Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
Ok, so youve got a huge bundle burning a hole in your back pocket, and you want your favourite car to last a lot longer.
Would it be possible to make a car out of something more robust? say Reynolds 853 or stainless?
If so, what would it cost, and how would the ride/comfort/characteristics change?
Imagine a lovely VW beetle or camper that was 25% lighter, and 90% harder to rust... awesome.
Has this ever been done on any level? Im not talking plain old galvanising..
IIRC, the DeLorean was a stainless body on galvanised chassis?
Landrover bodies are aluminium as are a good few sports cars.
Of course it is perfectly possible to build cars that last much longer. No incentive to do so in a capitalist society
Volvo amazon is the classic example of a long lasting car.
[i]Volvo amazon is the classic example of a long lasting car. [/i]
yes, the bloke who fitted rear speakers on the parcel shelf of mine said he'd never had to cut through thicker metal.
they still rust though.
Of course it is perfectly possible to build cars that last much longer. No incentive to do so in a capitalist society
Strange that the capitalist society has developed ways of painting cars that make them rust less. Have made OE parts that last much longer, have greatly improved the reliability and have started offering 5 yr+ warranties...
Move to Cuba, TJ. Should be perfect for you.
Strange that the capitalist society has developed ways of painting cars that make them rust less. Have made OE parts that last much longer, have greatly improved the reliability and have started offering 5 yr+ warranties...
+1
Modern cars last for a very long time, are exceptionally reliable and extremely rust proof.
Really we should be designing in obsolescence, fatigue and corrosion so as to keep the jobs going. Wont someone think of the workers?!?!?
http://reynoldstechnology.biz/our_customers_sports_cars.php
"...the land-speed record vehicle Thrust 2."
http://reynoldstechnology.biz/our_materials_531.php
Wont someone think of the workers?!?!?
TJ does that stuff. Meanwhile I'm ruthlessly exploiting the workers cos he's busy replying to threads about famine baby tories marketing the downfall of the NHS because all the fat people have started/stopped/whatever wearing helmets.
Westfield trialed 853 suspension components, thin the conclusion was the weight loss want worth the extra cost. Especialy as on that sort of thing the stiffness is as important, so you need more material, so you put weight back on, etc etc.
Basicly normal steel is strong enough and stiff enough, and light enough, so why bother.
Delorean made stainless cars, droped like a bomb due to cost.
Plenty of aluminium sports/super cars, but again, it costs.
These days most cars seem to have reached the point where they get writen off in a crash before they get scraped due to mechanical failiures.
Of course it is perfectly possible to build cars that last much longer. No incentive to do so in a capitalist society
What society offers more incentive? Do we need a 5 year plan?
Of course it is perfectly possible to build cars that last much longer. No incentive to do so in a capitalist society
Complete twaddle.
You don't own a car, do you? If you did, you'd know that modern cars (built in a capitalist society) are cleaner, faster, less thirsty, and much longer lasting than their counterparts of, say, twenty years ago.
I recall the mid-1970s, when cars were routinely rusting through at only three or four years. It didn't really matter that much, as the engines tended to die at 100k anyway.
Modern cars are genuinely excellent. Even the bad ones are long-lasting in a way you could only dream of in the 70s and 80s. What's driven this is competition amongst the manufacturers, who've competed to provide the best product. OK, they're trying to get market share, so it's not altruism, but no-one who actually uses a car nowadays would deny that they're immensely better built and longer lasting than all that Leyland crap we used to have to put up with.
But don't let the fact get in the way of your diatribe. No point in changing the habits of a lifetime.
These days most cars seem to have reached the point where they get writen off in a crash before they get scraped due to mechanical failiures.
Seeing the current thread about Audi headlights, it'll be the breakage or failure of over-complicated ancillary jinglejangles that will put newer breeds of cars beyond economic repair, no matter how everlasting the engines and bodies are.
I know someone who's insurance co wrote off their car over a pair of broken headlights (and no other damage) the headlight units easily exceeded the value of the car
Of course it is perfectly possible to build cars that last much longer. No incentive to do so in a capitalist society
Yep, LADA were definately known for making their cars from 853, being rust proof and never breaking down.
im in holland atm .. they seem to be mad for old cars ....
they have a penchant for old amazons , beetles and landys - im not just talking the odd one like in the uk ... im talking on an average day i see 4 or 5 of each !
853 was originally developed for side impact bars in Volvo doors.
