Most of my automotive friends know me well as a 'weight weenie' when it comes to cars, meaning I prize lightweight cars that are efficient in their design and execution. I always look to modern cars with a questioning eye when I read that their dimensions have grown, standard feature-sets increase, and weight balloons out of control. In fact, it's only recently that automakers around the world have started to pledge renewed focus on making cars lighter again, and I'm overjoyed to hear this news.
Even most of my die-hard car buddies seem to have a hard time with this concept, choosing instead to just add horsepower to mask the addition of more weight. Since more is generally regarded as better in our society, I suppose I can even forgive them a bit for their thought process. However, I'd like to share more of why I feel the way I do, just in case my detailed thoughts might help to convince others that I'm not completely crazy.
Since I'm a high performance car nut first and foremost, it's always easiest to point out why lighter is better when performance is the objective. Simple power-to-weight ratio is about the most importance performance parameter there is when it comes to gauging a vehicle's performance, so taking a hypothetical 200 hp car that weights 2000 pounds (a 2010Lotus Elise as example) and comparing it to a hypothetical 200 hp car that weighs about 3400 pounds (perhaps a turbocharged 2010 Audi A3 as example) will showcase the differences.
2010 Audi A3 (manual): quarter mile in 14.9 seconds @ 93 mph - 17 pounds per horsepower
2010 Lotus Elise (manual): quarter mile in 13.2 seconds @ 103 mph - 10 pounds per horsepower
That is only a glimpse of the performance difference between those two cars of course, but simply done to illustrate that a 200 hp car is not always the key to defining the performance of that car. We, as Americans, love to brag about horsepower but the real key to showcasing what a car is capable of (unless traction or aerodynamic issues are present) is really the power to weight ratio.
Fundamentally, a car that weighs less will accelerate better, stop better, will not require as aggressive of a suspension to handle equally (or better), and will not be as hard on its tires...nor will it require as much tire under the car to support the weight. I've long professed my love of lightweight cars (and weight reduction) as a means to achieving these very goals.
OK, so lets assume for a minute that you're not a performance car nut. Is there anything else about a lightweight car worth talking about? Yes, absolutely. Please tell me how a 1987 Honda CRX HF could get 52 mpg in the city and 57 mpg on the highway when a much more modern 2011 Honda CR-Z Hybrid can get 31 mpg in the city and 37 mpg on the highway? I'll give you a hint...it's not because Honda is trying to make a less efficient car. The reality is that the modern cars are saddled with many more features in the name of safety (not always a bad thing) and also feature content.
1987 Honda CRX HF: 1713 pounds (51 mpg city, 57 mpg highway)
2011 Honda CR-Z Hybrid: 2650 pounds (31 mpg city, 37 mpg highway)
Before I let you all believe this is all due to the lower weight in the 1987 model, which you know I'd love to do, I need to remind everyone that the procedures with the government independently tests for fuel economy have changed in recent years, so it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. However, you can see that the older Honda does a very fine job sipping the fuel! Hats off to Honda for still wanting to build an interesting car that gets good fuel mileage though.
Hopefully you can at least get a better idea of why I love lightweight cars from this short read, and I promise to follow up with more content in the future. After all, It's one of my favorite automotive topics! :)
Even most of my die-hard car buddies seem to have a hard time with this concept, choosing instead to just add horsepower to mask the addition of more weight. Since more is generally regarded as better in our society, I suppose I can even forgive them a bit for their thought process. However, I'd like to share more of why I feel the way I do, just in case my detailed thoughts might help to convince others that I'm not completely crazy.
Since I'm a high performance car nut first and foremost, it's always easiest to point out why lighter is better when performance is the objective. Simple power-to-weight ratio is about the most importance performance parameter there is when it comes to gauging a vehicle's performance, so taking a hypothetical 200 hp car that weights 2000 pounds (a 2010Lotus Elise as example) and comparing it to a hypothetical 200 hp car that weighs about 3400 pounds (perhaps a turbocharged 2010 Audi A3 as example) will showcase the differences.
2010 Audi A3 (manual): quarter mile in 14.9 seconds @ 93 mph - 17 pounds per horsepower
2010 Lotus Elise (manual): quarter mile in 13.2 seconds @ 103 mph - 10 pounds per horsepower
That is only a glimpse of the performance difference between those two cars of course, but simply done to illustrate that a 200 hp car is not always the key to defining the performance of that car. We, as Americans, love to brag about horsepower but the real key to showcasing what a car is capable of (unless traction or aerodynamic issues are present) is really the power to weight ratio.
Fundamentally, a car that weighs less will accelerate better, stop better, will not require as aggressive of a suspension to handle equally (or better), and will not be as hard on its tires...nor will it require as much tire under the car to support the weight. I've long professed my love of lightweight cars (and weight reduction) as a means to achieving these very goals.
OK, so lets assume for a minute that you're not a performance car nut. Is there anything else about a lightweight car worth talking about? Yes, absolutely. Please tell me how a 1987 Honda CRX HF could get 52 mpg in the city and 57 mpg on the highway when a much more modern 2011 Honda CR-Z Hybrid can get 31 mpg in the city and 37 mpg on the highway? I'll give you a hint...it's not because Honda is trying to make a less efficient car. The reality is that the modern cars are saddled with many more features in the name of safety (not always a bad thing) and also feature content.
1987 Honda CRX HF: 1713 pounds (51 mpg city, 57 mpg highway)
2011 Honda CR-Z Hybrid: 2650 pounds (31 mpg city, 37 mpg highway)
Before I let you all believe this is all due to the lower weight in the 1987 model, which you know I'd love to do, I need to remind everyone that the procedures with the government independently tests for fuel economy have changed in recent years, so it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. However, you can see that the older Honda does a very fine job sipping the fuel! Hats off to Honda for still wanting to build an interesting car that gets good fuel mileage though.
Hopefully you can at least get a better idea of why I love lightweight cars from this short read, and I promise to follow up with more content in the future. After all, It's one of my favorite automotive topics! :)
Hey Steve! I am not a car person but it was nice to read your blog. Your passion for cars is undoubtedly amazing!
ReplyDeleteKeep your thoughts coming.
-Rupinder.