Puffy-ness of modern vehicle bodies

[Stephen Tashiro]

The body designs of most modern vehicles look more "puffed out" that vehicle bodies of the 70's, 80's,90's. The designs of those eras didn't have flat areas, but, on the whole, they look flatter than modern cars. Is there some technological reason for the change in body style? Or is it just fashion?

Maybe car bodies follow the trends of human bodies - the shape of the the general population is getting puffier.

[Andrew Seemann]

Probably a combination of style preferences, a need for better aerodynamics for fuel efficiency, and more available freedom of design from technological advances in the last 20 - 30 years in computer design/manufacturing and sheetmetal forming. Now you can CAD a body part, CNC the die, and have a robot stamp it. Back then you needed a drafter, model maker, a die maker, and a lot more time and effort to put it in the manufacturing line.

[Doug Garson]

In addition to what Andrew said you also have advancements in materials technology that mean fewer limitations on what a designer can do. Then you have the new Tesla E truck that, as far as I can tell, has no curved surfaces.

[Jim Becker]

Aerodynamics takes a big nod for a lot of this because even incremental increases in fuel economy are meaningful financially for the auto manufacturers over the fleet average. Doug is also correct that the industry is less constrained when it comes to materials and fabrication due to modern techniques. Automated assembly also helps with this. One thing, however....there is a "remarkable similarly" between many vehicles across multiple manufacturers in style and implementation and that's likely both for marketing and functional reasons...the latter being "what works" for the aforementioned average fuel economy targets as well as strength at the same time for meeting safety expectations.

Of course, if you look at some of the 1950s and early 1960s vehicles, there were some pretty flowing designs! Mostly on a larger scale, however.

[Lee DeRaud]

One other thing is that a panel with compound curves and/or multiple creases (AKA "character lines") can be made from thinner/lighter material without sacrificing structural rigidity. Every ounce counts.

[Nathan Johnson]

You also have more stringent safety requirements, so things like headlamp height and side curtain airbags and whatnot have to be accounted for.

[Mel Fulks]

The old Studibakers were really rounded,looked like a plane with no wings. But ...they did not look puffy

[Eduard Nemirovsky]

I don't see anything puffy in the new Tesla truck :eek:. For me just simple ugly,
Ed.

[Mel Fulks]

I don't see anything puffy in the new Tesla truck :eek:. For me just simple ugly,
Ed.

There is ugly, plain ugly , and two flat planes ugly

[Doug Garson]

Last I heard it had 146,000 pre-orders so not everyone thinks its too ugly.

[Jim Becker]

Last I heard it had 146,000 pre-orders so not everyone thinks its too ugly.

Over 200K orders now, I believe.

[Lee DeRaud]

I don't see anything puffy in the new Tesla truck :eek:. For me just simple ugly,
Ed.It just doesn't look right without the flux capacitors on the hatch lid.

[Lee DeRaud]

Over 200K orders now, I believe.If P.T.Barnum was right about "one born every minute", that's over three months' worth.

[Edward Dyas]

The body designs of most modern vehicles look more "puffed out" that vehicle bodies of the 70's, 80's,90's. The designs of those eras didn't have flat areas, but, on the whole, they look flatter than modern cars. Is there some technological reason for the change in body style? Or is it just fashion?

Maybe car bodies follow the trends of human bodies - the shape of the the general population is getting puffier.The auto manufacturers are under a lot of pressure from the government to make them more fuel efficient. That translates to making them more aerodynamic. It's also why it's getting more and more difficult to tell one car from another. It used to be you could tell a Ford from a Chev from a block away.

[Jamie Buxton]

I agree with you Stephen. A lot of vehicles look like the designers puffed them up like an inflatable doll -- I guess because they think buyers want vehicles which look big. It is the McMansion phenomenon applied to vehicles.

I've been driving pickups for thirty or forty years now. Today's truck has a bed which is the same size as those forty-year-old trucks, but the whole truck is three feet longer, a foot taller, and at least a half foot wider. That's puffing up.

[Doug Garson]

It just doesn't look right without the flux capacitors on the hatch lid.
But it will come with optional solar collectors .

[Andrew Seemann]

I agree with you Stephen. A lot of vehicles look like the designers puffed them up like an inflatable doll -- I guess because they think buyers want vehicles which look big. It is the McMansion phenomenon applied to vehicles.

