GM Hints At Aluminum Bodies During $5.4B Investment Announcement

by Cameron Aubernon

May 1st, 2015 1:14 PM

gm hints at aluminum bodies during 5 4b investment announcement

During its announcement of a $5.4-billion investment into its facilities, General Motors hinted at possibly making the switch to aluminum bodies.

Part of the investment would go into the Warren Technical Center in Warren, Mich., where a revamp of its prototype plant would accommodate aluminum, steel, and blended steel/aluminum bodies, The Detroit Bureau reports.

Currently, aluminum has been used on some components and panels for a number of models as the automaker continues its experiments in lightweighting that began with the first Corvette. This is set to change with the upcoming Cadillac CT6, which uses the alloy throughout the majority of the body, while the firewall and floor pan are stamped from steel.

With ever-stringent fuel economy standards looming on the horizon — including the 54.5 mpg fleet fuel economy average set for 2025 — GM may apply aluminum to more of its vehicles to help meet the mandate, as the metal is easier to use than other lightweight materials such as carbon fiber.

However, aluminum is more expensive than steel, which may prompt the automaker to use it on luxury vehicles or on trucks and SUVs, following Ford’s extensive use of aluminum on the new F-150.

Steel, meanwhile, won’t be going away. The steel industry has made gains in developing lighter, stronger alloys, while automakers like GM are using blended sandwich-style body panels to reduce noise.

[Photo credit: Joseph Novak/ Flickr/ CC BY 2.0]

#Aluminum #FuelEconomy #GeneralMotors #Lightweighting

Comments

Join the conversation

9 of 36 comments

Big Al from Oz on May 01, 2015

The greatest advantage of the use of aluminium will be in the vehicles most impacted by CAFE regulations. This would indicate that commercial vehicles should not be considered prior to automobiles, ie, cars. Pickups have an advantage over cars using CAFE. That's why I found it odd that Ford went to aluminium on the F-150 when it did. When the use of aluminium on cars would of been more beneficial in meeting CAFE requirement. The only reason I can put it down to is design and the use of a full chassis. Look at the alumimium F-150s design and you will notice there are many straight and flat(ish) planes the vehicle is based on. This allows for much easier production, ie, long straight lines as opposed to the many planes that cars are styled with. So, essentially the style of the pickup has made Ford consider it a worthwhile exercise.

Like Reply
- See 4 previous
- Frantz on May 01, 2015
  
  And payload. While it might not matter to the avg person buying a $50-60k truck, the guy buying a $25k truck will be delighted that a F150 can replace the F250 in some cases now and save on cost, registration, fuel, and other fleet important considerations. I find that 99% of retail customers buy more truck than they need, and 99% of commercial customers buy less truck than they use.
  
  Like
- Big Al from Oz on May 01, 2015
  
  @Frantz, I read a very good working document compiled in the EU regarding the use of materials in commercial vehicles vs engine/drivetrain and aero changes. The study found that aluminium was only beneficial if a vehicle was used some ridiculous amounts of hours per week to offset the investment in the lighter material. Aerodynamic and engine/drivetrain efficiency gains were the viable option. I do think another salient argument for Ford to go down the route of an aluminium pickup is the profit generated by such vehicles in the US. The F-150 posed less risk as an investment. This is even considering that cars were of greater advantage using lighter materials in meeting CAFE requirements. Cars in the US sit on approximately a 3% profit and pickups currently make around a 25% profit.
  
  Like
- DenverMike on May 02, 2015
  
  @BAFO - It makes perfect sense. F-series mpg gains impact Ford's over all fleet average, more than any Ford hybrid econo compact ever could, by shear volume of F-series. And no Ford auto can gain as much from drastically improved working payload. Plus if a Focus rusts into the ground 20 years from now, no one is really out much cash, even if otherwise in mint condition. But today, a rust-free '95 pickup can easily hold $10,000 value if it's a fully optioned fullsize 4X4 in fair condition. Basically there's always more at stake with fullsize pickups. Ford made the right call here.
  
  Like
- Big Al from Oz on May 03, 2015
  
  @DiM, Your comment would of represented some value if you actually considered your statement. The Transit van will benefit far more from aluminium than the F-150. 75% of F-150s don't work. So what use is it to rant and rave regarding payload? Whereas most the Transit will be used for work. Still the most impacted vehicles with CAFE are cars. They would be the first choice, but their profit margins are to small to take on that risk. Pickups have a more or less fixed rate of profit due to protection of 25%. This makes them viable. It has very little to do with payload.
  
  Like
- DenverMike on May 04, 2015
  
  @BAFO - Pay attention this time. I'll go slower: The F-series represents Ford's biggest users of what we like to call "fuel". A small increase in F-series FE translates into tremendous impact for Ford fleet average and collectively, small improvements for up to a million US new pickup owners annually, loaded, empty, don't matter. But it's stup!d to think the Chicken tax creates 25% of anything. Since OEMs easily get around it by something we like to call "loopholes". 25% is a arbitrary number. It could just as well be 2,500,000% But if it guaranteed 25% profit. The Tundra, Titan, Frontier, Ridgeline would enjoy that too. And we'd still have every pickup ever sold here, STILL SOLD HERE!!!
  
  Like
Dusterdude on May 01, 2015

Saturn plastic lanes were great (owned a Vue) although I know they were cost prohibitive that's why they "went away"

Like Reply
Conslaw on May 01, 2015

GM's big announcement that it plans to invest $5.4 billion into its factories doesn't give a timeframe. I suspect it is a significantly longer time period than GM's recent announcement of a $5 billion stock buyback that GM said would take 21 months. In other words, GM will likely be paying off stock speculators faster than it will be investing in its factories. That's the old GM way.

Like Reply
Amca on May 02, 2015

The answer here lies in the Cadillac CT6 - its body is a hybrid steel/aluminum structure. They've gotten a fairly amazing result out of it, and there are hints it's what the next gen Malibu follows the same pattern. GM's not going all aluminum. They're going more aluminum.

Like Reply