AD #1701 – Ford Teams with Alcoa, New VW Tiguan Gets Bigger, Porsche Unveils EV

September 15th, 2015 at 12:37pm

Runtime: 6:22

- Ford Moving to Advanced Aluminum
- China’s BAIC Heads to Silicon Valley
- New VW Tiguan Grows in Size
- Mazda Unveils All-New Crossover Concept
- Jaguar F-PACE Makes Official Debut
- Porsche Shows 4-Door EV
- Audi Reveals Electric SUV Concept

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Hyundai, Bridgestone, Dow Automotive Systems and MEDC.

»Subscribe to Podcast | iTunes | RSS | Listen on Phone Stitcher | YouTube

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

17 Comments to “AD #1701 – Ford Teams with Alcoa, New VW Tiguan Gets Bigger, Porsche Unveils EV”

  1. Sean McElroy Says:

    Sorry for the delay today, we’re having some computer issues.

  2. wl simpson Says:

    Mission E sure rings this olwrench’s bell

  3. G.A.Branigan Says:

    No problem Sean,I was having internet problems this morning that had to be resolved.

    VW’s styling,I like it.Simple and clean,nothing outrageous at all.

    If they bring back the transporter/van,that would be a possibility for me in about 3 years.

  4. Mike Ma Says:

    Does Ford know something that General Motors doesn’t as a while back Cadillac’s Travis Hester said they had initially thought about building the CT6 mostly of aluminum except that there were NVH characteristics which made all aluminum cars impractical and why Cadillac chose using steel in the passenger compartment; then again, if Alcoa’s Micromill material proves to be practical we’ll see it used by General Motors as well.

  5. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Is this new aluminum “military grade?”

    As far as aluminum for cars, it saves weight, but the savings are fairly modest, all things considered. An F150 crew cab with a V6 turbo is about 8% lighter than a V8 Silverado. An aluminum Audi A8 is only about 4% lighter than the outgoing BMW 7 series which, I think, is mostly steel. I’m sure we’ll see more and more aluminum used in car bodies, but there is still progress to be made in lightening steel cars. Using “high strength” steel where soft steel is now used can save weight, because you can use less of it in the structure.

  6. Rob Says:

    They can probably drop a lot of vehicle weight as autonomy takes hold. As collisions are reduced if not eliminated there won’t be much need for crumple zones, roll-over A-pillars, Airbags, Door beams, etc etc. Weight is cut = improved MPG and longer range EVs.

  7. MJB Says:


    Hmmm. I don’t know. I think it might quite some time (decades, that is) before we see these safety measures removed from automobiles – if ever. The threat of endless litigation if lives were ever lost due to the absence of any of these measures may be too great.

  8. HtG Says:

    Audi e Tron

    That thing might be a blast to drive. It’s got a heavy battery way down low. Two rear motors which can be set up to vary torque side to side, helping steer the car. And the rear wheels steer too. Hard to see customers not enjoying the handling.

  9. Duke Says:

    You might be interested in reading this article

  10. Kit Gerhart Says:

    9 Thanks. Good article.

    It’s interesting that, apparently, continuous casting of aluminum results in different properties than with conventional processing. Continuous casting of steel, which has existed at least as far back as the 1970′s, is much more efficient than pouring ingots, and rolling them into billets, rods, strip, etc., but to my knowledge, the end product is the same as with “old fashioned” processing of the same alloy.

  11. Drew Says:

    Kit, the weight savings of aluminum cannot be simply summarized by looking at the weight delta between two different OEMs as each OEM has their own different internal standards (remember the 2014 steel-bodied F150 weighed considerably more than the Chevy)… Nor can it be calculated between two different generations within an OEM as the newer generation invariably has more regulatory content and more innovative technological features (a D-class car might have been in the 3375# ETWC weight class 30 years ago, but is roughly in the 4000# weight class now).

  12. Kit Gerhart Says:

    11, I agree that the comparisons don’t tell the complete story, but they are meaningful. All vehicles sold during a given model year have to meet the same standards, and the current Ford and Chevy pickups were new at about the same time.

    As far as the expensive German cars, there may be “other things” involved. All A8′s have AWD, while AWD is option on the BMW. Of other cars in that class, the Benz S-Class is heavier than the BMW, and the Lexus LS is lighter. The LS is about 100 pounds heavier than the A8.

    The weights I listed are from the CR web site, for the vehicles they tested. The pickups were comparably equipped, as much as possible, except for the engine type. I don’t know if the BMW or LS had AWD. If not, it would widen the weight advantage of the aluminum Audi a little.

  13. Roger T Says:

    First Porsche I actually like. This E car will make panamera look like ugly ducks.

  14. Jonathan Says:

    Can’t seem to post on today’s comment section of the Frankfurt show so let me say here the pricing on the new jaguar cuv f pace is dam aggressive.

    My wife always wanted a jag u ar and I was leaning towards a Porsche Macan.

    Gm doesn’t seem to have a Macan competitor just yet.

    Do you think the jaguar with the supercharged v6 will rival the road performance of the Macan 340 hp version?

    Great show and great coverage of the Frankfurt show…



  15. MJB Says:

    It’s a shame there are so few things left to be done stylistically with vehicles today. The rear shot of that Audi electric crossover concept is awfully reminiscent of the Lincoln MKC.

  16. HtG Says:

    Maybe that’s why the front facia and logos are getting more pronounced and loud. TBH, I need the jewelry all around the Macan to know what it is.

    It’s all Aztec now

  17. Drew Says:

    Kit, some government regulations can be implemented in a phased-in schedule over 3-4 years. This is often true for those regulations that requires major structural redesigns. So, major change vehicles often contain more regulatory content than carryover designs. That newly designed vehicle often contains anticipated regulatory-driven structure in anticipation of the next 5 years of rule making.