muleferg
Active Member
I thank Ford calls it Military Grade.
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I thank Ford calls it Military Grade.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
RobStark
Well-Known Member
http://transportevolved.com/2014/07/01/third-generation-tesla-wont-made-...
This has been repeated again and again. Tesla won't use all aluminum construction. Model S uses all aluminum construction save for the support for steering wheel and front dashboard. Designers were concerned with people used to rocking out in their cars slamming and playing "air drums" on their steering wheels would bend the aluminum support for steering wheel and dash after many years. So Tesla went with steel here.
That does not mean M3 won't be 50% aluminum or 90% aluminum.
We also know the M3 platform will be an all new platform not a version of the MS platform. Again that does not mean 100% steel.
From trade journal AutomotiveNews article on Ford F150
Ford's huge bet on aluminum
Analysts say substituting aluminum for steel costs an estimated $2 per pound of weight saved. Ford has said the 2015 F-150 will be up to 700 pounds lighter, but Ford hasn't said how much of the weight loss is the result of aluminum usage.
A 2014 F-150 SuperCrew with rear-wheel drive weighs 5,296 pounds, meaning Ford would lose about 13 percent of the weight if it takes 700 pounds out of the 2015 model.
Aluminum sheet is roughly $2.20 per pound, compared to 75 cents for steel.
This has been repeated again and again. Tesla won't use all aluminum construction. Model S uses all aluminum construction save for the support for steering wheel and front dashboard. Designers were concerned with people used to rocking out in their cars slamming and playing "air drums" on their steering wheels would bend the aluminum support for steering wheel and dash after many years. So Tesla went with steel here.
That does not mean M3 won't be 50% aluminum or 90% aluminum.
We also know the M3 platform will be an all new platform not a version of the MS platform. Again that does not mean 100% steel.
From trade journal AutomotiveNews article on Ford F150
Ford's huge bet on aluminum
Analysts say substituting aluminum for steel costs an estimated $2 per pound of weight saved. Ford has said the 2015 F-150 will be up to 700 pounds lighter, but Ford hasn't said how much of the weight loss is the result of aluminum usage.
A 2014 F-150 SuperCrew with rear-wheel drive weighs 5,296 pounds, meaning Ford would lose about 13 percent of the weight if it takes 700 pounds out of the 2015 model.
Aluminum sheet is roughly $2.20 per pound, compared to 75 cents for steel.
Last edited:
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
A steel beam is also used on the B Pillar for the Model S ... it is highlighted in the factory tour.
Bangor Bob
Member
There is additional prep needed on steel as well - several full-body dip and dry cycles for anti-corrosion treatment. That makes your body shop bigger and more expensive. Salt-belt customers will be rightly quite wary of steel paneled vehicles that skimp on this step.
I thought I'd share this link to a news article about a new welding technique, called vaporized foil actuator (VFA) welding, that is currently under development. The article is only indirectly related to the steel vs aluminum discussion here in this thread, and it will likely be years before this technique is put into use at an industrial level, but it's interesting to consider the possibilities nonetheless.
Making cars of the future stronger, using less energy | News Room - The Ohio State University
Making cars of the future stronger, using less energy | News Room - The Ohio State University
That is interesting. SpaceX has already pioneered one technique of aluminum welding that Tesla is now using:
http://electrek.co/2015/05/24/space...ing-techniques-and-equipment-to-tesla-motors/
This new technique might make cleaner welds in spots where they might be seen.
Model 3 will be aluminium. Tesla has a lot of experience with aluminium and none with steel, no point in going with steel and reforming all the manufacturing process for a much worse material. They will save cost in interior (plastic and cloth materials), overall size of the vehicle, gigafactory batteries, less profit margin, greater economy of scale... no problem on hitting 35k.
There will be some steel as there is some steel in Model S and Model X, maybe a bit more or a bit less.
What is the price of raw aluminum per pound?
Less than ONE dollar.
1000 pounds of aluminum costs less than 1000 USD.
Cost of steel is around 2/3 of aluminum cost.
So, they can save about 300 USD per car by going full steel and spend XYZ millions on retooling the factory.
What is the price of raw aluminum per pound?
