Month: 3월 2015

Home / 2015 / 3월 (Page 20)

BMW Recruiting Engineers to Focus on Lightweight, Carbon-Fiber Composites

BMW Recruiting Engineers to Focus on Lightweight, Carbon-Fiber Composites

PARIS – BMW is recruiting 40 engineers with carbon-fiber expertise to help meet its goal of launching its i3 and i8 lightweight electrified vehicles in 2013.

BMW co-sponsored the JEC composite exposition here this year here to call attention to its job openings. Engineers and staff from the auto maker’s human resources department shared the BMW’s booth.

Carbon-fiber bodies long have been used for Formula 1 race cars and supercars, such as the Mercedes SLR McLaren Roadster, and carbon-fiber components such as roofs and spoilers are not rare on sporty cars.

However, the i3 will be the first high-volume car using the technology, which is based on a material costing as much as E20/kg ($13/lb.). BMW’s one-shift capacity is about 12,000 units annually for the electric i3.

The push to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions is behind BMW’s strategy.

“People are seeing that something has to change, and there are people who are willing to change their behavior,” says Hanno Pfitzer, a BMW process development engineer for CF bodies. “In 2050, 70% of the world’s population will live in cities. People need mobility, but they want to do it in a sustainable way.”

BMW launched its Project i in 2007, but it began building experience with carbon fiber in 2003 for series production of individual parts, such as the roof panel on the M3.

Now it will expand on that knowledge with the launch of the compact i3 EVC, previously referred to as the Megacity Vehicle, and the larger i8 plug-in hybrid, based on the Vision Efficient Dynamics supercar introduced at the 2009 Frankfurt auto show.

When BMW made an electric Mini E variant based on the Mini Cooper S, Pfitzer says it added 221 lbs. (100 kg) to the weight of the vehicle.

For an electric city car, BMW decided to compensate for the extra mass of a battery by reducing the weight of the car body, “and there is no lighter material than carbon fiber,” Pfitzer says. With lighter weight, the i3 will share the handling characteristics that are part of the brand’s heritage.

BMW’s design strategy harkens back to earlier days of car making, with a body-on-frame design. The powertrain will be part of an aluminum chassis that BMW calls its Drive Module, and the Live Module body will be a carbon-fiber structure resting on it.

The i3’s carbon fiber body-in-black is structural, made from preformed fabric pieces impregnated with resin injected in the resin-molding transfer method. Painted thermoplastic panels will be the visible skin of the car, but the roof will be a black carbon-fiber panel with a visible pattern, textile engineer Franz Maidl says.

The side panel on display in Paris has no B-pillar, suggesting the four sedan-style doors will incorporate the B-pillar function, similar to the Ford B-Max introduced at Geneva this year.

BMW has formed a joint venture with German carbon-fiber producer SGL Group. Its subsidiary, SGL-Automotive Carbon Fiber, in Moss Lake, WA, will produce the fibers, the rovings made with 50,000 fibers and the unwoven cloth used to make parts.

The U.S. plant begins production in the third quarter. BMW will make the body parts, itself , with tools and processes it has designed.

Having the JV and controlling the process from beginning to end is essential to the success of the program, Pfitzer says.

“The impregnation of the fibers by the resin is a highly complex process full of conflicting requirements,” he says in a written presentation. “On the one hand, the resin must reach every area of the material with minimal delay, impregnating every fiber right down to microscopic level.


BMWi3 at JEC show in Paris. Tape conceals joints to prevent competitors from learning about vehicle’s adhesive strategy.

“(But) as soon as it has impregnated all the material, the resin needs to harden as quickly as possible. Thirdly, a release agent is required that will allow the resinated components to be parted from the molding tools without the components being damaged. Resolving all these conflicting requirements simultaneously is a highly complex task.” At the JEC event here, BMW says it is recruiting staff for conception and design of car bodies and undercarriages, process planning and process engineering, prototype construction, complete vehicle design and seat design.

Seat design likely is related to BMW’s effort to develop ways to recycle the large amounts of scrap in the carbon-fiber process. Pfitzer says an in-house process to recycle carbon-fiber waste is “in the final stages.”

Original article available here:
http://wardsauto.com/ar/bmw_staff_carbonfiber_110402/

Osram’s Plug-n-Play LED Forward Lighting Nears Debut

Osram’s Plug-n-Play LED Forward Lighting Nears Debut

A new universal light source could be the lynchpin enabling light-emitting-diode technology to fulfill expectations and corner a significant share of headlamp applications in even mid-priced vehicles, supplier Osram Sylvania says.

LEDs, long billed as the next big thing in forward and rear signal lighting, have seen only limited application so far.

Just a handful of luxury models, the Audi A8 and R8, Lexus LS 600h and top-line Toyota Prius among them, employ LED headlamps.

Application in taillamps is becoming more ubiquitous as auto makers seek the styling panache the technology offers. But even here, LEDs are found on less than 20% of the new vehicles offered in the U.S., Osram estimates.

Cost and the custom-design requirements of current pixilated LED systems have held back the technology from further growth in the signal-lighting arena, says David Hulick, Osram marketing director-specialty solid state lighting. Cost is the main barrier for headlamp applications too, he adds.

But Osram’s Joule-branded line of single-source LED lighting, which is designed to be as interchangeable from one vehicle to another as a conventional headlamp or taillight wedge bulb, has the executive convinced a new era is about to begin.

“A lot of things are happening (in automotive lighting),” Hulick tells Ward’s. “And the face of this industry is going to change.”

Osram predicts by 2020, one in four cars worldwide will have LED headlamps, while half of all vehicles will use LEDs for rear signal lighting.

The standardized Joule forward-light source looks like a small hockey puck, measuring about 2 ins. (50 mm) in diameter and a half inch (12 mm) thick, with an array of 0.4-in. (1-mm) square high-brightness LED chips in the middle.

Its first use was in dealer-installed fog lights for some Mitsubishi models sold in Asian markets, but its initial OE application will come in daytime running lights for an upcoming vehicle due in the next 12 months from a U.S. auto maker, Hulick says.

Additional use as the primary headlamp will come in short order, he predicts, as auto makers get comfortable with the more affordable Joule technology and are drawn to the durability and design-flexibility benefits LEDs offer compared with more conventional bulbs.


VW’s high-mileage XL1 concept uses Osram’s LED system in its low-profile headlamps.

Osram long has been predicting that one day LEDs would replace even high-end, high-intensity discharge (or Xenon) lamps, expected to be available on 38% of new vehicles by 2015, as the premium lighting option for new-car buyers. Hulick still expects that to happen, though he admits LED technology needs further development to be fully competitive with HID headlamps.

“We don’t have as much punch (brightness) as HIDs yet,” he says. “That will come in time.”


Osram’s universal LED system for forward lighting.

But because LEDs are more energy-efficient, the Osram’s Joule system also could be an affordable option for auto makers to use in forward lighting for electric vehicles and other high-mileage cars. Volkswagen employed Osram’s Joule technology in the headlamps for its recently unveiled XL1 concept, considered a “1L car” because it is designed to deliver 235 mpg (1 L/100 km).

The Osram LED system draws 14 watts of electricity, while a halogen bulb requires 65 watts. “So we’re giving better than halogen performance for 14 watts compared to 65,” Hulick says. “It’s going to make a difference in battery-electric vehicles, where (engineers are) counting every watt.”

The biggest roadblock to a widespread LED movement is the incandescent bulb.

“The old technology works,” he says of the conventional automotive wedge bulb. “It is reliable (and) durable. It does everything it should. No one is out there saying, ‘I have a problem with this, you’ve got to do something.’”

Re-engineering a vehicle’s forward lighting systems to accommodate the new LED technology “is not an easy, low-effort transition,” Hulick admits. “I would say it is a challenge to do this.”

But the plug-and-play design of Osram’s Joule device means once the initial work is done, broadening application across vehicle lines and platforms would be a relative snap. Current LED technology requires a more model-specific engineering approach.

“As the technology matures, I think you use it as a product differentiator,” Hulick says. “For the American producers, that’s really important. How do you get someone out of the V-6 Mustang and into the (higher priced and more profitable) GT? What features are going to appeal to people that are visible and tangible? Lighting is one of the things that produce this effect.”

OSRAM has been following a similar tact for the past few years with rear signal lamps, using another universal light source it developed about eight years ago. Its initial application was on the Mercury Mountaineer, but it is now employed on several models, including the Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Malibu.

The OSRAM technology uses a higher-powered single LED light source that sits behind a stylized, molded-plastic light guide. Current taillight treatments consist of a custom-designed circuit board with an expensive array of tiny LEDs.

Osram says consumers would pay about $174 to replace its Joule signal-lighting system if damaged in an accident. That compares with $131 for today’s incandescent assemblies and $299 for LED array assemblies.

“A standardized, off-the-shelf part as the engine (of the light system) could be more attractive (for lower-cost vehicles),” Hulick says. “That’s where we think the market is headed.”

