2014 Ford Flex Limited W/ecoboost on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel

When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.

An in-depth look at the Ford GT with Xcar

Ford made big waves when it unveiled the new GT at the Detroit Auto Show this past January. But as far as details go, it's been rather quiet. Though Dearborn has revealed what engine will sit between those buttresses, it hasn't told us exactly how many horses or torques it will produce, or precisely how fast we should expect it to propel the new all-American supercar. Fortunately, the automaker let the crew at Xcar into the studio to give us a quick, four-minute rundown of all the information that is out there at the moment, along with all the most intriguing angles of the vehicle's design. The historically savvy among us will already know that the new 2016 Ford GT traces its roots back to the GT40 that conquered Le Mans half a century ago, and through the previous Ford GT that debuted a decade ago. Both of those featured V8 engines (supercharged in the latter case) while their modern successor goes with a twin-turbo V6. But as Xcar points out, six cylinders aren't without their precedence in the history of the GT-series Ford supercar: the GT70 rally car of 1970 originally packed a 2.6-liter V6. That engine was later replaced by a 1.6-liter inline-four, which puts another crack in the theory of the eight's hegemony over the history of the series – as does, we'll point out, the Bugatti-like quad-turbo V12 that featured in the GT90 concept of 1995 that sadly never made production. The point is that divergence from V8 tradition shouldn't dissuade anyone from getting excited over the arrival of the new GT, and we're looking forward to seeing what she can do – on and off the track. Related Video: