>yup. if the designs and materials of today's cars would last (with proper
>maintenance) as the older, heavier, less-complicated designs of the 50's 
and
>60's, you'd never have to buy another car (except for psychological reasons
>.. like keeping up with the Johnsons or some such). :)
>
>and the car companies would go broke.
>
>Porsche had designed an aluminum bodied car back in the early 70's, but was
>talked out of it by some other car companies (and their own research) ...
>it would never rust or corrode, and (unless you had a wreck) would never 
wear
>out. so people would never buy a newer car. :)
>(that's not ACTUALLY the reason they stated, but it's close enough to the
>truth of the matter).

Nope. Aluminum is very soft, and fairly brittle when fatigued. And it
fatigues much more quickly than steel, and so is vulnerable to vibration,
of which a car has lots. Even if it's alloyed with other metals, it retains
many of these troublesome properties.

So, it is rarely used for structural parts, unless the parts can be very 
thick
and resistant to deformation (engine blocks, cyl heads, bumpers etc.). And
never for body panels, since it dents and scratches VERY easily. Otherwise
Saturn would have used aluminum instead of the (even more durable) plastic
body panels it now uses.

In aircraft, aluminum is often used as skin, since planes don't get many
parking-lot dents, and also because air loads tend to be distributed over
a broad surface. And, if a plane has multiple wing spars, they MIGHT be
made of aluminum (but more often steel, or even carbon-fiber laminates
these days). But a single, heavy spar that carries all the wing's stress,
is almost never aluminum-- that's putting all your eggs in an unacceptably
fragile basket.

>>If newer cars are so wonderful, how come there have been several recalls 
on
>>the paint jobs in recent years?
>
>it just goes to show: a quick shower can never produce the quality of a 
deep
>soaking bath. :)

Have you been talking to /martha again?   :^)

Steve Maher   smaher@gi.com