Money no object, I'd build it from the lightest, stiffest material I could get - that'd be carbon composite then
As in many things, stiffness is the key with car chassis, you can't have too stiff
Seeing the current thread about Audi headlights, it'll be the breakage or failure of over-complicated ancillary jinglejangles that will put newer breeds of cars beyond economic repair, no matter how everlasting the engines and bodies are.I know someone who's insurance co wrote off their car over a pair of broken headlights (and no other damage) the headlight units easily exceeded the value of the car
Possibly, but it's getting better, and people dont put the effort into fixing cars anymore. Perfectly feasible to build an ECU from scratch (google megasquirt). Headlamps have always been expensive, but remember old LUCAS 7"/9" ones? The bulbs weren't even replaceable so the whole unit had to be replaced! If ford did that these days there realy would be uproar.
back to my original point, technicalities aside - could it be done?
Say, I want a car made entirely of 853, just because.
If so, would it handle/behave differently?
Would 853 make the chassis squirm/flex too much if built in the same gauge? Or would handling improve? (like on a bike frame!)
The DeLorean dived because of costs, but it was still done. Bare metal cars that dont rust = super cool.
I love the DeLeorean.
Remember: money is no object here.
If so, would it handle/behave differently?
it's be different for sure but there's far too many variables to say in what way and by how much
I think that just saying just make cars of high quality steel is a bit simplistic. From what I understand (I'm no engineer) car companies are more and more using mixtures of low tensile/high tensile steel, aluminium and composites in cars where the best material is most appropriate to get the best compromise of cost/weight/rigidity.
BTW if money is no object - make the car out of carbon fibre. Like McClaren etc...
The Alfa Giulietta uses some bits of spangly steel to keep weight down
Well firstly it would be flexier (if you reduced the tube guages and butted to take advantage of its extra strength) or stronger (if you just used PG tubes in the same guage.
Flex in a car is nearly always a very bad thing for handling. So ultimatley you'd end up with a very strong car.
Bus as with bikes, you could build a stiffer/lighter one from Aluminium, so why bother?
Hmmm, valid points.
A carbon fibre VW camper van?. Cool no doubt. Souless? Possibly.
Steel is real.
BTW if money is no object - make the car out of carbon fibre. Like McClaren etc...
even the renault clio has light weight plastic wings.
531 was used for the front suspension subframe on the E-type jag and various spaceframe race cars.
Porsche 917;
[i]The car had remarkable technology: Porsche’s first 12-cylinder engine, and many components made of titanium, magnesium and exotic alloys that had been developed for lightweight "Bergspider" hill climb racers. Other methods of weight reduction were rather simple, such as making the gear shift knob out of Balsa wood, some methods were not simple, such as using the tubular frame itself, as oil piping to the front oil cooler.[/i]
they did have to gas pressurise the frame as it flexed so much the welds tended to crack - if the drivers saw the 'frame pressure' drop too far they had to stop.
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
If so, would it handle/behave differently?
Depends how much of that pixie dust you used. If you got enough, it'd be a really springy but still stiff for power transfer....
People build steel hardtails mainly for character it gives the frame. People don't build steel full sus bikes because the character of the frame is dictated by the suspension design.
As far as i'm aware, all cars have some sort of suspension.....
http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/membersonly/february97/features/steelcar/steelcar.html
"STRENGTH OR STIFFNESS?
Underlying these decisions regarding material selection is the overall design goal for the particular body structure component. "You're designing either for strength or for stiffness," Fekete said. "That's what's driving the thickness of the material." The thickness of steel car parts is usually determined by the degree of required stiffness, but in about 20 percent of the applications the important property is strength. "If you're designing for stiffness, an increase in strength level won't give you anything because the elastic modulus of the material doesn't change," Fekete said.
"When you design for strength, you're primarily trying to handle crash loads," said Bruce Emmons, president of Autokinetics, an engineering services firm in Rochester Hills, Mich. "Suspension loads are also a concern, but they tend to be much lower magnitude than crash loads," he said. "Generally, we want to use higher-strength steels in crash-sensitive parts such as impact beams, bumper bars, rockers, and B-pillar reinforcements. More recently, however, the focus has moved toward greater stiffness, which is desired for improved ride, vibration, and harshness [NVH] quality." Higher stiffness targets are something relatively new in American car design, he said, joking that structural stiffness levels used to be set just high enough "to allow the car doors to close.""
nice info above guys.
and that Porsche 917 is astonishing.
quite a few steel FS.doberman(n?),fireeye.off the top of my head.
Ducati make the frame out of chromoly tubes.might be a good place to find out if 853 or similar would offer benefits.cheaper than welding up a car chassis.
I remember..the snark.(pedal)car made out of bicycle frames.In wales.
read about in..cyclopaedia.94 maybe.
This has to the most hilarious-most-thread ever. It would not be cost effective to make a car of those materials. Even the highest end stuff isn't - they use carbon fibre etc.
TandemJeremy - Member
Landrover bodies are aluminium as are a good few sports cars.Volvo amazon is the classic example of a long lasting car.
Not quite:
The bodywork was hand-made out of an aluminium/[u]magnesium[/u] alloy called Birmabright, to save on steel.
Amazon lasted well due to durable (and antiquated) engineering - they still rust like ****.
853 is inherently flexy any more then aluminum is inherently stiff. Its all to do with the overall design of the frame and what the builder / desinger is trying to achieve.
You could build a really stiff frame (or car) out of 853 if you wanted
I think you will find that most of the structural steel components and chassis in a car are already made of the lightest stiffest steels that they can be, many of which are as "strong" as if not stronger than 853.
A great resource for the use fo steels in cars is found [url= http://www.ulsab.org/Projects/Future-Steel-Vehicle.aspx ]here.[/url]
The only reason 863 is expensive is because of reynolds marketign bullshit, they make similar and better steels in industry without the equivalent cost increase. (I'm not saying they are as cheap, but the percentages are much much less). Ask Brant who commented on this at on-one, anyone remember DN6 steel?
Is DN6 actually 853 in sheeps clothing then?
I know that Prius panels are made of thinner higher grade steel to conserve weight, but I don't know what steel it is.
I've had a few chips and whilst the exposed metal has rusted it hasn't gone under the paint at all, which was slightly surprising.
"DN6" is our piss take on the tube sets that come out of the Founderland Company in Taiwan - http://www.eco.com.tw/ - with different badges on.
One of those is Reynolds 520.
It is Founderland tubing, boxed and from the same runs, with the same QC checks as standard "Taiwan Chromoly". You can get it in many different diameter, wall thicknesses, butting profiles.
It is however not 853. Which is a magical clever steel which claims to get stronger when it's welded. Which is crackers, as George from G-Sport pointed out - if that were the case, surely it would be better to weld all over the tubing.
But it is better "after welding" than normal steel. And is stronger too. So you can use less of it. But then using less makes things flexier.
Any clearer?
I'm surprised aluminium isn't used more - more expensive to weld / shape / buy I suppose?
Elise was (is?) aluminium chassis with fibre glass body. Always thought that was great till some #@?!€ scraped it in a carpark and drove off. Expensive fix till the insurance was resolved. Luckily, a real gent took their number and left me a note with his details offering to be a witness - top man.
New Clios have plastic front wings to keep weight down.
853 is inherently flexy any more then aluminum is inherently stiff. Its all to do with the overall design of the frame and what the builder / desinger is trying to achieve.You could build a really stiff frame (or car) out of 853 if you wanted
Yes, but what's the point, it'd be much stronger than it needed to be. Idealy you'd pick a steel (other/better materials exist) that had just enough strength for the task in the shape/thickness that gave you the desired stiffness.
brant - Member853. Which is a magical clever steel which claims to get stronger when it's welded. Which is crackers, as George from G-Sport pointed out - if that were the case, surely it would be better to weld all over the tubing.
But it is better "after welding" than normal steel. And is stronger too. So you can use less of it. But then using less makes things flexier.
Any clearer?
The way I understood it was its not "stronger" it's "harder". The main failiure arround the weld is a crack (don't see many frames fold on the weld do you, they crack), thus you have to make the tube thicker to cope with both making it stronger (the forces are generaly concentrated in one part of the tube, eg the bottom of the downtube or top of the top tube, where youd gusset it normaly, by the middle they're distributed arround the whole circumfrance) and stiffer as flexing tubes tend to crack (so you amke it stiffer so it wont flex). Making it "harder" means you can rule out the crackign case to a certain extent and just make the tube thick enough to be strong. Which makes it lighter and flexier (if you want that, or just simply stronger).
You dont weld all over the tube as you dont normlly crack tubes mid way allong their length, so it'd be wasted.
Stronger materials can be made thinner, but there's a limit to how thin things can get regardless of theoretical strength because they might get dented or punctured for instance.
You don't own a car, do you? If you did, you'd know that modern cars (built in a capitalist society) are cleaner, faster, less thirsty, and much longer lasting than their counterparts of, say, twenty years ago.
Don't knw about the last one though. From what I heard from mechanics and body shop blokes, new cars are pitas... They do break down as much as old ones, but the bill is much higher.
My car mechanics told me that the price of standard services on a dacia (old school motors) is about half of it's modern counterparts.
My car mechanics told me that the price of standard services on a dacia (old school motors) is about half of it's modern counterparts.
They lied.
And Dacia are part of renault, so in fact they're both french and using late 90's tech, anyone want to voce an oppinion of late 90's french cars?
The only price increace is most now specify synthetic or semi synthetic oil, but also a longer interval to counter that, and oftent he oil is the only thing thats changed, lots have 2 year intervals on filters etc.
brant - Member853. Which is a magical clever steel which claims to get stronger when it's welded. Which is crackers, as George from G-Sport pointed out - if that were the case, surely it would be better to weld all over the tubing. But it is better "after welding" than normal steel. And is stronger too. So you can use less of it. But then using less makes things flexier. Any clearer?
So...youre not trying to.sell us 853 frames this week?
So Brant why use 853 to build inbreds then ?
Strange that the capitalist society has developed ways of painting cars that make them rust less. Have made OE parts that last much longer, have greatly improved the reliability and have started offering 5 yr+ warranties...+1
Modern cars last for a very long time, are exceptionally reliable and extremely rust proof.
They have the technology to do better though, but won't use it.
Mercedes Benz developed an engine with a 100k mile service interval but the dealers point blank refused to sell it, too much profit o be had from servicing. Much like Hoover trying to buy Dyson's idea to shelve it somewhere, too much money in bags.
They have the technology to do better though, but won't use it.
Mercedes Benz developed an engine with a 100k mile service interval but the dealers point blank refused to sell it, too much profit o be had from servicing. Much like Hoover trying to buy Dyson's idea to shelve it somewhere, too much money in bags.
Thats a bit of a conspiracy theory.
Theres examples of Honda morotbike engines being used for 100k miles, track days, allsorts, no engine serviceing beyong checking the oil level didn't drop below the min level. They survived perfectly well.
Van's have longer intervals purely because they arent weight concious so can have bigger sumps and filters, double the oil volume and filter area and the intervals can double.
Bessides, with the rise in things like MINI TLC plans (basicly you pay for 5 years serviceing upfront with the car) theres an insentive for the dealers not to do any serviceing as theyve got the moeny upfront.
Mercedes Benz developed an engine with a 100k mile service interval but the dealers point blank refused to sell it, too much profit o be had from servicing.
Urban myth.
There are many cars which don't need a full service for 100k miles, at least in the old sense of checking valves, etc. All they need is an oil change every 20k miles or so, filters and a safety checkover. Engines, to a large degree, are not serviced until high mileage, when cambelts/chains and the like need to be renewed. But all that decoking the head etc....a thing of the past.
I used to work for a manufacturer, so I do have some idea what I'm talking about.
The rest of the car components (suspension, cooling system, electrics etc) needs checking, which is what happens at a service.
If I ever went on that QI telly program I would quickly discover that everything I 'know' is in fact wrong.
I'd like to see proof of that andrewh.
Seems to me there'd be a hell of a lot of money to be made in a service interval of 100k miles.
Although I'm sceptical - OIL change interval of 100k miles perhaps, but there's everything else - checkups, fluids, air filters, belts and all the rest.
They lied.
Do you have any proof to back that up...?
I heard it somewhere and believed it. See posts above, may be an urban myth. Will google it later, if it's on Wikepedia then it must be true....
Magnesium is dangerous cos if it catches fire then you'll need really really dark glasses otherwise you'll be blinded.
I used to work for a manufacturer and a major aftermarket parts manufacturer / distributor.
Within our lifetimes it is highly likely that, aside from crash repairs, the only parts your car will ever need are service consumables.
Also... it is now true that if aftermarket parts are of a sufficient quality they can be used interchangably with OE parts. Meaning you don't have to take your car to the dealer network to maintain the warranty. This negates the argument that it makes commercial sense for the manufacturer to keep short service intervals.
TSY - that's more or less true now apart from failures. There will always be failures, but their frequency is less. We don't need to adjust tappets or check valves etc any more.
I'm sure we could make a car that was so overbuilt it lasted forever, but it would cost a lot. The problem is that people who buy new cars often change them before they get old, so they don't care if it lasts 8 years or 80 - they won't own it. The people who buy used cars are much further down the manufacturer's list of priorities. Surely?
So Brant why use 853 to build inbreds then ?
Because it gives a sense of superiority to those that own them, due to them being "better than normal" and weighing about half a pound less.
853 is great. Like I said - it *is* better than regular steel in a post-weld condition.
My problem with 853 is that you can't get long 38mm down tubes. As the billets of material they make it from aren't big enough.
My problem with 853 is that you can't get long 38mm down tubes. As the billets of material they make it from aren't big enough
Reynolds now have 853 in 38mm x 9/6/9/1.1 DZB 740mm long, how long did you want to go?