I've been driving pickups for thirty or forty years now. Today's truck has a bed which is the same size as those forty-year-old trucks, but the whole truck is three feet longer, a foot taller, and at least a half foot wider. That's puffing up.

Which baffles me to no end. It seems like people want more of everything that makes pickups inefficient and a pain to drive. A tall and wide profile for poor fuel efficiency. A tiny bed not much bigger than a Model A pickup bed, yet a wheel base that makes feel like you are parking a pontoon boat, with about the same grace and ease. 200 more hp than a truck from the '80s, yet 95% of the time the bed is loaded only with air, and all the tow hitch is pulling is the drag vortex. All this can be yours for $50,000.

[Leo Graywacz]

Aerodynamics takes a big nod for a lot of this because even incremental increases in fuel economy are meaningful financially for the auto manufacturers over the fleet average. Doug is also correct that the industry is less constrained when it comes to materials and fabrication due to modern techniques. Automated assembly also helps with this. One thing, however....there is a "remarkable similarly" between many vehicles across multiple manufacturers in style and implementation and that's likely both for marketing and functional reasons...the latter being "what works" for the aforementioned average fuel economy targets as well as strength at the same time for meeting safety expectations.

Of course, if you look at some of the 1950s and early 1960s vehicles, there were some pretty flowing designs! Mostly on a larger scale, however.

I remember when the Ford Taurus came out. It was computer aerodynamically designed. After that a lot of cars that came out had a great deal of similarities to that design because it was fuel efficient.

[Kev Williams]

The Tesla pickup, what are they doing to make all the flat sheet metal stronger than a cookie sheet?

And this 'puffed up' car thing is real. When in traffic, keep your eyes out for a '60's Camaro. When mixed in with newer cars on a 4-lane, they look like toys in comparison, almost everything dwarfs them...

[Doug Garson]

The Tesla pickup, what are they doing to make all the flat sheet metal stronger than a cookie sheet?

And this 'puffed up' car thing is real. When in traffic, keep your eyes out for a '60's Camaro. When mixed in with newer cars on a 4-lane, they look like toys in comparison, almost everything dwarfs them...
If you watched the video introducing the truck the body is high strength stainless steel, they demonstrated its strength by hitting it with a sledge hammer (that was before they broke the glass demonstrating that it was unbreakable:confused:).

[Kev Williams]

I did watch the video, I know it's strong, what I don't know, is how they did it? :)

[Jason Roehl]

I've been driving pickups for thirty or forty years now. Today's truck has a bed which is the same size as those forty-year-old trucks, but the whole truck is three feet longer, a foot taller, and at least a half foot wider. That's puffing up.

I've only been driving them for 20-ish, but what I've seen is a bit different. The trucks of yesteryear were far, far more likely to be a regular cab truck with an 8' bed on it that would haul 4'x8' sheet goods. Now, they're far, far more likely to be an extended cab, crew cab, or "super-crew" with a 5'-6' long bed so that they aren't so long, but can haul a family. I have an '07 F150 SuperCrew (4 full size doors) with a 5.5' bed that is essentially the same length as the '90 F150 I used to have that had a regular cab and 8' bed. But, for the same fuel mileage I got out of that little 5.0L V-8 in the '90, I get almost double the horsepower and torque in the 5.4L, with far superior handling (and this one is 4WD), despite probably weighing at least 1000 lbs more. Heck, it has better tow ratings than the '93 F250 I had with a 5.8L V-8, thanks to around 50% more HP and torque. I just looked up size specs on the two--my current truck is about 5" longer, but is 0.1" narrower. Wheelbase is about the same between the two, and the new one is 6" taller.

[Leo Graywacz]

I did watch the video, I know it's strong, what I don't know, is how they did it? :)

It's probably a skin over something more rigid.

[Leo Graywacz]

I agree with you Stephen. A lot of vehicles look like the designers puffed them up like an inflatable doll -- I guess because they think buyers want vehicles which look big. It is the McMansion phenomenon applied to vehicles.

I've been driving pickups for thirty or forty years now. Today's truck has a bed which is the same size as those forty-year-old trucks, but the whole truck is three feet longer, a foot taller, and at least a half foot wider. That's puffing up.

