Jump to content

Reports: GM To Use Carbon Fiber In Truck Beds

Gorehamj

Recommended Posts

1SLOW1500 Senior Enthusiast

1SLOW1500

Posted
Posted
To whom it may concern:
FIBERGLASS IS NOT CARBON FIBER. Repairs and manufacturing of fiber glass is an open air process; and do not require the cumbersome vacuum packing and sealing in an vacuum bag that carbon fiber requires for high tinsel strength. Air has to be removed from vacuum bag or the material will not cure evenly. I make a living doing this.
Fiberglass repairs are a picnic compared to shattered carbon fiber parts that have to be discarded.
You cannot make a buck (wood Mold) for carbon fiber without a vacuum bag big enough to fit the entire  mold in,
thus this is why the boating industry will never adopt carbon fiber to replace fiberglass less costly curing process.
Hope this post clears that up.
Yes you are 90% right but still there is other ways to to carbon fiber.. dry carbon can be done in camber. Again 1980 tech. But price and cost have dropped to the redneck diy house build.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply
kstruckcountry Senior Enthusiast

kstruckcountry

Posted
Posted

I think everyone understands the differences. I have seen fiberglass and carbon fiber sheets laid up together. The glass will potentially provide some extra impact resistance.

I would assume composites for automotive use are vacuum bagged, due to the weight savings, which isn't as much of a concern in boats.

One time we played with a Kevlar/glass/carbon mix, just for giggles.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

1SLOW1500 Senior Enthusiast

1SLOW1500

Posted
Posted
I think everyone understands the differences. I have seen fiberglass and carbon fiber sheets laid up together. The glass will potentially provide some extra impact resistance.

I would assume composites for automotive use are vacuum bagged, due to the weight savings, which isn't as much of a concern in boats.

One time we played with a Kevlar/glass/carbon mix, just for giggles.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


Just for fun look at ultra carbon they are pushing all the rules. Carbon wheels and even a carbon converter. Still not highest end carbon but interesting.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Snoringbear Enthusiast

Snoringbear

Posted
Posted

There's some interesting comments being made on this thread for sure.  I confess that I don't know anything about fiber carbon but I suspect I'm about to learn.  I do know though that the pickup truck market, especially the full size half ton market, is as competitive as it gets.  So, I disagree that any of the manufacturers are purposely making junk and are out to screw anybody.  Sure, the profit motive is alive and well.  Afterall, it's required to survive.  But, "truck people" are in my estimation some of the most knowledgeable buyers/users there are.  So, any manufacturer that produces a poor quality product for very long  will pay severely with lost market share, profits, etc, and maybe even eventually go out of business.

 

i will say this about the general state of quality being produced today.  It's the best it's ever been.  I'm an old dog and started my driving career with 50's era beaters.  So, I've lived the evolution of cars and trucks.  I remember spending some time practically every weekend it seemed doing some sort of maintainence on at least one of the family vehicles.  Current generation (with a little luck) are pretty much maintainence free for first 100k miles with exception of routine wear items.  Well, im pooped, calf rope  ?!

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted

The difference, Snoringbear, is with a little maintenance, those vehicles can be driven forever - just look at Cuba. I've seen these cars sit in fields in the direct sun, with rain, snow, and constant moisture, and they still had GOOD chrome trim and bumpers, and all the body panels were solid! Anything rubber or fabric was trashed, but that's to be expected. If your mechanically inclined, that engine that sat for decades will start and run!

 

Try that with ANY vehicle being produced today. I guarantee there will be computer and wiring failures that will drive you to drink. Cars today are 15 year vehicles AT BEST - most don't have a prayer of getting close to that. That statistic isn't getting any better with these '18's, I can assure you of that. Everything today is built to get you just out of the warranty period. Sometimes they can't even do that!