– with Drew Winter

dzoia@wardsauto.com

Original article available here: http://wardsauto.com/ar/osram_lighting_debut_110401/

One wheel forward, one wheel backward for Tata’s Pixel

One wheel forward, one wheel backward for Tata’s Pixel

A city car concept for Europe, the Tata Pixel has a rear engine and a turning circle radius of 2.6 m, thanks mainly to the effects of its infinitely variable transmission, which can control each rear wheel independently, allowing rotation in opposing directions when parking.

Tata’s rear-engine Pixel, shown in concept form at the 2011 Geneva Motor Show, was conceived as a city car for Europe. At just over 3 m (9.8 ft) long, it is based on the Nano and is claimed to be the most package-efficient four-seat (for adults) car in the world.

Carl-Peter Forster, Group CEO of Tata, said the company believes there is an opportunity for such a car in Europe, particularly one with exceptional maneuverability. That maneuverability comes from the use of a prototype toroidal traction-drive IVT (infinitely variable transmission) from Torotrak, which has been developed to assist rotation of the outer rear wheel forward and the inner rear wheel backward as the front wheels turn at acute angles. The resultant turning radius is a remarkably compact 2.6 m (8.5 ft).

The Pixel’s transmission comprises Torotrak’s traction-drive and epicyclic technology. When the car is driven normally, the transmission provides seamless ratio changes, said Torotrak Product Development Manager Rob Oliver. “But when parking and when very tight maneuvering is needed, its ability to control each rear wheel independently is used to enable rotation of those wheels in opposite directions,” he said.

He added that by linking the vehicle’s steering system with the control mechanism for the IVT, the car could pivot about its rear axle. “Zero turn capability provides tremendous opportunities to deliver new technology solutions for urban drivers,” he said.

The Pixel’s maneuverability is complemented by very short overhangs, and scissors-action doors provide added accessibility in tight spaces.

Connectivity is also central to the Pixel’s design, with key functions controlled by the driver’s smart phone.

The concept has a 1.2-L three-cylinder turbocharged diesel engine with stop-start facility. The engine is fitted with variable coolant and oil pump operation plus rapid warmup technologies. Low rolling resistance tires are fitted.

Claimed economy figures include a European combined (NEDC) fuel consumption figure of 3.4 L/100 km and CO2 emissions of 89 g/km.

Torotrak is working closely with Tata. Torotrak’s technology focus is on traction-drive systems, developing main-drive transmissions and variable-speed drives for flywheel-based hybrids. Its variable drive technology is also being developed for use in engine auxiliary systems including superchargers, turbochargers, and fan systems to help facilitate engine downsizing. Its core technology platform is a full-toroidal traction drive designed to deliver improved fuel economy and reduced emissions in parallel with high levels of performance.

Underlining its commitment to environmentally responsible city transport solutions, Tata had its Indica Vista EV fully electric model at the show. Also a four-seat model, it has a predicted range of up to 160 km (99 mi). Developed by Tata Motors European Technical Center, it is being built in the U.K. for selected users in trial and technology evaluation within the U.K.’s Technology Strategy Board-sponsored CABLED (Coventry and Birmingham Low Emissions Demonstrators) consortium.

The Tata Vista EV qualifies for the U.K. Dept. for Transport Office for Low Emission Vehicles’ Plug-in Car Grant scheme.
Stuart Birch

Original article available here: http://www.sae.org/mags/AEI/9473

‘Spectacular Failures’ Await Electric Vehicle Industry

‘Spectacular Failures’ Await Electric Vehicle Industry
By James M. Amend
WardsAuto.com, Mar 30, 2011 9:04 AM

DETROIT – Basking in the glow of a $2.5 million Progressive Automotive X Prize for production-viable design, Li-ion Motors plans to join the growing throng of electric-vehicle makers later this year.

Against this backdrop, Li-ion Motors carries an upside-down balance sheet, with millions of dollars in liabilities to creditors and the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. According to a regulatory filing, the company figures it needs an additional $2 million to bring its cars to market, starting with the six-figure Inizio supercar in July and the sub-$50,000 Wave II hatchback in December.

Industry pioneers Henry Ford and David Dunbar Buick built their empires on tighter budgets. But the case of Li-ion Motors highlights the disparity of today’s EV industry, which features a few favorites with deep pockets and a stable of cash-strapped long-shots surviving on federal money and private-equity infusions.

The betting is fierce. And only a few are expected to make the home stretch.