Reynolds now have 853 in 38mm x 9/6/9/1.1 DZB 740mm long, how long did you want to go?
Well, I'm only going off:-
1) What they told me a year or so ago.
2) The price list I have from 15th August didn't have that tube in.
3) The biggest tubes in that price list are a 34.9mm DT thats 680mm long.
brant
what are you talking about?
The Toyota Picnic used to have an engine slung under the passenger compartment which was a non-serviceable item.
Molgrips, 30 year old Golfs used normal steel but rust from chips doesn't spread. VW just used very good primer.
Not all fancy steels have corrosion resistance, and the paint, seam dealer and cavity wax process has far more to do with the level of corrosion. I've had galvanized cars rust at the seams due to rubbish Sean sealing...
I own an 853 Inbred s/s. Best bike I ever rode. And I love it, or at least I [i]think[/i] I do ?.. not so sure now.
Brant, as designer of my favourite frame, & after your comments, [i]should[/i] I love my 853 Inbred? Or am I just shallow?.
Dont let my missus answer that.
Brant posted on my thread - gush
I've got two of Brant's frames, an SS with the magic 853, and a hooligan Inbred 567 with hooj tubes. I can't imagine either working better by swapping tubesets. Although I imagine a standard SS with regular size DN7 tubes would be difficult to tell apart from mine with identical speccing.
Back to cars, something like an Arial Atom frame might work in 853 if suitable size tubes were available. The triangulating tubes between the top and bottom maintubes would probably give enough stiffness, and it's a very small, light car as well, so issues like those of the beautiful 917 shouldn't arise.
[edit], just had a look at the Atom's specs, and it says:
Bronze Welded DOM/ERW Steel Tubing
Powder Coated
Aluminum Bulkheads
there you go. Could work, but I doubt there would be anything at all to be gained.
molgrips grasps the point, the re is no market for a car that cost 50% more and lasts twice as long.
yes cars now are a damn sight better than they used to be - but a 100 mph / 100mpg car with a life span of 30+ years is easily possible
Re Atom etc, I'm surprised they use steal, alloy would be lighter and stiffer, or can alloy tubing not be made strong in those mums of lengths?
The Else uses an alloy tub which is better than any heavy steal tub would be.
Re Atom etc, I'm surprised they use steal, alloy would be lighter and stiffer, or can alloy tubing not be made strong in those mums of lengths?
The Else uses an alloy tub which is better than any heavy steal tub would be.
There are certain parts of Caterhams that utilise 853 tube as did westfield look at said material
In the world of WRC Some areas are replaced with a sheet material not unlike 853 but these arent production cars in the sense of Ford's etc
An alloy structure like the ariel would be lighter and stiffer??? how so it could actually be made much lighter and stiffer in a higher grade steel ,the majority of tubular frames for sports cars are made of stuff that isnt even near the strength of standard 4130 and its pretty low quality at that
regarding spares.
camera makers used to say the same things about electronic cameras.
last longer and never break.
but if you look at prices for s-h film cameras it's the electronic ones that aren't worth anything.not the older mechanical cameras.
a car is a consumable product.an expensive one.
edit-you can repair a film camera.harder to do with an electronic one.
but a 100 mph / 100mpg car with a life span of 30+ years is easily possible
Few people will pay lots of money for a 100mpg car - the people who can afford lots of money want fast fancy cars and don't care about fuel bills, on the whole.
For this reason the Vauxhall Ampera/Chevy Volt won't sell in large numbers. Great car, I'd love one but they are almost £30k 🙁
30 year old Golfs used normal steel but rust from chips doesn't spread.
My 20 year old Polo certainly spread rust from chips. However the underbody was sealed with about a 5mm thick coating of soft yellow stuff which I thought was pretty clever.
Reynolds 853 is basically the same as T45.
T45 is used all over the place:
[img] 
[/img]
and:
[img] 
[/img]
awhiles back to school mate T45 is a bit stronger than 531 or 4130. It isnt quite at the level an air hardening steel .. 8)
who said anything about 531 or 4130? - the question was about 853.
i'll let you figure the rest out.
(but here's a clue; manganese)
after that, i want 500 words from you on the connection between hardness, and toughness.
🙂
ha ha I know the composition of both, but t45 is not anything like 853. t45 yield 700mpa, 853 yield 1400mpa. Is the chemistry the same? bs4t45 has a max of 1.6 Mn, I know that 853 is not the same. Not allowed to publish the composition here.
oh dear, your next piece of homework, is to learn the difference between yield strength, and UTS...
this is fun isn't it?