Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday October 21, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-19-2012, 01:45 AM   #76
skywaffles
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 82470
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Vehicle:
. let's take
an ussie

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AllAWD View Post
None of the things you listed came out on a Ford until after it's been in the market for years. I'm talking historically, GM has been leading car tech going back to the 1920s when ford kept making the same model T for decades.

Ford bought hybrid tech from Toyota, and most of their other innovations were not engineered in house beyond bolting off-the-shelf parts together. GM had full EVs in the late 90s, onstar, night vision. These are things that never existed in the market. Look back to the 50s and you'll find a lot more true "firsts" by GM and Chrysler. Most of the crap was crap and broke, but still. Ford doesn't try.

I'd still by a Ford over either of those two...none of them are innovating lately.
This is a commonly repeated utter falsehood. The companies cross license hybrid and other patents. Ford's hybrid drive is in-house.

Historical innovation means nothing. GM and (especially) Chrysler can't compete now which is what matters.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
skywaffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 09:22 AM   #77
Scooby921
Merci Buckets
Moderator
 
Member#: 88606
Join Date: Jun 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Clarkston
Vehicle:
2011 GMC Sierra
'13 JCW

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
Is it 100% magnesium or is it some hybrid mix like with aluminum or something?

--kC
From my experience with magnesium for automotive applications it is alloyed with Aluminum and Zinc. If anyone has an actual interest in magnesium look at Meridian or Lunt Manufacturing. They both do magnesium parts for the automotive industry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank A View Post
magnesium? are they kidding?

Would love to see the full composition report to see what metals they are adding to prevent corrosion from road salt. This sounds like a very bad idea...
These days the base unibody structure of an automobile gets 100% electro-plated (E-coated). It's not a bulletproof coating, but it provides significant improvements to corrosion resistance as you first have to chip it or wear it down to get to the metal underneath. And even then the metal underneath usually went through some kind of zinc oxide coating before it was E-coated. Additionally, most vehicles have a rubbery underbody spray-on coating that helps protect against stone chips and also provides a bit of NVH reduction as a stone hitting a rubbery surface makes less noise than a stone hitting a metal surface. And the last point, if you look at the actual image shown in the first post it looks like a portion of what would be the rear seat and seatback. That's a structure that will most likely be completely covered by other parts and materials and have very little exposure to water or salt from the road.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper1rfa View Post
Actually, his point does stand. Magnesium allows can rust *really* fast when exposed to salts, because the salt causes the oxide to flake like iron rust does.

No road salt? not a problem. Those of us with salted roads have more to worry about.

That said, It's been used in airplanes for decades and I'm sure there are things you can do.
Magnesium in salt water doesn't rust fast. The increased "rust" is due to galvanic corrosion when magnesium is in direct contact with a metal of significantly different galvanic potential and you then add a substance which increases the flow of electrons from one material to the other. Magnesium touching aluminum isn't too bad, even with water on the joint. Magnesium touching steel is bad and water on the joint will lead to the magnesium pitting and cracking and falling apart.

This isn't new technology. I wrote a senior thesis on the use of magnesium for automotive engine brackets back in 2003. There are a lot of things that can be done to isolate magnesium and remove galvanic corrosion concerns. As far as normal atmospheric corrosion is concerned it isn't much different from aluminum.



As far as the fire and burning is concerned, why do we all point and laugh at this as a bad idea when there are already plenty of vehicles using magnesium? It's been pointed out that there are engine blocks, cradles, subframes, and brackets already made from magnesium. The base casting in almost ALL steering wheels is magnesium. IIRC the roof structure on the Corvette Z06 is magnesium. Ford has used magnesium trans housings for a very long time. Besides, once a car catches on fire it is generally totaled. Why does it make such a huge difference if it burns more? You're insurance company is going to total it and someone is going to crush and scrap it. If you're worried about people getting out before the magnesium ignites, worry about the steering wheel in their hands too.





Quote:
Originally Posted by skywaffles View Post

Ford has direct injection, turbocharging, full EVs, hybrids, automated manuals, active grilles, automatic parking, all the latest radar guided nonsense, etc.

Chevy has...heavy cars? And the Volt.

If you take away Fiat's new engines, Chrysler is stuck firmly in 1995.

U wot m8? Ford is the only American automaker who seems to be innovating lately.
GM has direct injection, turbocharging, hybrids, parking assist, active crash avoidance, and is working on a dual-clutch transmission. In fact I believe GM had turbocharging and hybrids before Ford.

Sooo...what point were you trying to make? That Ford is more innovative? As I recall they are also late to the party when it comes to push-button start and keyless entry/ignition, though their Lincoln commercials would like you to believe they invented it.
Scooby921 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 11:05 AM   #78
Masterauto
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 198376
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Delaware
Vehicle:
X5D Subaru BRZ
Nissan GT-R

Default

I wonder if it will burn like the old VW air cooled Magnesium blocks. You could not put them out till they burned themselves out.
Masterauto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 07:45 PM   #79
AllAWD
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 17079
Join Date: Apr 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Alexandria, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skywaffles View Post
This is a commonly repeated utter falsehood. The companies cross license hybrid and other patents. Ford's hybrid drive is in-house.

Historical innovation means nothing. GM and (especially) Chrysler can't compete now which is what matters.
So Ford designed hybrid completely in house, but decided to cross patent with Toyota? Explain that to me, I don't get it and am much too lazy to care.

Now GM has lightweight magnesium sheet metal and Ford has nothing unique from GM.

The Volt is not something to discount. I met one of the engineers and we talked at length about the work that went into the battery system and especially the cooling.
AllAWD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 12:10 PM   #80
shikataganai
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 92634
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Vehicle:
2007 Land Cruiser
2013 LEAF

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AllAWD View Post
So Ford designed hybrid completely in house, but decided to cross patent with Toyota? Explain that to me, I don't get it and am much too lazy to care.
http://green.autoblog.com/2009/07/03...a-hybrid-syst/

Quote:
The reality is that Ford independently developed its own hybrid system at the same time Toyota was doing its own. The basic architecture of both systems is the same and both are based on the concepts developed and patented by TRW engineers in the late 1960s. When Ford introduced the Escape Hybrid, Toyota went after the Blue Oval for infringing on its patents. Ford had patents of its own on the technology that Toyota was using. Eventually, the two companies reached a cross-licensing agreement that gives both companies the right to build their own systems. Such cross-licensing agreements are common in these kinds of cases, but Ford did not use the Toyota hybrid system. The only other company that uses Toyota's system is Nissan for its Altima hybrid, and they actually buy hardware from Toyota.
shikataganai is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.