cheap to operate. It really upsets me when I go to NZ/AU and everyone is driving new diesel toyota and nissan pickups that get 30+ and they can't sell them in the USA. :bash:
:yeah:
Im jonesen for a diesel tacoma or wrangler! :tup:
Post by: Dhoey07 on July 28, 2012, 11:02:52 AM
Isn't the Miata the official pace vehicle for the gay pride parade? :chuckle: :chuckle:
No, Subaru takes all honors as the vehicle of choice for the gays and lesbians! :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Because a miata is wayyyyyyyy less gay than a STI
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 28, 2012, 06:25:50 PM
Post by: wraithen on July 28, 2012, 06:32:51 PM
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 28, 2012, 07:01:29 PM
The ranger may die but I doubt the b2000 mazda will. If it does someone will come along with a similar design.
The Ranger and Mazda pickups come off the same assembly line. They are exactly the same truck except for some sheet metal and interior parts. They must have something to replace the Rangers because they have been one of the best selling models ever. I figure they just couldn't put all the computerized crap in the old Ranger design, so they have to redesign and rename it.
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on July 28, 2012, 10:00:28 PM
Actually Toyota messed up when they made em
Bigger, why get a mile or two better per gallon than a full size for a smaller truck at almost the same price?!! The old Tacomas rocked!!!!
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 29, 2012, 12:39:01 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on July 29, 2012, 01:09:34 PM
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on July 29, 2012, 01:49:31 PM
Nows the time to p/up a good used ranger, the demand and price is only going to go up.
:yeah: Don't think that I haven't considered it!
Post by: predatorpro on August 02, 2012, 12:53:44 PM
Is aluminum any less durable than the plastic that my 150 body already has? The bed won't even hold a magnet.aluminum has a memory...so no i would never buy a truck with an aluminum frame!
Post by: wraithen on August 02, 2012, 12:58:23 PM
Is aluminum any less durable than the plastic that my 150 body already has? The bed won't even hold a magnet.aluminum has a memory...so no i would never buy a truck with an aluminum frame!
Splain please. Do you mean it wants to revert back to previous shapes? Or that it will corrode quickly?
Post by: magnanimous_j on August 02, 2012, 01:03:34 PM
The Ranger and Mazda pickups come off the same assembly line. They are exactly the same truck except for some sheet metal and interior parts. They must have something to replace the Rangers because they have been one of the best selling models ever. I figure they just couldn't put all the computerized crap in the old Ranger design, so they have to redesign and rename it.
I sold Fords for 4 years and I love the ranger (I owned 2). But it was an old design, got terrible gas mileage for the power output, and was almost as expensive as an F-150.
Ford isn't dumb, they'll come out with another small truck.
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on August 02, 2012, 01:33:40 PM
I sold Fords for 4 years and I love the ranger (I owned 2). But it was an old design, got terrible gas mileage for the power output, and was almost as expensive as an F-150.
Ford isn't dumb, they'll come out with another small truck.
I hope so. I too owned 2 Rangers. The first was a 1984 with the 2.8 v-6 (semi-OK, 27 mpg.) The second was a 1991 with the 2.9 fuel injected V-6. (Great engine, 28 mpg with a tailwind!) Sadly, at only 183,000 miles, it got totalled in an accident. Didn't realize what a wonderful vehicle I had until I lost it!