Mustang SVO to return!!!?

[Fusion2.3H]

On the other hand, even with high-grade aluminum it's tensile strength is lower then a low-grade steel.

Mild Steel Tensile Strength (Low-Grade): 300ksi
6111 T4 Aluminum Tensile Strength (High-Grade): 295

In order to get the same crash worthiness out of an aluminum chassis, they would have to use more aluminum. It could make sense to use a high grade DP980 Steel, so that the overall weight could be reduced while maintaining the crash worthiness.

[Higher Rhymes]

Originally Posted by Fusion2.3H

On the other hand, even with high-grade aluminum it's tensile strength is lower then a low-grade steel.

Mild Steel Tensile Strength (Low-Grade): 300ksi
6111 T4 Aluminum Tensile Strength (High-Grade): 295

In order to get the same crash worthiness out of an aluminum chassis, they would have to use more aluminum. It could make sense to use a high grade DP980 Steel, so that the overall weight could be reduced while maintaining the crash worthiness.

Steel frame, aluminum body FTW!

[syr74]

I find it easy to believe that a plan exists for a 3000lb, 300hp, GTDi I4 Mustang, but not for the 2010MY...the weight doesn't work out. The target weight for the GRWD Mustang GT set to debut around the 2012 or 2013 model year is 3250lb, making a 3000lb turbo four Mustang a little more likely.

[red_rider]

Originally Posted by ausrutherford

For the 2010 model year, according to a source, the Mustang will have an SVO offering. The model should be powered by a...wait for it...2.5 I4 Ecoboost MAKING 300 HP!!!! AND it will also lose 500 POUNDS over the 4.6 V8 that we have to today. Holy Crap we have a winner!

Right, the 4 banger will weigh -60 lbs

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by Fusion2.3H

http://www.ussautomotive.com/auto/steelvsal/hood.htm

Above is a quick pricing analysis comparison between aluminum and steel. I changed the prices to reflect current pricing $1.43/lb for Aluminum and and $0.56 for 10-20 Steel, non-SAE grade.

Aluminum cost : $42.32
Steel cost: $32.43
Volume: 1,440,000
Tot. Price Aluminum: $60,940,800
Tot. Price Steel: $46,699,200
Added Cost: $14,241,600
Weight Saving: 49%

3 important things to consider:
1. From that page, the weight savings of a move to Aluminum hoods from steel is about 30 pounds. That's too small to make a dent in EPA fuel ratings, which means an automaker would be spending $14,000,000 extra for no benefit. In order to really help fuel ratings, they might need to drop weight, say, 300 pounds. Then you're looking at $1,400,000,000 in added expenses.
2. Aluminum is weaker than steel. So you might need to replace 1 cubic foot of steel with (just for the sake of argument) 1.3 cubic feet of Aluminum to keep the same frame strength. That adds to your costs and reduces your weight savings.
3. Shaping the parts as you need them may cost more (or for all I know, less) with Aluminum and with steel. Some materials are easy to work with than others.

I don't mean to defend the status quo. It's not impossible that Detroit automakers have delayed a move to Aluminum and other lighter materials out of sheer idiocy.

But it's possible that cutting 5-10% off of the weight of a typical vehicle with Aluminum adds several thousand dollars to the production costs.

[big swede]

Originally Posted by Michael_S

3 important things to consider:
1. From that page, the weight savings of a move to Aluminum hoods from steel is about 30 pounds. That's too small to make a dent in EPA fuel ratings, which means an automaker would be spending $14,000,000 extra for no benefit. In order to really help fuel ratings, they might need to drop weight, say, 300 pounds. Then you're looking at $1,400,000,000 in added expenses.
2. Aluminum is weaker than steel. So you might need to replace 1 cubic foot of steel with (just for the sake of argument) 1.3 cubic feet of Aluminum to keep the same frame strength. That adds to your costs and reduces your weight savings.
3. Shaping the parts as you need them may cost more (or for all I know, less) with Aluminum and with steel. Some materials are easy to work with than others.

I don't mean to defend the status quo. It's not impossible that Detroit automakers have delayed a move to Aluminum and other lighter materials out of sheer idiocy.

But it's possible that cutting 5-10% off of the weight of a typical vehicle with Aluminum adds several thousand dollars to the production costs.

And that's why I will believe it when I see it. For one the the author is the one who said COULD lose 500lbs. This is not Ford giving a target weight this is an author who probably knows next to nothing about car weights and how big of an issue it is to drop that kind of weight. I will stick with my 3300lbs until I see proof. Hopefully I'm wrong and we will see a Mustang that weighs the same as a loaded Turbo Cobalt... yeah right.

[ausrutherford]

Originally Posted by big swede

And that's why I will believe it when I see it. For one the the author is the one who said COULD lose 500lbs. This is not Ford giving a target weight this is an author who probably knows next to nothing about car weights and how big of an issue it is to drop that kind of weight. I will stick with my 3300lbs until I see proof. Hopefully I'm wrong and we will see a Mustang that weighs the same as a loaded Turbo Cobalt... yeah right.

