This morning Ford called the Wall Street Journal's suggestions "premature." The company said it is looking at many ways to reach the 54.4 mpg target by 2025 and that a fully aluminum pickup truck is likely to have many things working against it. One expert in a Detroit News article, documenting Ford's refute, said there would be significant extra expenses in designing, building and repairing any vehicle that uses a lot of aluminum.

For now, it doesn't look like we'll get an all-aluminum truck anytime soon, but we can expect more experimentation in certain suspension, frame and body panel components, looking for the right balance that keeps the strength but loses the weight.

From PickupTrucks.com: http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2012/07...the-works.html

-------

Analysts said Ford may add other aluminum body components in its next-generation truck, but said an aluminum body is not practical.

"You may see Ford use aluminum fenders, you may see aluminum door skins, but you're not going to see an aluminum pickup," said Jim Hall, analyst with 2953 Analytics LLP. "Full-aluminum structured vehicles are much more expensive to insure because they are much more expensive to repair," he said, adding that most body shops cannot work on aluminum cars."

A Ford source confirmed the company is looking at using more aluminum components on its new pickup, but added that design has not been finalized.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz21rbIP6eu

 

54.4 mpg???? Is that even physically possible???

 

I was thinking the same thing

 

Its a manufacturer-wide MPG target set by CAFE. It means every model vehicle that Ford builds has to have an average of 54.4mpg. Here's a short example:

Fiesta-40
F-150-17
Explorer-22
-----------------
2012 Average: 26.3 mpg

I'm sure that number would be higher if we calculated every vehicle Ford currently offers, but still nowhere near 54.5mpg so the guys up top need to release some electric cars or something.

 

This administration determined it must happen so it must happen. If it is possible fine. If it is not possible that doesn't matter it must happen. I think we are going to see much smaller and lighter cars with less performance in the coming years. Similar to the early/mid 70s with the oil embargo.

 

I think it is good for competition to push technology, and in this case, its good to make the engineers struggle to achieve a tough goal. The United States put a man on the moon only because we had competition and set very tough goals.

I support this CAFE mandate. If global conditions push fuel prices up over $5-7/gallon in the US by 2025, consumers would literally be screaming for 50+ mpg vehicles. We all love our trucks, but the percentage of households that can cashflow $600 per month in gas for a single vehicle isn't high. I know it adds cost to vehicles up front, but we should see the savings over the operating life of the vehicles.

Back on original topic, I'm sure there are a lot of parts on my 2012 that ARE Al, and more that could be converted once engineering has solved some problems. I say bring it on!

-Andy

 

Mark Levine touched on this today. Starts at the 50 minute mark of the August 2, 2012 show.

Isn't that neat? Lighter and lighter F-150's. What is the problem with this? What happens with the law of physics? What happens to human beings in accidents when vehicles are lighter and lighter and lighter? What happens when you replace steel with more and more aluminum, plastics and rubber? More and more people die on our roads. Study after study show this. 10's of thousands of people die due to these CAFE standards over the years.

CAFE standards were first put in place in the 1970's in response to OPEC and gasoline line shortages. That's 40 years ago. Now they have become the holy grail of environmentalists. We want better and better mileage. Well something has to give because the law of physics isn't going to change. So they make these vehicles lighter and lighter and smaller and smaller and hence more and more dangerous.

I don't care how many more air bags it has, You hit another car. You hit a deer. You hit a tree. the injuries are going to be more severe and there are going to be a lot more deaths. They are being directed by Washington beaurocrats and politicians to build trucks that are more and more dangeorus.

And here's the kicker. CAFE standards do not work! You don't save gas. As people go further on mile of gas, they drive more because they can afford to drive more. Yes, CAFE standards. No, more and more death traps thanks to the good folks in Washington.

http://marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930

What we need to do is repeal CAFE standards and let Ford and these other manufacturers build what they want to build and let the public buy what they want and not buy what they don't want and let that shape the kind of cars/trucks/F-150's that are made in this country rather than people like Algore and a bunch of liberals dictating what kind of F-150 we have to have. It's a free market.

You want to save on gas, eliminate CAFE, start drilling and get a real energy policy in this county.

 

No, but that's the point. If they fail to reach that goal they will have to pay a huge fine. It will eventually become a cost of doing business and handed down to the customer.

Good, more cars like the little miatas. They are a blast to drive.


