3 ms·

I was under the impression the bigger weight gains were not so much thanks to safety as they were due to amenities that have become essentials. Things like air

I was under the impression the bigger weight gains were not so much thanks to safety as they were due to amenities that have become essentials. Things like air conditioning, awd (if you consider it to not be strictly a safety feature), automatic transmissions, larger wheels (though many are now aluminum) and the tires for them, power steering, infotainment systems and their wiring harnesses, sun/moon roofs, bigger/more comfortable seats, etc. But emissions-related things also come to mind, such as catalytic converters, dpf/gpf, improved exhaust systems, longer exhaust piping and larger chambers, def, etc. (I did note that cars are made of lighter materials, such as fiberglass, composites, and aluminum.) Edit: I do think that while the range of vehicle sizes may not have changed too drastically, the probability distribution curve has. Station wagons were never “in” the way SUVs are, sedans are basically on their way out (though the newest “CUVs” are really just sedans with weird profiles and jacked high up), and pickups were not a suburban mainstay.

sliken 3y ago
Standards are rising. Cars today are quieter (more insulation), stiffer (more metal in the body), have traction control, ABS, better brakes, numerous airbags, wider tires, larger interiors, better stereos (more wiring and speakers), more catalytic converts, fuel injections, high pressure fuel pumps, better heat/cooling, etc. Easy to forget how bare cars were in the 1960s, how people tolerated terrible brakes, terrible tires, flexible bodies, crude attempts to minimize the flex problems with canted tires, etc. I've heard that 50 year old cars are often accelerate faster than new, even with 2/3rds the power because of the age, just by using current tires.
- ComputerGuru 3y ago
  Yeah, I was excluding ABS and traction control because I was only enumerating non-safety features (and including audio systems under infotainment). I’m curious how much weight airbags add – having replaced the modules before, they’re pretty lightweight… though I’m sure the numbers add up. Incidentally, you might be surprised to learn how localized some of these amenities are. In some other countries I lived in or visited, I know of “brand name” dealerships (ok, I’ll call them out, it was Chevrolet) selling cars (the same models available in the states and in Europe!) without ABS as standard – let alone traction control, automatic transmission, or (on other models?) power windows. Edit: this link has an absolutely terrific comparison of tradeoffs involved in lowering vehicle weight, compares ICE to EV weight profiles, and puts the current price per kg of weight saved for ICE vehicles at $5/kg while forecasting that EVs will reach price parity on that metric by 2030. Definitely recommend reading! https://www.lightmetalage.com/news/industry-news/automotive/electric-vehicle-material-selection-for-chassis-and-suspension-components/ https://www.lightmetalage.com/news/industry-news/automotive/...
  - sliken 3y ago
    Well safety system are required and do add a fair bit of weight/complexity and a wide range of interconnected systems. For top safety ratings you need a heavy body, reinforced in weird ways, so that even an offset collision results in quite the dance of sacrificial bending, redirecting, and even rotating the engine under the car so it doesn't penetrate the cabin. It also requires quite a few sensors, each of which are on a wiring harness that reaches all over the car including accelerators in the front bumper, explosives in the airbags, explosives in the seat belt retractor, wheel torque, acceleration, and speed sensors. The wiring harness has secondary effects as well, as a critical system it must be protected, numerous mounts, and changes to design for it's routing, protection, and of course access for a human or robot to install the harness. I noticed that in Teslas the a pillars are HUGE compared to what I'm used to in a subaru forester. Numerous suspension pieces are designed to fail in a safe way so a collision doesn't redirect the wheels or engine into the cabin. I do wonder if it's worth it, if all vehicles weighed 25% less, would there be more or less deaths? At least for bikes and pedestrians larger/heavier vehicles have cost lives.
elmerfud 3y ago
Catalytic converters were mandated by law in the 70's. So if we include the time period of the article mentions the beginning year of 1980 in the comparison of weight, by that time most cars were automatic transmissions and included air conditioning. Plus the mid-priced to upper priced vehicles did include these extra amenities such as sunroofs, power windows, power seats and so forth. If you go all the way back into the 60s this wasn't the case but the article didn't go back that far it's specifically mentioned weight differences from 1980 until essentially modern times. And if you look at cars between those time periods primarily it was safety features airbags which have a significant amount of weight added along with abs traction control and even things like crumple zones add to the weight of cars. These were all things that had come about since the I'm very late 70s and early 80s. Even things like electronic fuel injection systems were common on American built cars by the early '80s. They have become refined over time, but those refinements have allowed them to become a more efficient and lighter in weight yet overall cars have increased massively. And this weight increase is despite lighter weight composite materials and the use of aluminum in many components that were not before. In the mid '80s old engines were essentially cast iron, now it's difficult to find an engine that is not aluminum. Even in heavy duty trucks the block may be cast iron still for durability but the heads are aluminum. You mentioned exhaust systems previously exhaust was exclusively steel, now it's common that it's a titanium based alloy that is very much lighter than the steel counterparts. I think we very much underestimate the weight of components such as airbags and abs systems have in cars.
- ComputerGuru 3y ago
  Yeah, I think I was mentally doing more comparison to cars from the 70s rather than the 80s. Thanks for thinking this through “aloud” with me; I enjoyed it!