The newer "puffy" trucks are significantly more safe and quite a bit quieter inside. I went from a 1988 GMC 2500 to a 2007 GMC 2500 and the difference was immense. The 88 had a 150HP motor and the 07 had a 352HP. When I was in the 88 you could hear everything outside, even with the windows shut tight. With the 07 when you shut the windows it was almost silent inside. My 88 got 14.5 MPG, the truck weighed 3200lbs it was a single cab 8' bed. The 07 gets 13.5 MPG and weighs 6000lbs, and has a 352HP motor that is like a rocket when you shove the pedal it is an extended cab with an 8' bed.

[Jim Becker]

If P.T.Barnum was right about "one born every minute", that's over three months' worth.

Could be true. Pre-ordering is only $100 (refundable I believe) and more or less gets one a place in-line should they decide they want to buy once production starts. In the mean time...that cash earns Tesla a few shekels of interest and probably some accounting brownie points, depending on how it's, um...accounted for.

[Jim Becker]

The Tesla pickup, what are they doing to make all the flat sheet metal stronger than a cookie sheet?

It's not exactly "sheet metal" in the sense that other vehicles use metal. Part of the reason that the vehicle is likely so angular is because the material they are using can't be stamped like is normally done for motor vehicle body panels. They had to do a rather deep score on the inside of the material and then carefully bend it.

[Bill Dufour]

Speaking of puffy cars I realize they remind me of the Chevron car toys. Maybe the milineal designers grew up with them?
Bill D.
https://www.chevronwithtechron.com/cars

[Steve Rozmiarek]

I wonder how you'd do something useful with that tesla, like pull a trailer....

https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/client/to_webp,q_glossy,ret_img,w_1280/https://pjtrailers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/lg_L3-14-inch-i-beam-low-pro-with-duals-trailer.jpg

[Stan Calow]

Today's truck has a bed which is the same size as those forty-year-old trucks, but the whole truck is three feet longer, a foot taller, and at least a half foot wider. That's puffing up.

Yes. I want one of those old Datsun pickup-sized trucks. Everything else has outgrown my garage.

[Doug Dawson]

It's probably a skin over something more rigid.

The body exterior is the frame, like a rigid exoskeleton. That's how they did it. With enough steel plate, anything can look like that. :^)

[Doug Dawson]

I wonder how you'd do something useful with that tesla, like pull a trailer....



Weld the hitch to the bodywork.

BTW, I'm waiting for them to put headlights on the rear of it, so you don't know if it's coming or going. :^)

[Jim Becker]

Steve, I doubt this is suitable for larger trailer setups like you show, especially due to weight, but it's probably just fine with both bumper pull and *small* gooseneck. I have not looked for specifications, but I'm guessing it's probably similar to the typical half-ton pick-em-up-truck relative to limits, but range may be sticky "loaded up".

[Doug Garson]

If they can design an electric truck why does anyone doubt they can design a trailer hitch? Specs say 14,000 lb towing capacity.

[Edward Dyas]

Then there is the issue of parking the big puffy truck at the box store which isn't truck friendly anyway. I think I get a new dent on my truck bumper every time I get lumber.

[Jim Becker]

I don't think that dents are going to be easy to put in THAT particular truck...it's not thin sheet metal.

[Doug Dawson]

If they can design an electric truck why does anyone doubt they can design a trailer hitch? Specs say 14,000 lb towing capacity.

They will be talking about torque. Again, it's an exoskeleton.

These things will rock with torque.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Steve, I doubt this is suitable for larger trailer setups like you show, especially due to weight, but it's probably just fine with both bumper pull and *small* gooseneck. I have not looked for specifications, but I'm guessing it's probably similar to the typical half-ton pick-em-up-truck relative to limits, but range may be sticky "loaded up".

Jim, that body shape isn't compatible with any gooseneck or 5th wheel trailer. Side panels would interfere with turning. If they intend it to be a crossover, like the old Chevy Avalanche, then so be it. They are useless as a truck though, and the sales supported that uselessness. I don't know the weight of it, it looks heavy though, so the GVW while pulling a trailer would possibly be an issue with the DOT, as would battery life. Bottom line, it's not going to play where pickups actually earn a living because it isn't a pickup, it'll be too expensive, it won't have enough capacity for hauling or range, and it looks stupid (that last one is my own opinion ;). They did get a bunch of free press though, cheapest name recognition marketing campaign ever!