Less than ONE dollar.
1000 pounds of aluminum costs less than 1000 USD.
Cost of steel is around 2/3 of aluminum cost.
So, they can save about 300 USD per car by going full steel and spend XYZ millions on retooling the factory.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Tesla does not will not buy raw aluminum but automotive grade aluminum sheet. That is $2.20 per pound while the equivalent steel is $0.75 per pound.
The big 7 story press that Tesla uses to stamp most of its body parts was inherited from Toyota which used them to make steel bodied Corollas and Matrix. So it can do both aluminum and steel.
Tesla will need to purchase new BIW lines robots etc. The current ones are for X and S. They don't currently have the capacity to manufacture 500k cars.
No retooling necessary for a mostly steel or all steel Model 3.
Except both Elon and JB Straubel have said the Model 3 will either use much less or no aluminum. Steel is much easier to work than aluminum and for structural parts steel is actually a better metal to use. There are pros and cons of both, but steel has more pros than just being cheaper than aluminum.
ratsbew
Active Member
I'm hoping for a steel unibody and aluminum body panels. This seems like a good way to prevent corrosion on the exterior too.
rEVhappy
Goldmember
My prediction: Steel unibody and mostly steel panels; save for the wheels, suspension, and hood which will make use of aluminum alloy.
anticitizen13.7
Not posting at TMC after 9/17/2018
My perspective is that the aluminum vs. steel debate may be pointless in the end. As long as the Model 3 is fun to drive, affordable, and highly safe, the choice of material does not matter to me.
I drive a Honda Civic, which uses all-steel construction, of which 50% is high-strength alloy, and IMO steel works just fine.
I drive a Honda Civic, which uses all-steel construction, of which 50% is high-strength alloy, and IMO steel works just fine.
I would actually expect aluminum steel ratios that are more in line with the Audi tt. By that I mean a mostly steel substructure that will lower the COG even further and allow for efficient use of their exiting aluminum stamping infrastructure for body panels etc.
ICE car constructions have several reinforcements in their design so that, on frontal impact, the motor is not going directly into the passenger cabin. Also the tunnel needed for the drivetrain/gearbox/differential/ ... causes reinforcements that are not necessary in an EV construction.
Isn't there already a cost saving in material purely because of the simpler design? If so, comparing the amount of aluminum (or steel) used with an ICE car makes barely sense?
Isn't there already a cost saving in material purely because of the simpler design? If so, comparing the amount of aluminum (or steel) used with an ICE car makes barely sense?
Tesla's stamping machine that is currently cranking out parts for the Model S and Model X was installed by Toyota to stamp steel parts, so it shouldn't struggle with any metal materials Tesla uses. They will probably need to get more stamping machines at some point. I don't know it Toyota just had the one machine, or had others, but there will come a point where the machine is maxxed out.
MartinAustin
Active Member
Great thread, I think I've seen every possible point of view represented! 
I am glad the quote from Chris Porritt was included... that's about the most concrete piece of evidence that this sort of discussion has at this point. It's probably worth noting that the statement was made in June 2014, and the car goes into production in Q4 2017. It's possible that they will "update their opinion" on what they should build the car from, during this long period, once they really start building and testing prototypes - plus, the price of aluminium has fallen quite a bit, I think.
Some other thoughts:
The mass of the Model S body-in-white is 410lbs, I think I have read. That's less than 10% of the mass of the car. If they made the BIW from steel, the car probably wouldn't weigh that much more. Same thing goes for Model 3... if it has an all-aluminium BIW that is 80% of the mass of the Model S, it'll be 328lbs. (two strong guys could lift it... funny) This won't be a significant fraction of the mass of the car, whether it's steel or aluminium. I don't think they ever set out to make the cars light in order for them to accelerate well. The priority is range, and together with aerodynamics - a field which they clearly dominate - the light weight of the car helps it move off from a stop without gouging power out of the battery. I still think they will favour aluminium for this reason.
I think they will continue with a combination of steel and aluminium as they have done on Model S (and probably Model X, we just don't know enough about it yet). Steel is used in some of the underpinnings for strength in those areas. However they stick to aluminium because it's "strong enough to meet safety goals" while being lighter than steel could ever be.
