[rajess_in]

Originally Posted by sidindica

I was shocked to see the alto's brochure quoted kerb weight of 705 kg for the 800 cc version. Thats about light as the omni. The k10 weighs at 760 kg, whereas the F8D had about similar weight 4-5 years ago.safety? care a damn.

Rightly pointed out. As long as the law requiring an feature / safety arrangement is made mandatory, no one cares to add them or provide them.

ABS in trucks was introduced only when law enforcing their mandatory usage came.

[muni]

Originally Posted by rajess_in

Kindly note that all steels weigh the same as their density is same. What really matters is their tensile strength (at which they break / failure starts) or rather their Yeild Strength (condition at which they permanently deform) will vary depedning on their type.

For the same load, performance, life, durability and strength normal steels will be much thicker compared to their High Strength counterparts. This is the basis for the weight difference between them.



By using this type of steel, the manufacturer (in this case Ford) would save a lot of metal to give the same amount of performance, safety, durabillity. since Boron steel, as rightly pointed by you has more tensile strength. In fact it can be made into one of the toughest steel sheet by employing the Hot Stamping process.

But at the same time the Boron steel costs a real bomb compared to the normal steels. Hence the high pricing of the car.

But IMHO the car is over priced a bit compared to what it actually should.

What parts do you think ford would have used this material in the car. Am sure they wouldnt have used it extensively for the car. Am just curious to know which parts would really matter for the high tensile strength to matter.

[Gansan]

Originally Posted by Aroy

That said, assuming MUL produces 1 million cars, a reduction of 1 gram weight is reduction of 1,000,000 g or 1,000kg or 1 ton. Now what metal costs 137 crores/ton (= 13L/kg or 13,000/10g) that is nearly the price of gold.

Just the right time to sell my 600+kg Alto K10 and get at least 100 crores!

I think their drive was to reduce 1 gram per component supplied by vendors.

[rajess_in]

Originally Posted by muni

What parts do you think ford would have used this material in the car. Am sure they wouldnt have used it extensively for the car. Am just curious to know which parts would really matter for the high tensile strength to matter.

I have not been part of their team to give the necessary details.

Refer the below pictures for some idea of about where these are used. The second picture is that of the Fiesta Europe. Hope this explains your query.

[muni]

Originally Posted by rajess_in

I have not been part of their team to give the necessary details.

Refer the below pictures for some idea of about where these are used. The second picture is that of the Fiesta Europe. Hope this explains your query.

Thanks. Looks like these play an extensive role in absorbing the energy during a impact/collision and also provide structural rigidity.

[dot]

Originally Posted by Ascari

For example BMW uses lighter aluminium for the fendor,bonnet and the boot lid.They are now using high strength steel in key areas.

Not just high quality metal but they (BMW and others) are also using composite structural parts which have higher strength to weight values than conventional metal.

[vinya_jag]

Reducing weight was done a long way as a concept.
But the sad part is that none of those technologies came into any of our cars here. Thanks to low margins.

The usual aluminium body frame, magnesium alloys are not even an option on our cars here. They cost a whole lot which the resulting fuel efficiency will never even out.

A simple aluminium bodied car might even cost a lakh more than a steel built car, and if it reduces the weight by 100 Kilos, and the fuel efficiency improves by say 2 Kmpl, it still would not make sense for an average buyer to afford the car.

Carbon fiber body parts and Kevlar fuel tanks will not even make it into India if this is the case.

Here was a concept done some 10 years back (Which I loved), and had a lot of common sense ideas that could have made it into our cars, but yes, the margins again :(

Daewoo Mirae - Interior | ConceptCar

For now atleast, we are a volume driven, low margin market, which will see systems designed to solve a very different problem making into our cars. Hope there will be a shift

[Lalvaz]

Originally Posted by rajess_in

Kindly note that all steels weigh the same as their density is same. What really matters is their tensile strength (at which they break / failure starts) or rather their Yeild Strength (condition at which they permanently deform) will vary depedning on their type.

For the same load, performance, life, durability and strength normal steels will be much thicker compared to their High Strength counterparts. This is the basis for the weight difference between them.



By using this type of steel, the manufacturer (in this case Ford) would save a lot of metal to give the same amount of performance, safety, durabillity. since Boron steel, as rightly pointed by you has more tensile strength. In fact it can be made into one of the toughest steel sheet by employing the Hot Stamping process.

But at the same time the Boron steel costs a real bomb compared to the normal steels. Hence the high pricing of the car.