Snoringbear Enthusiast

Snoringbear

Posted
Posted

Well Jesse, I have a different recollection of "the good ole days" than you which is ok.  I just remember adjusting and replacing breaks, points and plugs, v-belts, water pumps, fuel pumps, anti-freeze every fall, oil every 3k, clutches, pressure plates, throw-out bearings, etc, etc.  Sure, sheet metal was thicker but rust-out was terrible.  Engines often had to be rebuilt well before 100k.  Btw, current auto complexity is partly driven by gov regulations and partly by customer demand.  Electronics content in today's autos has grown exponentially over the past few years.  Nobody wants a simple stripped down auto anymore.  It won't sell.  My first brand new auto purchase was a 1975 Chev half ton with in-line six, three on the tree, bench seat, am radio, no power anything.  I wouldn't by it today I know that for sure and my wife wouldn't ride in it for double sure, lol ?...

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted

It's a tossup - do you want something that rides nice, cost more than a house did in '75, and is complete junk in 12 years .... or something simple, bare-bones that does what it's supposed to do for CHEAP,  and will last forever in the right hands?

 

We can agree to disagree, but I'll take the latter. 

 

They don't build vehicles I want anymore! Everything has a damn PC in the dash. NO THANKS. Power windows and A/C is about as fancy as I want.

 

The beauty of today is you throw modern suspension and a HEI ignition into one of those relics, and they are absolutely perfect. 

 

I miss my '72 El Camino - with a little work, it was just as reliable as anything (drove it cross country pulling a 2k lb. trailer, then kept it 10 years after - never rebuilt the engine), and handled and rode better than ANY modern car. 

truckofwinandawesome Senior Enthusiast

truckofwinandawesome

Posted
Posted
The difference, Snoringbear, is with a little maintenance, those vehicles can be driven forever - just look at Cuba. I've seen these cars sit in fields in the direct sun, with rain, snow, and constant moisture, and they still had GOOD chrome trim and bumpers, and all the body panels were solid! Anything rubber or fabric was trashed, but that's to be expected. If your mechanically inclined, that engine that sat for decades will start and run!
 
Try that with ANY vehicle being produced today. I guarantee there will be computer and wiring failures that will drive you to drink. Cars today are 15 year vehicles AT BEST - most don't have a prayer of getting close to that. That statistic isn't getting any better with these '18's, I can assure you of that. Everything today is built to get you just out of the warranty period. Sometimes they can't even do that!


My Aveo is a perfect example of this throwaway culture; because as of right now, it’s only worth $3,500-$4,000 according to KBB, and if my transmission were to kick the bucket the car would only be worth scrap value because a transmission from GM costs more than what the rest of the car is worth. (And the engine is just as costly; which is why I NEVER see an LXV engine at a salvage yard)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

Longevity, reliability?

I'm hoping my 2012 lasts until I get the dirt blanket.

I believe any vehicle that comes together correctly on today's assembly lines with proper care and maintenance will last.

They all make a bad one now and then.

The technology in manufacturing and assembly is far better today.

They are more complicated and harder to work on.

My 2012 is vastly superior to my 93.

 

I also take into account the human factor.

John Doe 1 does the maintenance and doesn't abuse his vehicles.

John Doe 2 performs poor maintenance, beats his vehicles then complains they are junk.

 

There are a lot of factors and opinions and maybe I'm naive but I'll take fuel injection,  superior ignitions, platinum plugs, synthetic fluids, advanced tires etc. etc. any day.

 

:happysad:

 

 

 

 

 

Snoringbear Enthusiast

Snoringbear

Posted
Posted

You're right Diyer2,

a few things that sometimes get lost in the mix;. Inflation -- takes about $8 today to purchase  $1 of 1970 content.  So, a 1970 truck costing say $3000 a equivalent truck today would cost about $24,000.  But, the catch is the key word "equivalent".  There are virtually no trucks produced today with the same content as in 1970.  Today's trucks, even the so called base models are loaded with far more content.  I'm not going to bother listing all the differences that comes to mind but the list would be very long.  One technological factor that has caused huge change was the invention of the integrated circuit in 1959 which was not so very long ago for some of us old dogs.  But, just consider the imporovenents that have come to pass over the past 50 years and you'll get the idea...

revrnd Senior Enthusiast

revrnd

Posted
Posted
On 12/25/2017 at 5:44 AM, sdeeter19555 said:

5th wheel would just utilize the existing bed bolts...