[Bill Dufour]

I would expect the battery alone to weigh over one ton. The big car battery weighs roughly 2000 pounds so the truck battery will weigh that much and more.

[Jim Becker]

Jim, that body shape isn't compatible with any gooseneck or 5th wheel trailer. Side panels would interfere with turning. If they intend it to be a crossover, like the old Chevy Avalanche, then so be it. They are useless as a truck though, and the sales supported that uselessness. I don't know the weight of it, it looks heavy though, so the GVW while pulling a trailer would possibly be an issue with the DOT, as would battery life. Bottom line, it's not going to play where pickups actually earn a living because it isn't a pickup, it'll be too expensive, it won't have enough capacity for hauling or range, and it looks stupid (that last one is my own opinion ;). They did get a bunch of free press though, cheapest name recognition marketing campaign ever!

Steve, there have been folks in the equestrian community having trouble with a GN on some current trucks where the sides of the beds were made taller in the design and the trailer GN could go high enough to clear them. (usually older trailers) . But that said, I don't think that Tesla is intending "this" truck to be a "work truck" or for heavy trailering. It will likely meet the needs of the majority of folks who want a pick-em-up-truck to cruise the highways and malls and pick up stuff at the home center once in awhile. That's how most pickups get used in the same way that most "Very capable" 4x4 SUVs never see off-road conditions beyond a dirt road or a muddy parking lot. :)

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Steve, there have been folks in the equestrian community having trouble with a GN on some current trucks where the sides of the beds were made taller in the design and the trailer GN could go high enough to clear them. (usually older trailers) . But that said, I don't think that Tesla is intending "this" truck to be a "work truck" or for heavy trailering. It will likely meet the needs of the majority of folks who want a pick-em-up-truck to cruise the highways and malls and pick up stuff at the home center once in awhile. That's how most pickups get used in the same way that most "Very capable" 4x4 SUVs never see off-road conditions beyond a dirt road or a muddy parking lot. :)

Very true! I think the tesla should be called a crossover, not a truck.

BTW, I saw the tug of war with the F150, would like to see that vs a "real pickup" like my beat up old duramax work truck, lol. I don't think the tesla would stand a chance.

[Stan Calow]

Very true! I think the tesla should be called a crossover, not a truck.

Yes, that's right! Its more like an El Camino.

[Leo Graywacz]

Very true! I think the tesla should be called a crossover, not a truck.

BTW, I saw the tug of war with the F150, would like to see that vs a "real pickup" like my beat up old duramax work truck, lol. I don't think the tesla would stand a chance.

I saw an article that poo pooed the contest. The Telsa because it's heavy already had the advantage. The Telsa started the pull first which gave it the advantage. The pickup truck was in two wheel drive with an empty bed which gave it a distinct disadvantage grip wise and they said the tires on the gas truck weren't exactly fresh while the Telsa had brand new tires.

I don't know if the Telsa was a 4wd or AWD but if it was then putting the gas truck in 2wd was just dishonest. Grip of tires and weight have the biggest factor in a tug of war, engine size next. Since the truck was not new it's probably not one of the newer ECO turbo trucks either. If you are comparing high tech electric to old fashion gas the least you could do is use a newer model truck with equivalent HP ratings.

[Leo Graywacz]

https://youtu.be/jzKCJsou10w

[Jim Becker]

Very true! I think the tesla should be called a crossover, not a truck.

It's still a truck...just as vehicle like the Ranger and Colorado are trucks.

Here's an interesting opinion article that caught my eye...I kinda agree with it.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/perspectives/cybertruck-tesla-elon-musk/index.html

[Bill Dufour]

Reminds me of another truck. Is it the Honda ridgeline with the big sail panels.
Bil lD

[Erik Loza]

It's still a truck...just as vehicle like the Ranger and Colorado are trucks.

Here's an interesting opinion article that caught my eye...I kinda agree with it.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/perspectives/cybertruck-tesla-elon-musk/index.html

+1 ^^^ Sure, looks like it's from outer space but to be honest (at least here in TX), probably 75% of the trucks I see never will haul or tow a single thing. Just purchased for looks or as the owner's personal toy: Lift kits in the city, expensive rims, immaculate bed liner, etc. I suspect Tesla doesn't care about the "regular truck market" and is trying to invent a new one. I'd test drive one of these in a heartbeat.

Erik