But IMHO the car is over priced a bit compared to what it actually should.

So, can you then explain why the same car weighs less in India? Is it because the Indian car is safer and uses high tensile steel while the Australian/Jap car uses normal steel? Really?

[Ascari]

@Lalvaz It maybe lighter due to lesser equipment levels.Lesser number of airbags,lesser equipment,trim,engine model etc,you never know!

Or maybe they reduce the weight to earn the respect of Indian consumers who are only after what you call it "FUEL EFFICIENCY"

[ukderebail]

Originally Posted by aaren

Sorry for being OT but this certainly would have been a scary experience. Hope nothing serious happened.

Having said that did you report this to Maruti and if yes, what was their reply?

Well i reported the first instance of skidding while going to tirupathi to Maruti guys. The concerned showed me a demo video of ABS system, which virtually shows the skidding to the right, whereas my vehicle veered towards left, which was not comprehended by him, by logical deduction it had shifted gravitationally towards left because two passengers were seated on the left, whereas demo had only driver on the right. But second one i did not approach them for a solid reason. I personally feel all scientific theories may not apply to Indian road condition which is already filled with slippery gravel or sand and further with light tyres brakes do have limitation in rainy season particularly.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by ukderebail

With tubeless tyres unless one has ABS system one is bound to meet with accidents.

What's the connection between tubeless tyres & accidents?

[ukderebail]

Originally Posted by carboy

What's the connection between tubeless tyres & accidents?

If you compare the thread on tubeless tyres, its thickness is much lesser than the regular rubber tyres, the feel of the tubeless tyres is more of plastic compound according to me. Finally the weight per se of tubeless is much lesser. It naturally has effect on the braking power.

[HotChillyPepper]

Originally Posted by Aroy

Actually lighter vehicle will stop faster!

Well said. Mass plays an important role in inertia. As the mass goes up the inertia too.

[AbhiJ]

Originally Posted by ukderebail

If you compare the thread on tubeless tyres, its thickness is much lesser than the regular rubber tyres, the feel of the tubeless tyres is more of plastic compound according to me. Finally the weight per se of tubeless is much lesser. It naturally has effect on the braking power.

You are wrong on so many levels .... Let me start

1) The tread depth on a tyre is not based on the fact whether its tube or non tube type. It is simply design. The Michelin XM1+ are tubeless and have very deep tread depth. Also, tread is generally a decent wear indicator. It is not an absolute measure of grip / braking. On a dry surface, slick tyres actually perform better !

2) Regardless of what you feel, there is no plastic in the tyre compound - Tubed or Tubeless. At least not yet.

The feel might differ because of cheapening (reducing rubber %) but that is irrespective of whether a tyre is tubeless / tubed. In fact the inner most layer of the tube less tyre is usually butyle - A Synthetic Rubber.

3) Weight of the car / tyre does not help in braking. k.e. = 1/2 x m x v^2. It is in fact inverse. The more the weight, the more kinetic energy it has and hence requires more stopping.

4) Tyre companies are spending millions to actually further reduce weight of the tyre. Reduced weight = better. Period.

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by ukderebail

If you compare the thread on tubeless tyres, its thickness is much lesser than the regular rubber tyres, the feel of the tubeless tyres is more of plastic compound according to me. Finally the weight per se of tubeless is much lesser. It naturally has effect on the braking power.

Tubeless tyres are heavier than tubed tyres because a layer of Butyle rubber is added to the inner part to retain air. Other wise both the tyres have same design. With tube the tubed tyre will be slightly heavier (to the extent of the weight of tube less butyle coating).

What you may be referring to is the older cross ply tyres, which had thicker bodies and heavier weight. This was necessitated by the design which flexed less hence needed more rubber.

Radial tyres due to their superior thermal characteristics are designed with less rubber for the same strength and speed rating, as they dissipate heat faster than bias (cross) ply tyres. So they last longer on highways, but may get shredded on rough roads and tracks faster.

Each part of the tyre - tread, bead, sidewall ... (there are more than 50 different separate part in a tyre), have different formulation. They are manufactured separately and assembled, primarily in a "tyre building machine", to give us the finished Tyre. For the same duty and speed the tyre formulation is same, so there is no question of "plastic" fee, as plastic per say is not used. What you may perceive, is that some formulations may use more synthetic rubber, which has that slick feel, but that comes in expensive tyres as synthetic rubber is way too expensive.