Steve
2012 2500hd 6.0l
 

Haven't box bolts 'thru' the floor been non-existent since the GMT400 was intro'd? Bolts come up thru the frame & thread into weldnuts in the crossmembers under the floor panel. 

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted

I hear the same arguments all the time about older vehicles that "their engines never made it past 100k", etc. For whatever reason, I have NEVER experienced this!

 

I have beat and abused my older vehicles 10x harder than I ever could today (for legal, and physical reasons!) and out of all those engines, only ONE failed on me - a 305 in my '72 C20 with 4.56 gears doing well over 100MPH on the highway. Engine must've been at 6k for 10 minutes before the #7 big-end bearing decided to melt down.

 

You guys wouldn't believe the things I used to do to my vehicles! I was insane behind the wheel. People who were fearless were scared when I drove! Not even joking! I've got the 2-page driving record to back that up. Everything I owned in those days was built between '77 & '89 - not exactly the best years in the automotive world. In fact, I'd say those were some of the WORST, not counting today - only difference today is that they look decent, ride great, and have great power right out of the box. Keeping them running is another story however, and is totally hit or miss. You might get lucky and get 100k before the money lights come on, while the next guy's engine can't even make half that.

 

First new vehicle I ever bought in my life - my '07 Silverado - gets parked in a garage every day/night, has had nothing but the best of the best synthetic oils, and I don't beat this thing anywhere near the way I beat my other vehicles when I was 15-25 years younger ... and this one burns oil, and is showing early signs of cam bearing failure. That's just plain WRONG, especially considering that I paid THIRTY TIMES what I paid for my vehicles in my teens!

 

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that just maybe the quality components aren't there today.My Silverado's brakes pulsated with just FORTY MILES on the clock! How the hell does that even happen??? My '86 Grand Marquis is STILL on it's OE fuel pump, power steering pump, steering box, engine, transmission, and differential at 249k miles. Ball joints have been in it for 150k miles & 12 years. My Silverado couldn't even make it to 40k on the lowers, and barely made 50k on the uppers! Usually that's the other way around, since the lowers are normally larger, but things are different in the 21st Century, for sure! :uhoh:

Snoringbear Enthusiast

Snoringbear

Posted
Posted
On December 26, 2017 at 7:35 AM, truckofwinandawesome said:

 


My Aveo is a perfect example of this throwaway culture; because as of right now, it’s only worth $3,500-$4,000 according to KBB, and if my transmission were to kick the bucket the car would only be worth scrap value because a transmission from GM costs more than what the rest of the car is worth. (And the engine is just as costly; which is why I NEVER see an LXV engine at a salvage yard)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well, he to Google Aveo as I didn't know what it was.  Apparently, it's been rebadged as a Sonic?  Anyway, you're correct in that it's basically a throw away car.  Ford sells the Fiesta in the same market for about $17K.  This sector is aimed primarily at young first-time buyers just getting started in life.  So, if the car holds together for maybe seven ~ maybe ten years and 100K miles or so it's served its purpose.

truckofwinandawesome Senior Enthusiast

truckofwinandawesome

Posted
Posted
Well, he to Google Aveo as I didn't know what it was.  Apparently, it's been rebadged as a Sonic?  Anyway, you're correct in that it's basically a throw away car.  Ford sells the Fiesta in the same market for about $17K.  This sector is aimed primarily at young first-time buyers just getting started in life.  So, if the car holds together for maybe seven ~ maybe ten years and 100K miles or so it's served its purpose.

 

Yup, my Aveo just passed 100K, and the issues are starting to come in thick and fast; and it REALLY doesn’t help that my Aveo started its life in the industry that is infamous for pushing cars to the absolute limit: an Enterprise Rental Car.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,913
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Smitty462
    Newest Member
    Smitty462
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 1 Anonymous, 693 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...