Legal Bill

I have no science or studies to report, just my observations. It seems to me cars just keep getting heavier. I'm sure we all remember the cars of our youths. Sports cars weighed well under 2,000 pounds. GTs and touring cars weighed in under 2,700. Compact coupes and sedans were not much over 2,000 pounds. We probably all laughed at the giant full sized American cars that weighed in between 3,700 and 4,000 pounds. Today, most cars are over 3,000 pounds. So called compact and mid size cars tip the scales at 3,700 to 4,000 pounds. Full size cars all seem to be well over 4,000 pounds with some super honkers that weigh in over 5,000 pounds. (Yes, I know a few cars from our youth came in this heavy too.)

This thread isn't about SUVs. We already beat that one to death elsewhere. I'd like to keep this discussion to cars.

My big concerns are the consumption of raw materials and build costs for modern cars, and the gas mileage the finished product gets. The weight seems to be driven by a combination of factors which I think include safety features, convenience features, luxury features and performance features. While we may all be happy with the current selection of new cars, we cannot escape the fact that we must consume and pay for the materials and energy that create and propel a 4,000 pound vehicle, just to deliver an average 175 pound person to work each day.

Do we have responsibilities to the future generations, and the rest of the world to try to be more economical? What, if anything at all, would you do to change the current trend? What, if anything at all, do you do personally?

PWRMKR

Yes. Or, eventually we will consume ourselves into extinction.

I did as much as I could and lost: boo hoo.

"harness the full force of American optimism and ingenuity to invest in new technologies and alternative fuels, create tax incentives that help automakers produce more fuel efficient cars, and reward the consumers who buy them. We invented and built the cars we drive today - we can invent and build the cars we drive tomorrow, too."

I got this from some elite liberal website.

johnnydev

Bill, I'd be curious to see the changes in a specific model over the years. What's the difference between a '69 and an '05 Mustang? Or an early Civic and the current model? Anyone know?

Legal Bill

Those points aren't bad, but they are kind of general. Would you give tax breaks to the buyers of lighter cars? This would be a better use of the tax code when compared to the stupid tax break that was given for industrial vehicles. That tax break ended up being used by folks who wanted huge SUVs. At what weight would you give a break to the consumer or the manufacturer?

DiamondDave2005

People do tend to keep cars a lot longer than they would (or could) in the '50, '60s and '70s. The car may use more materials, but stay on the road for eight years as opposed to maybe four years back then.

As far as the future goes, I seriously think that nano-technology (as long as we don't end the world with it) will allow us to enter the age of 'something for nothing', with raw materials being pulled from dirt/water/space, etc.

Legal Bill

Great question. Today's Mustang weighs over 3,500 pounds with a V-8. The 1964 with a V8 weighed around 2700 pounds if memory serves me correctly. I can look it up tonight, or maybe someone can find it on a Mustang fan site. In the late 60s and early 70s Mustangs got very big. I'm sure they weighed around the same as the new model today. But then they got small again and the weight went down some. The common place fox platform 5.0 weighed in around 3,200 pounds for years.

The early Civics were well under 2,000 pounds. Again, I'll have to look it up, but 1800 pounds comes to mind. Todays Civic is over 2,800 I think, but again I don't have the exact figure from memory.

Legal Bill

I would love to know the numbers that go with your first point. I think the issue is how long modern cars stay on the road rather than ownership because it is much more common now for a car to change hands several times before it goes to the grave yard.

I do admire the work the engineers have done to shrink components and lighten them with different materials. I often dream about fitting the lightweight S2000 motor and tranny into a British sports car of the 60s. The resulting car would have double the stock hp and weigh less than the original British sports car. That is the issue that realy annoys me. The fundamental components of today's car are much lighter than the components of their vintage counterparts.

rjosey8385

I think much of the added weight is in structural components to strengthen the car and protect the occupants. This guy flipped a couple of times in his S, ended up inverted, and walked away from it....

https://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=249484

And is some of the issue bigger tire and wheel sizes? Emission requirements (OK, the O2 sensor ain't exactly heavy, but the catalytic converter adds a tad)?

PWRMKR

Bill, for the most part, general is all you are going to get from me.

Yes, I would give big tax breaks for the eco box buyer and tax the hell out of the gas-guzzler. It blows me away that this hasn

cordycord

I think you hit the nail on the head; safety and convenience are the reason that car weight has gone up. Your 1970's vintage Civic or Mustang had roll up windows, and survival in a 35mph head-on collision was doubtful.

That said, I'm all for letting the market decide what they want to drive. Apparently there is already a 'cycling' of the market to smaller cars and sports cars, from SUV's.

In my business, we are DEFINITELY feeling the pinch from a scarcity of products. Steel and aluminum prices have doubled and tripled this year alone! However, that is being caused by China's buying up of all the raw goods worldwide for their infrastructure upgrades. Again, the market will adapt.

We've got two trash cans here, one recycle and one trash. The recycle is always more full than the trash.