The Follow Up, Part 2

The second part of the podcast that I wanted to talk about was Matt's example of the Chevrolet Camaro. He brought up the really important idea of platform sharing. Basically, platform sharing is when automakers use the same architecture to underpin different vehicles. For instance, the Camaro is based on what GM calls their "Zeta" architecture, which was, first and foremost, engineered for full-size rear-wheel-drive sedans like the recently discontinued Pontiac G8.

This goes against the original idea of the muscle car: to take the biggest, most powerful engine possible and stuff it into a smaller car. The current Camaro is the antithesis to this because it is just a big engine in a big car.

No matter how well the Camaro drives, it will always be limited by the platform that upon which it is based because said platform dictates its size. Not to beat a dead horse, but weight, by definition, hampers performance, which is why it baffles me why a so-called "performance car" can weigh more than 2 tons.

Platform sharing has only gotten worse as a result of the SUV craze. As crossovers become more and more popular, automakers are sharing platforms among more and more disparate car models. In an article from the June 2003 issue of Car & Driver, former editor-in-chief Csaba Csere uses Nissan as a prime example of this. In the early 2000s, Nissan introduced a plethora of new models, many of them based on the same two platforms. One of these platforms, known as FM, was for mainly for front-wheel-drive mid-sized cars like the Altima and Maxima. But the other platform, FM, was used for everything from rear-wheel-drive based crossovers to sports cars.

The Nissan Z is a historic sports car model that has been produced by Nissan starting in the 1970s. Looking at today's 370Z, you would expect it to be optimized for handling and performance and, thus, as lightweight as possible.

What you wouldn't expect, though, is that it shares the FM platform with the Infiniti FX, a mid-sized, all-wheel-drive, luxury crossover vehicle that weighs around 4500 pounds.

What Csere emphasizes in his article is that, since these two vastly different cars share components, the common components are not optimized for the different purposes of the vehicles. For instance, suspension components shared between the two would have to be strong (and thus heavy) enough for the FX, meaning that they would be unnecessarily strengthened for the smaller 370Z. So basically what he is saying is that platform sharing makes cars like the 370Z heavier than they need to be.

What I'd like to show through these examples is that automotive obesity does not only relate to fuel efficiency, but other types of efficiency as well. Sure, it saves time to not have to engineer different parts for different cars, but if cars are not structurally efficient, then they are not optimized for their specific purpose. Since cars are consumer items, shouldn't the engineers' main purpose to optimize them for their specific consumer base? Especially with performance cars, car enthusiasts are going to buy the car that is the purest representation of their needs as a driver.

Maybe what I'm calling for in writing this blog is more than a desire for cars to become lighter. Maybe what I want is a re-evaluation of how cars figure into American society. Our culture of excess can be clearly seen in our automotive market, and this goes against my notion of what a car should be. Automobiles are a luxury, and, in my humble opinion, the current state of the automobile exploits this excessiveness. Instead of taking advantage of this luxury, I think that society should appreciate it in its purest form rather than distorting the automobile to exaggerated proportions.

The Follow-Up Part 1

So last week I did a podcast, and there were some ideas discussed that I'd like to expand on this week.

First of all, thanks again to Matt Hardigree, News Editor of Jalopnik.com who took some time out of his busy day to talk with me. He really had some great ideas, and I'd like to talk about some of them some more.

Matt talked about how, with key markets, size classes have actually shifted up as cars have been getting bigger and bigger over the past few decades. If you think about sedans, there are really 4 main classes: subcompacts, compacts, midsize, and full-size. But, if you compare the 2000s and the 1980s, the subcompacts of today would have been called compacts, the compacts of today would have been called midsize, and the midsized of today would have been called full-size.

He provided a great example with the Ford Taurus and the Ford Fusion, so I'll illustrate his point with a few pictures.

Obviously, the red car in the middle is the 2010 Ford Taurus. The other red car is a late-80s Taurus, and the blue car is a mid-90s Taurus. The Taurus used to define the mid-sized segment and compete with the Camry and Accord, but now it's one of the largest sedans on the road.

Instead, the Fusion, a new nameplate introduced in 2006, has now taken the place of the Taurus as Ford's midsized car. But, my question is, why does Ford need both?

Another idea that Matt brought up was that of manufacturers working to increase fuel economy while skipping the step of losing weight. Hybrid cars have obviously proven themselves as practical and efficient, but the technology is heavy. Batteries add weight to a car, which detracts from fuel economy.