The Chevrolet Volt extended-range EV, which reportedly took more than a billion dollars to develop and produce, makes GM one of seven auto makers with a highway-certified EV on the U.S. market. And the paint is still wet on one of this group – the $100,000 Fisker Karma EREV is in its second week of production.

Including plug-in hybrids, more than 70 EVs are expected to hit roadways around the world, according to a Ward’s survey of sellers and intenders.

“You will see some spectacular failures this year. Absolutely,” says Micky Bly, executive director-electrical system, hybrids, electric vehicles and batteries at General Motors.

Tesla founder and CEO Elon Musk recognized early the auto industry’s intricacies and leveraged the engineering expertise of Lotus Cars to integrate his propulsion system with the sports-car makers’ Elise platform. The resulting Tesla Roadster boasts a range of 244 miles (393 km) from a single charge.

Bly says some EV makers will falter “very soon” having realized “that becoming a car manufacturer is not easy.” But if he were to wager on a survivor among the startups, he says his money would go on a company such as Tesla Motors.

The success of a partner approach is debatable. Musk, who made his fortune as founder of Pay Pal, says he would start from a clean sheet if he were to do it all over again.

“You end up spending more than if you just built the thing from scratch,” he told journalists in Detroit recently.


Wave II due in December from Li-ion Motors.

So Musk has adopted that approach for the Model S, due out next year. While the car owes much to Toyota engineering and production expertise, a benefit of Tesla’s partnership with the Japan-based auto maker, its chassis was developed in-house.

Still, the associated costs were onerous, as the auto maker recently warned in a quarterly regulatory filing.

“Our Model S production model will require significant investments of cash and management resources and we may experience unexpected delays or difficulties that could postpone our ability to launch the Model S on our planned timeline or result in cost overruns,” the document reveals.

Musk tells Tesla investors the Model S launch remains on schedule and plans for a platform-mate, the Model X cross/utility vehicle, also are on track with a prototype expected by year’s end.

So far, Palo Alto, CA-based Tesla has delivered some 1,500 Roadsters through 14 dealerships in North America and Europe but has yet to yield a profit for investors, which includes the U.S. government. The U.S. Department of Energy gave Tesla a $465.1 million loan, in keeping with the Obama Admin.’s strategy of promoting advanced-propulsion technology.

Tesla’s losses total $273.9 million against revenue of $144.5 million, according to regulatory filings.

Fisker Automotive takes Tesla’s strategy to the extreme with its Karma EV, outsourcing everything including production. Output of the 4-passenger Karma began March 21 at Finland-based contract assembler Valmet Automotive.

Fisker claims 3,000 pre-orders have been placed for the Karma, which travels up to 50 miles (80 km) on its lithium-ion battery before the range-extender, a 2.0L turbocharged I-4 from GM, sends it another 250 miles (402 km).

California-based Fisker also is scheduled to deliver a PHEV dubbed the Nina. Due in late 2012, it will be significantly less expensive than the Karma.

It will be built at a former GM plant in Delaware. Fisker acquired the site with a $528.7 million DOE loan.

The company wants to sell some 15,000 Karmas globally, and upwards of 100,000 Ninas by 2014. Fisker spokesman Roger Ormisher tells Ward’s the auto maker has raised $1 billion, including the DOE loan, to help launch the Nina and fund its business.

Brandon Mason, an analyst with PriceWaterhouseCoopers, likes Tesla’s chances. Fisker’s, too. “They will be capped to an extent by capacity restraints,” Mason says of Fisker.

“Their business model suggests you can be profitable selling 30,000-40,000 vehicles a year, because it’s a premium vehicle and they can charge more,” he tells Ward’s.

Coda Automotive also takes a piecemeal approach to its EV development. Spun off in 2009 from Miles Electric Vehicles, a Southern California manufacturer and distributor of EVs for fleet use, Coda works mostly with foreign suppliers. Coda uses a Li-ion battery pack from Chinese cell-supplier Tianjin Lishen Battery, packaging its propulsion system into a Hafei Motor Saibao sedan, also from China. The Saibao is based on a Mitsubishi chassis.

The EV maker plans to assemble the Coda sedan in China for export to the U.S., starting in the second half of this year. Coda originally planned to launch the 5-passenger car in 2010. It has a range of 100 miles (161 km) and is expected to cost $44,900. The company thinks it can build as many as 14,000 units this year.

So far, Coda has raised some $200 million to support production and marketing of the sedan and has submitted an application for $500 million in DOE loans for a proposed battery-system manufacturing plant in Ohio.

Washington lawmakers are closely scrutinizing the battery-plant plans due to Coda’s partnership with Lishen, which would have a stake in the Ohio venture.