Since this was on a Mustang fan site, they usually know how the engineering of the Mustang by the heart, because they have themselves done work on their Stangs. Plus they have a source who would know if this was the target weight.

[syr74]

Guys (and gals), I'll say it again.....the error here isn't with the possibility of the option package or the target weight/hp it rests with the stated target production date. The 300hp GTDi four wont be in full scale production in time for a 2010MY intro, and the projected weights only work with the GRWD Mustang which has a target weight of 3250lb for the V8 manual model. A GTDi four Mustang is a very likely possibility, but it wont be a 2010MY car. Think more like the 2012MY and you'll be on the money.

[igor]

Originally Posted by ausrutherford

Since this was on a Mustang fan site, they usually know how the engineering of the Mustang by the heart, because they have themselves done work on their Stangs. Plus they have a source who would know if this was the target weight.

rofl

I have been around the car rumor industry for about 2 years now and already know that most rumors end up being very much exagerrated -especaily by fan sites ...

Igor

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by ausrutherford

Since this was on a Mustang fan site, they usually know how the engineering of the Mustang by the heart, because they have themselves done work on their Stangs. Plus they have a source who would know if this was the target weight.

If you have nothing better to do with your free time, go through old posts on this site and read predictions about GM models, their weights, and their engines. You will find thousands of ridiculously optimistic posts, even from some people who claim to have insider information.

[Stéphane Dumas]

Also, I wonder if this upcoming I4-turbo will be allowed to use E85 fuel? Since the E85 is less cheaper then Premium fuel and E85 can use higher octane level and higher compression rates. It can be interesting to see

[mooseman]

I really don't understand why people feel it would be so tough to get a GTDI 2.5L I4 down under 3100 lbs. I don't have the specs on a standard GT wheel, but with those big fat spokes I'd guess they weigh over 30lbs, prolly on the neighborhood of 32-35lbs each. Replace them with lightweight wheels and you save easily 10lbs each. I'm assuming the GT comes with a spare tire. Been pretty standard practice lately to make those optional. There is 60lbs. So, in wheels tires alone you've managed 100+ lbs off.

Aluminum hood- 25-30lbs. Aluminum trunk lid- 15-20lbs. 2 high strength steel fenders up front- 5 lbs each, maybe? Thats 50-60lbs.

Replace cast iron brake calipers with alu ones? Multi-piece rotors with alu hats instead of a solid cast iron one? Cast alu or tubular steel suspension parts?

Dunno, seems there are plenty of easy places to shave 1-2-3 lbs here and there without resorting to reengineering the entire car. Sure, it costs more money, but Ford hasn't exactly had trouble moving higher dollar specialty Stangs. If Ford offered a 300+hp 3000lb "Track" SVO 'Stang, I don't think they'd have any problem moving them as fast as GT500s. Plenty of guys would line up for a Stang that weighed almost 1000lbs less than the GT500.

[igor]

^^ 32 - 35? what do you think they are made of - lead?

I know they are not lightweight - but nything above 28lbs per wheel is ridiculous.
even then - say you put in some super 18lb wheels - you justsaved 40 lbs - not 300. and Turbo always requires a lot of plumbing which is heavy.

besides stripping interior, installing aluminum body panels and redesigning the whole car, there really is not way to cut 300 lbs from a well designed car - and the Mustang might not be perfect, but it is not overweight (compare to Camaro and Challenger)

Igor

[mooseman]

Originally Posted by igor

^^ 32 - 35? what do you think they are made of - lead?

I know they are not lightweight - but nything above 28lbs per wheel is ridiculous.
even then - say you put in some super 18lb wheels - you justsaved 40 lbs - not 300. and Turbo always requires a lot of plumbing which is heavy.

besides stripping interior, installing aluminum body panels and redesigning the whole car, there really is not way to cut 300 lbs from a well designed car - and the Mustang might not be perfect, but it is not overweight (compare to Camaro and Challenger)

Igor

I've seen plenty of aluminum wheels that weigh in that range. But, as you say, even if they do only save 40lbs on 4 wheels, plus 60lbs for the the spare and associated bits like jack and tire iron, thats 100lbs. So, now you're at 3200lbs. From what I've read Ford already uses aluminum on the hood and front and rear control arms, so those are out in the calculation. But trunk lid and fenders are still in. 25 lb savings for all 3 parts, cosnervatively. 3175 lbs now. But, I've also read that Ford saved 75lbs by using an alu block on the 4.6 rather than cast iron. So, how much more do you think a cast iron block for a 4.0L V6 weighs than a 2.5L alu I4?

75lbs? Probably more since there is only 1 bank with no valley? 100lbs? 1 set of cams rather than 2, 1 set of heads, headers, exhaust manifold? 2 feweer con rods and pistons, shorter crank, smaller cam chain, etc. 150lbs? More? You get the point. Now add back in the turbo plumbing. I haven't a clue what that would weigh. 75? So, another 75lbs lighter. So we're at 3100lbs. Alu calipers and alu hatted disk rotors? 7.5lbs per wheel? 3070lbs. Done.

Sub 3100lbs is well within reach. 3000? A bit more work. Maybe an alu roof, lighter seats, etc.