The problem is that everyone thinks they are entitled to drive a huge truck all the time. Look around and ask yourself what the average person hauls in the bed of their truck most. I can tell you that it isn't lumber, stone or other building materials or anything heavy and bulky for that matter. The average person hauls empty space around. You don't need to be hauling empty space.

 

What does entitlement have to do with the fact that making everything lighter and lighter is going to make them less safe? Also some people have no choice but to own one vehicle due to $$$. So if that one vehicle happens to be a truck, they have little choice but to drive it most of the time. My Dad refuses to get a small car because he has problems getting in and out of them due to how low they sit to the ground.

 

This is just cluelessness shining through. Lighter doesn't necessarily equal death trap. There was a test of a 50's Impala versus a early 2000's Impala. The old car weighed more, but the occupants didn't fare nearly as well as in the newer car.

Sure, if you have similar vehicles today one weighs 6000 lbs and the other weighs 4000 lbs, common sense says the larger vehicle is going to win in a head-on collision. But it all has to do with the crash structure of the vehicle. There are so many variables in place that you can't just say the people in the heavier vehicle are going to be safer. It's just not the case. Plus, how many crashes are head-on collisions? And, there are a lot of semis on the road...how come all of us aren't dead since we drive smaller vehicles? Seriously, this argument is just BS!

Here is the video...it is a Malibu, not Impala.


and info on the video


That 54.5 mpg number is not the window sticker number. It is some adjusted number for CAFE purposes, including credits for E85, etc. I think the actual number (as it correlates to stickers) is somewhere around 30 or so. It's still high, but not that far off when you think about the small cars that Ford sells. Also, it is weighted by the number of vehicles sold. You can just average the numbers, you have to take the number of vehicles of each type sold in the average, and the fuel economy of each of those sales. Now you know why the 6.2L in the F150 is a pricey option.

I'm not saying I agree with CAFE standards, just stating some facts to clear up the incorrect info that's being spewed around.

 

The fuel regulations are a result of the high number of large vehicles on the road that don't need to be there, the consumer based side of the equation. Many people are capable of driving a car but because they can afford to drive the truck they do so, these people are the target. The government is not allowed (yet) to tell people what they can and cannot drive. In order to reduce the use of heavy, fuel inefficient vehicles they set fuel economy standards unreasonably high knowing that a truck capable of doing its job will not reach it. Since there will still be a need, production will only be cut back rather than stopped. Large fines will be used against manufacturers making the vehicles that do not meet the criteria. The fines will be passed down to the consumer and push the market away from large vehicle production. This will force consumers to buy fuel efficient vehicles since the heavier vehicles will be much more expensive. Since the technology cannot be advanced enough to meet the standards they must attempt to improve at every possible opportunity, weight being a relatively cheap way.

...but that is just my little conspiracy theory. A government discouraging something by making it too expensive to own is completely unheard of (sarcasm).

 

I for one do not want my truck to be lighter. Pulling my trailers (I have 4 of them for different uses), I want to be sure there is enough *** in the truck to not get pushed off the road. I do not feel safe hauling over 7,000k even if the sticker shows it can.

I do not need a 3/4 ton and the F150 is just fine for my needs. If they keep lightening the trucks, you will see more people opt for the 250's to do the job.

 

Honestly, if you need to tow more than 7k regularly, you should have a 3/4 ton truck. 1/2 ton trucks have gotten too big (IMO) due to the 'mine is bigger' wars from the manufacturers. Ford needs to lower the tow ratings of the F150, lighten the F250 to make it a tad smaller to fill the niche of the heavier F150, and let the F350+ handle huge towing duty.

This coming from someone that wishes the F150 could tow my fifth wheel (and I would feel safe doing it).

 

Given my 05 weighs much more than my 01 did, I would not mind a bit lighter of a truck.

 

Interesting attempt with the video comparison but you have to use identical cars and not a really old outdated 50's Impala. Better materials and technology can make small and lighter vehicles safer than they would otherwise be, however those same materials also make bigger vehicles s safer than they would have been as well. All other things being equal, bigger/heavier vehicles are still safer and ligther and lighter vehicles cause more deaths. The research shows this.

On entitltements, why are temporary politicians who know nothing about designing and building vehicles entiled to tell us what we should drive based on a false premise?

CAFE does nothing to save gas.

Manmade global warming is a hoax.

Competition makes cars/trucks better, not government.

Most if not all of our problems can be traced to government intrusion, (see Fannie Mae, Education, Obamacare, etc).