sliken 3y ago

Standards are rising. Cars today are quieter (more insulation), stiffer (more metal in the body), have traction control, ABS, better brakes, numerous airbags, wider tires, larger interiors, better stereos (more wiring and speakers), more catalytic converts, fuel injections, high pressure fuel pumps, better heat/cooling, etc. Easy to forget how bare cars were in the 1960s, how people tolerated terrible brakes, terrible tires, flexible bodies, crude attempts to minimize the flex problems with canted tires, etc. I've heard that 50 year old cars are often accelerate faster than new, even with 2/3rds the power because of the age, just by using current tires.

ComputerGuru 3y ago
Yeah, I was excluding ABS and traction control because I was only enumerating non-safety features (and including audio systems under infotainment). I’m curious how much weight airbags add – having replaced the modules before, they’re pretty lightweight… though I’m sure the numbers add up. Incidentally, you might be surprised to learn how localized some of these amenities are. In some other countries I lived in or visited, I know of “brand name” dealerships (ok, I’ll call them out, it was Chevrolet) selling cars (the same models available in the states and in Europe!) without ABS as standard – let alone traction control, automatic transmission, or (on other models?) power windows. Edit: this link has an absolutely terrific comparison of tradeoffs involved in lowering vehicle weight, compares ICE to EV weight profiles, and puts the current price per kg of weight saved for ICE vehicles at $5/kg while forecasting that EVs will reach price parity on that metric by 2030. Definitely recommend reading! https://www.lightmetalage.com/news/industry-news/automotive/electric-vehicle-material-selection-for-chassis-and-suspension-components/ https://www.lightmetalage.com/news/industry-news/automotive/...
- sliken 3y ago
  Well safety system are required and do add a fair bit of weight/complexity and a wide range of interconnected systems. For top safety ratings you need a heavy body, reinforced in weird ways, so that even an offset collision results in quite the dance of sacrificial bending, redirecting, and even rotating the engine under the car so it doesn't penetrate the cabin. It also requires quite a few sensors, each of which are on a wiring harness that reaches all over the car including accelerators in the front bumper, explosives in the airbags, explosives in the seat belt retractor, wheel torque, acceleration, and speed sensors. The wiring harness has secondary effects as well, as a critical system it must be protected, numerous mounts, and changes to design for it's routing, protection, and of course access for a human or robot to install the harness. I noticed that in Teslas the a pillars are HUGE compared to what I'm used to in a subaru forester. Numerous suspension pieces are designed to fail in a safe way so a collision doesn't redirect the wheels or engine into the cabin. I do wonder if it's worth it, if all vehicles weighed 25% less, would there be more or less deaths? At least for bikes and pedestrians larger/heavier vehicles have cost lives.

elmerfud 3y ago

Catalytic converters were mandated by law in the 70's. So if we include the time period of the article mentions the beginning year of 1980 in the comparison of weight, by that time most cars were automatic transmissions and included air conditioning. Plus the mid-priced to upper priced vehicles did include these extra amenities such as sunroofs, power windows, power seats and so forth. If you go all the way back into the 60s this wasn't the case but the article didn't go back that far it's specifically mentioned weight differences from 1980 until essentially modern times. And if you look at cars between those time periods primarily it was safety features airbags which have a significant amount of weight added along with abs traction control and even things like crumple zones add to the weight of cars. These were all things that had come about since the I'm very late 70s and early 80s. Even things like electronic fuel injection systems were common on American built cars by the early '80s. They have become refined over time, but those refinements have allowed them to become a more efficient and lighter in weight yet overall cars have increased massively. And this weight increase is despite lighter weight composite materials and the use of aluminum in many components that were not before. In the mid '80s old engines were essentially cast iron, now it's difficult to find an engine that is not aluminum. Even in heavy duty trucks the block may be cast iron still for durability but the heads are aluminum. You mentioned exhaust systems previously exhaust was exclusively steel, now it's common that it's a titanium based alloy that is very much lighter than the steel counterparts. I think we very much underestimate the weight of components such as airbags and abs systems have in cars.

ComputerGuru 3y ago
Yeah, I think I was mentally doing more comparison to cars from the 70s rather than the 80s. Thanks for thinking this through “aloud” with me; I enjoyed it!