Tesla has built up several years of experience working with aluminium, and has a great deal with Alcoa for the aluminium that they order. They receive it in those big rolls we have all seen in factory footage. There is some notion here that they will save money by increasing the amount of steel in the Model 3. I don't think this makes sense... because they will be ordering two types of body materials, and suffering from the attendant logistical costs caused by that - manufacturing costs, storage costs, transport costs - all with new vendors. By simply buying more aluminium from Alcoa, they will get it for less-per-roll than they are currently getting it. Reconfiguring their Titan back and forth between the two metals won't be that big of a deal, they already reconfigure it back and forth for the different panels they want to stamp out of it, but I believe the increased cost of tracking and ordering two metals will blunt the savings of using steel in the first place. The paint shop will have to have two technologies for spraying paint/primer... this will cost extra money vs. doing everything the same for all vehicles as they are doing now.
Staying with aluminium as the primary metal in the bodywork will help Tesla maintain its image of premium cars. Go back to old-fashioned steel - simply to save money? In a time when even the best-selling F-150 truck has switched to aluminium? And GM is thought to be switching its trucks too? Doesn't make sense.
Range is critical to the Model 3. Switching to heavier steel would simply be a bad idea. (Yes aerodynamics is a big factor, but so is mass)
Chris Porritt's eight exact words were "We can’t use aluminium for all the components." Well, aluminium isn't used throughout the whole Model S either.
I am glad the quote from Chris Porritt was included... that's about the most concrete piece of evidence that this sort of discussion has at this point. It's probably worth noting that the statement was made in June 2014, and the car goes into production in Q4 2017. It's possible that they will "update their opinion" on what they should build the car from, during this long period, once they really start building and testing prototypes - plus, the price of aluminium has fallen quite a bit, I think.
Some other thoughts:
The mass of the Model S body-in-white is 410lbs, I think I have read. That's less than 10% of the mass of the car. If they made the BIW from steel, the car probably wouldn't weigh that much more. Same thing goes for Model 3... if it has an all-aluminium BIW that is 80% of the mass of the Model S, it'll be 328lbs. (two strong guys could lift it... funny) This won't be a significant fraction of the mass of the car, whether it's steel or aluminium. I don't think they ever set out to make the cars light in order for them to accelerate well. The priority is range, and together with aerodynamics - a field which they clearly dominate - the light weight of the car helps it move off from a stop without gouging power out of the battery. I still think they will favour aluminium for this reason.
I think they will continue with a combination of steel and aluminium as they have done on Model S (and probably Model X, we just don't know enough about it yet). Steel is used in some of the underpinnings for strength in those areas. However they stick to aluminium because it's "strong enough to meet safety goals" while being lighter than steel could ever be.
Tesla has built up several years of experience working with aluminium, and has a great deal with Alcoa for the aluminium that they order. They receive it in those big rolls we have all seen in factory footage. There is some notion here that they will save money by increasing the amount of steel in the Model 3. I don't think this makes sense... because they will be ordering two types of body materials, and suffering from the attendant logistical costs caused by that - manufacturing costs, storage costs, transport costs - all with new vendors. By simply buying more aluminium from Alcoa, they will get it for less-per-roll than they are currently getting it. Reconfiguring their Titan back and forth between the two metals won't be that big of a deal, they already reconfigure it back and forth for the different panels they want to stamp out of it, but I believe the increased cost of tracking and ordering two metals will blunt the savings of using steel in the first place. The paint shop will have to have two technologies for spraying paint/primer... this will cost extra money vs. doing everything the same for all vehicles as they are doing now.
Staying with aluminium as the primary metal in the bodywork will help Tesla maintain its image of premium cars. Go back to old-fashioned steel - simply to save money? In a time when even the best-selling F-150 truck has switched to aluminium? And GM is thought to be switching its trucks too? Doesn't make sense.
Range is critical to the Model 3. Switching to heavier steel would simply be a bad idea. (Yes aerodynamics is a big factor, but so is mass)
Chris Porritt's eight exact words were "We can’t use aluminium for all the components." Well, aluminium isn't used throughout the whole Model S either.
Similar threads
- Article
