3 ms·
That depends. Many auto bodies are made from aluminum and plastic these days, while the ones that continue to use steel for some body panels coat them not just
by Alupis 3y ago
That depends. Many auto bodies are made from aluminum and plastic these days, while the ones that continue to use steel for some body panels coat them not just with clear coat, but also paint. Chassis/frames are steel, but not exposed directly to sunlight, and typically have a coating as well.
Bare, exposed steel is pretty dumb in all things except perhaps looks (until it rusts).
- kube-system 3y ago> not just with clear coat, but also paint. Most are phosphated, then e-coated, then primed, then painted, then clear-coated.
- Alupis 3y agoThank you. This seems to just further emphasize the absurdity of selling bare stainless vehicles to consumers that drive on public roads, in all kinds of conditions including salted winter roads.
- kube-system 3y agoIt's a choice. All engineering choices have consequences, and no material is perfect. It doesn't seem much more absurd than other parts of the vehicle, to me. Bare stainless has been used on other vehicles before. It provides a certain aesthetic.
- Alupis 3y agoTo be pedantic, this was more of a cosmetic choice rather than an engineering choice. The other bare stainless vehicles learned the same lesson (and are not produced today).
- kube-system 3y agoEngineers deal with more than just functional design requirements. There were also undoubtably other requirements pertaining to manufacturing, cost, and cosmetics which were a factor here. If cost and manufacturing weren't a factor, they could have just CNC'd the panels out of very fancy stainless grades that are a pain to stamp and cost a lot.
- Alupis 3y agoI think the issue is they decided what it should look like before they designed the rest of the vehicle. They wanted something that looked unusual... and now they have unusual problems to deal with. There's no practical reason to make the vehicle have bare stainless panels, or "unbreakable" breakable windows, etc. It's marketing gimmicks that now seem to be developing into a PR issue. Time will tell.. The very fact that they try to upsell a wrap is absurd enough and obviously indicates Tesla was worried this might become an issue. The wrap should have been included... or some form of coating.
- kube-system 3y agoOther manufacturers also make new engineering choices in the name of styling that create unusual problems. Because selling the car is part of the design requirements. As one of many examples, Mazda's Soul Red Crystal paint has some special formulations and application steps that were a departure from other types of automotive paint. It has no purpose other than cosmetics, and it had some issues when it was introduced. It was also more challenging and expensive to repair. Styling may be a 'marketing gimmick', but it is an inherent requirement to selling cars in volume. > The very fact that they try to upsell a wrap is absurd enough and obviously indicates Tesla was worried this might become an issue. Some other manufacturers do this for painted cars too, because clear-coat is brittle and chipping is a known cosmetic issue that can occur. e.g. https://autoparts.toyota.com/products/product/paint-protection-film-pt90707110 https://autoparts.toyota.com/products/product/paint-protecti... At the end of the day, I don't think it's any more unacceptable that cybertruck owners need to hit their truck with some scotchbrite to remove tiny rust specs than it is unacceptable that toyota owners need to hit their hood with some touch up paint to remove tiny paint chips. It's all just minor cosmetic wear and tear.
- Zigurd 3y agoIt is a choice. The choice is also motivated by a Big Idea: ELiminate every part you don't need. This sounds like a good idea to the point some people will adopt it uncritically, but when you start eliminating parts, like paint, or an anti-pinch sensor, or LIDAR, that you might actually need, you just create technical debt and future recall liability. Bad dogma.