![]() |
Third generation of automotive steel http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90...2/7299064.html Summary: First Gen automative steel: DP steel, CP steel, TRIP steel what every car has nowadays. Second Gen automative steel: TWIP steel, too expensive to beused on cars Third Gen automative steel: started developing in 2007 in USA and China, tested in 2009. Will be introduced and applied in 2014 VW models in China Cost: A compact sedan using 3rd gen will cost 240EURO more than 1st gen Fuel Efficiency: 5% less Safety: 2x better (as they claim) Quote:
|
^ That is a HUGE difference. Let's see some test results. For all we know the info's cooked. This IS China after all. The thing is that we may not see the overall effects of this (other than possibly weight reduction), since you can bet that car manufacturers will probably start using thinner sheets too, if this were true. |
doesn't say much in terms of the cost-effectiveness, but China does have a reputation to be a little chintzy with their automotive products |
i always think of this video when i think of driving in China |
Unfortunately for the Chinese there is already an established grading system of steel Just like their "8 stars" hotels.. just because you keep on adding generations or stars don't make it really better than the rest of the world's. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikiped...E_steel_grades |
So, if you crash a Chinese car you're only going to be horribly injured and not guaranteed dead. It'll be interesting to see how it goes though, new technology is always nice. |
Those vids of Chinese cars being crash tested were horrifying and hilarious. |
LOL. 99,000 accidents and 27,000 dead. So basically 1 in 3 accidents result in a death? WOW. Just WOW. Besides, it's not really the strength of the steel that's the most important. It's how it's shaped and formed that gives the final structure (vehicle body) it's strength. Posted via RS Mobile |
True enough. Depending on what they mean by 2x safer though. If it meant that the same amount of material could absorb twice the usual force of impact, then using the same design, crap or otherwise, would result in a car that's twice as safe. Otherwise you could use x amount less material for a car with the same crash ratings. Given the price difference between 1st and 3rd gen you'd have something between the current steel chassis and, say, aluminum or cf for a relatively low price. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:28 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net