I liked how Matt referred to it as the manufacturers working against themselves. It seems to me as if they are almost skipping a step towards their ultimate goal of efficiency. They're working twice as hard to increase fuel economy because they're attempting to do so with heavier and heavier cars. In many cases, the same fuel economy gain that can be achieved by adding a hybrid powertrain to a car could be achieved by simply shedding weight.

The Podcast

It's podcast time! I was really excited to get the chance to talk to Matt Hardigree, the News Editor of Jalopnik.com because he has some really interesting ideas about the automotive industry. So a huge thanks to Matt...I never would have expected a hot-shot automotive journalist like him to take the time to talk to a lowly college student like me. Anyways, hope you enjoy.

The Extent

In my first post, I used a specific example to show the problem. But, in this post, I want to show that this disturbing trend is widespread in the automotive industry by sharing with you some interesting statistics.

I was reading this article the other day, and I thought it brought up one important point. The idea of the "safety curve" seems very relevant.

As safety regulations get stricter, cars get heavier. Side-impact regulations especially, which have come about in the past few years, mean that the essential structure of the car unibody must be strengthened to meet the new regulations. For cars to be stronger, they must weigh more.

However, the author of this article says, "we're betting the safety curve will eventually level out." This makes sense. I think that, at a certain point, cars are hit a wall past which they cannot get any safer. At the very least, manufacturers will eventually run out places to put airbags.

Back to those statistics though. It's not just certain models that are growing, it's entire segments of the automotive market. According to Edmunds.com, "small" cars of today, compared with small cars of 1990, weight 549 pounds more, have a 6.4 inch longer wheelbase, and have 61 more horsepower. And that's an average. Small is a relative term in this case.

If fuel economy had dramatically increased in this same time period, this wouldn't be a big enough issue to write a blog about. But here I am, writing away. But, also compared to 1990, small cars get on average only 2.5 miles per gallon higher than their predecessors.

Labels are becoming an issue. Car and Driver magazine ran a comparison test a few years ago with the headline "Full-Sized Minivans." Have you stood next to a current-generation minivan lately? It's anything but mini.

This article also had three ironic images showing the "bloat" of three different cars. So, in contrast to my 3 good examples last week, here's three images showing some bad examples. The sad thing is that these three cars are some of the best-selling models on the market.

The Toyota Corolla is actually the best-selling car worldwide of all time. And, apparently, by 2020, it will have become a blimp.

The Honda Accord, too, has been among the 10 best-selling cars in the US for a couple decades now. I used as it as an example in my very first post.

Obviously, trucks are always big. But they're getting even bigger! I wonder if it will ever stop. Maybe when our roads are filled with Jabba the Huts, someone will make a change. But who knows?

The Top 3 Cars that Buck the Trend

On a more optimistic note than my previous two posts, I'd like to highlight 3 standout cars that have shown solidarity against the trend towards automotive obesity. I tried to do a Top 5 list, but I couldn't find more than 3 good examples...maybe that's a bad sign about the way things are heading.

1. Mazda Miata

The Miata debuted in 1989 as the Japanese equivalent to a British sports car. In 12 years, the Miata has experienced only a 12% increase in weight, from 2200 to 2400 pounds today. This is with the addition of airbags, more stringent safety requirements, myriad creature comforts, and a more powerful engine. Mazda engineers put painstaking detail into taking as much weight out of the car as possible. Rumors suggest that the next-generation Miata may lose even more weight.

2. Hyundai Sonata

Korean auto manufacturers have been on the rise in the past 10 years, and no car better represents this than the new 2011 Hyundai Sonata. This new model actually weighs about 100 lbs. less than the previous-generation. As opposed to other midsized sedans which offer a larger V-6 engine option, the current-generation Sonata was engineered to hold only a 4-cylinder engine, which means a lighter weight body shell and chassis. Instead of a V-6, Hyundai recently introduced a powerful but efficient turbocharged 4-cylinder engine to complement the base 4-cylinder engine.

3. Porsche Cayenne

Now, you may be wondering how I could put a two-ton Porsche SUV on this list, but this vehicle is important. The first iteration of the Cayenne was a beast weighing more than 5000 lbs. For the second generation, the Cayenne went on a diet. Porsche cut out more than 400 lbs. from the car in the redesign by using aluminum in the chassis and eliminating inefficiencies in the structure of the vehicle. Although it's still a big, powerful, luxurious SUV, the Cayenne now gets 20% better fuel economy.



If more automakers spent time and money towards the goal of reducing weight in their cars, they would have more successful products. Take the Sonata, for example. Since the redesign, the Hyundai has shot up in the sales rankings, passing the Nissan Altima to become the third best-selling sedan in the US (behind the Toyota Camry and the Honda Accord.)

The Reason

My dad grew up without a car. Growing up in Chapel Hill, NC, his family rode their bikes everywhere. Ever since he first bought his own car when he was 27, he has seen cars as a necessary luxury (however oxymoronic that might sound). For him, they are nothing but a way to conveniently get from point A to point B.

Last summer he bought his first car with power windows. As an automotive enthusiast myself, going car shopping with him was sometimes frustrating. He asked one Honda dealer if they could give him a car with roll-up windows for a lower price. They informed him that they didn’t make cars with roll-up windows anymore.

He ended up buying a silver Honda Fit with a stick-shift. It was the perfect choice.

Most people aren’t like my dad. Most people view cars as a status symbol. The fact that it will get you from point A to point B is unimportant to most people. Would anyone buy a Cadillac Escalade if 50 Cent didn’t put it in his videos?

A Honda Fit weighs 2,489 pounds and costs $15,000. A Cadillac Escalade weighs 5,895 pounds and costs $87,000. Let’s examine what the Cadillac has that the Honda does not.

• An in-dash DVD player with two roof-mounted Flip-down 8" screens
• Power-retractable running boards
• Heated steering wheel
• Heated and cooled cup holders
• Heated and cooled front seats
• GPS navigation system
• Bose 5.1 surround sound system

The list goes on and on. My house doesn’t even have surround sound. It’s a question of “want” versus “need.” My dad doesn’t want or need anything more than the Honda Fit provides. He can fit his bike in the back, he gets 35 miles per gallon, and it doesn’t break down.

No one “needs” heated and cooled cup holders, but everyone seems to “want” more and more out of their cars. The idea of owning an Escalade is attractive to many American consumers. Being behind the wheel of a 3 ton beast makes you feel powerful and in control. It’s an American ideal. We have wide highways, open space, and unlimited opportunity.

Europe is different. There, a Honda Fit is a family car. No one wants or needs anything more. In Europe, an Escalade would be more out of place than a bull in a china shop. Their narrow roads don’t afford big cars, and neither do their gas prices.

Americans have downsized their cars before. The 1973 oil crisis brought myriad Japanese automakers like Toyota and Honda to the forefront of the American auto market because their small, reliable, and cheap cars offered a practical alternative to American land barges like Lincolns and Buicks.

Maybe what we need is another oil crisis so that Americans stop taking our resources for granted. Automakers are engineering many different alternative-fuel vehicles for the future, but this does little good if Americans keep buying inefficient cars. If events like oil crises can motivate consumers to change their habits, then maybe the government needs to come up with something like increased gas taxes to create a monetary initiative to downsize.

The Problem

In 1976, Honda introduced the Accord to the United States Market. The first Accord was a hatchback that weighed approximately 2,000 lbs.


Fast forward to 2011. The Honda Accord now weighs 3,605 lbs. That's an 80% increase in weight over 35 years. Imagine if you weighed 150 pounds when you were 15 and 270 when you were 40.

The Honda Accord is just one example of a dominant trend in the American car market. Especially with the rise of SUVs in the past 20 years, every new car seems to be longer, wider, taller, and heavier than its predecessor. Everyone talks about human obesity as a health problem. Automotive obesity is also a health problem; just like people, heavier cars consume more fuel.

Let's talk more statistics. From 1975 to 1982, right around the time that a gas crisis hit the US, the average fuel economy of cars in the US went from 13.1 mpg to 21.1 mpg in 1982. The average fuel economy in 2011: 22.5 mpg. That's not so great.

And it's all because cars have gotten so fat! The 1976 Honda Accord produced 68 horsepower. The 2011 Honda Accord (which weighs almost a whole ton more) produces up to 268 horsepower and is rated at a mere 24 mpg combined city and highway. Bigger, more powerful engines require more fuel. Thus, despite the advances of modern technology, the cars that Americans actually buy are ridiculously inefficient. If we went from 13.1 to 21.1 mpg in 7 years, shouldn't we have gone way further than from 21.1 mpg to 22.5 in 29 years?!

Maybe it's because people are getting bigger too. Maybe it's because SUVs dominate the roads and people don't want to be in a 2000 lb. Honda when they get hit by a 6000 lb. Chevy Suburban.

Or maybe it's because a car is a symbol of power in our society. People like to drive fast, powerful cars because it, in turn, makes them feel powerful. A Toyota Camry with a V-6 today can go from 0-60 mph in under 6 seconds. A Corvette from the 80s would struggle to hit that same mark.

American consumers want to have their cake and eat it too. Cars are getting heavier because people think they need airbags and power windows and navigation systems and heated seats, but heavier cars need more power to motivate their increased mass and Americans want fast cars too.

Is this what we want?