Best-known for the 2-passenger City urban car, Norway’s Think has been in the EV game for two decades. Later this year, the company expects to begin selling a 4-seater City to U.S. retail customers after focusing exclusively on Europe as part of a post-bankruptcy strategy that began in 2009.

Last year, Think sold 1,042 of its 2-seaters. “We expect our volumes to be considerably higher this year, as we expand in the U.S. and other key markets,” Think CEO Barry Engle tells Ward’s.

Engle says the auto maker also is working with partners on joint-venture opportunities in Asia for its drivetrain technology.

Engle expects the EV market to emerge slowly, as cities develop charging infrastructures and permit protocols for home installations, while consumers become more comfortable with the technology and dealers more expertly qualified to sell and service the vehicles.

“When the market does develop, we think that EV adoption rates are going to increase very quickly, because of the environmental and social benefits, low cost of operation and suitability for urban usage,” he says in an email.

Engle thinks it’s too early to predict winners and losers, but adds, “there are so many new players that are getting into the EV market, it would be reasonable to expect that some manufacturers are not going to make it.”

One of the more eagerly awaited EVs comes from China’s BYD Automobile. But the anticipation likely stems from the auto maker’s credibility rather than the viability of its proposed product.

In 2009, BYD promised its e6 cross/utility vehicle would arrive in the U.S. before 2011. Reports now say 2012, as a test fleet takes to the road in the second half of this year.

The global recession was unkind to the battery-producer-turned-auto-maker, slamming the brakes on its vehicle sales in China and putting the U.S. launch of the e6 behind schedule.

The hiccup prompted a visit from billionaire investor Warren Buffet, who owns a stake in the company, perhaps to motivate executives.

BYD also recently revised the e6’s range downward to 205 miles (330 km) from 250 miles, and U.S. distribution plans remain murky. The company has priced the e6 at $40,000 for the American market and says it has the capacity to produce 50,000 units annually.

Dan Cheng, a partner in the Southfield, MI, office of industry-consultant A.T. Kearney, envisions three camps of EV makers as the industry matures:

Companies that fail because of the complex demands of commercializing a product.
Companies that are acquired by established manufacturers or folded under a parent’s wing through a major equity stake.
A handful that make it on their own.

“That last category would contain very few companies,” he says. “Very few companies are going to have the wherewithal to join the elite group of global OEMs.”

Even the biggest auto makers are migrating their businesses to global platforms, testimony to the premium placed on economies of scale.

“This is a scale business,” Cheng says, adding profitability will be “very challenging” for companies targeting annual volumes of 30,000 to 40,000 vehicles, which is the range of many EV makers.

The embryonic recharging infrastructure in the U.S. also will have a polarizing effect on sales and, ultimately, the number of manufacturers. For example, Cheng thinks sprawling suburban areas will develop infrastructures more quickly than urban ones because the latter lack space.

A handful of EV makers could find a cozy niche in the delivery-van market, he adds, given the fleet channel’s simpler sales, marketing and service demands.

Bright Automotive, an Anderson, OH-based EV maker spawned from a Rocky Mountain Institute consortium, hopes to market a multipurpose PHEV to commercial and government fleets.

The Idea is powered by a Li-ion battery pack with a range of about 40 miles (64 km). Then it switches over to a hybrid-propulsion system. The combination promises 100 mpg (2.4 L/100 km), the company says. The Idea is expected in 2013 or 2014.

Bright’s technology drew a $5 million equity investment last year from GM, which supplies the Idea’s 2.4L internal-combustion engine. In return for the minority stake, GM gained access to Bright’s work in advanced lightweight materials.

Three-year-old Bright also gets access to GM’s advanced engine, transmission and other technologies.

In addition, Bright wants to tap DOE funding for advanced-propulsion vehicles.

Ford is taking the same route to introduce its first EV, an electrified TransitConnect van for fleet customers. Ford and partner Azure Dynamics, an EV engineering house, combined to bring the vans to market.

Launched late last year, the Transit Connect EV will go about 80 miles (129 km) on a full charge, backed by a 20-kWh Li-ion battery pack that takes between six and eight hours to charge on a 240V outlet.

If successful, Ford could take over the program fully, including production. AM General currently assembles the vehicles.

“If we really do see a larger volume potential, we would transition to doing a lot more of this in-house,” Sherif Marakby, director-electrification programs and engineering at Ford, told Ward’s at the TransitConnect EV launch.

“If you look at hybrids, we’ve done the same thing, where we’ve taken sourcing and purchasing, gone from doing the work outside to practically doing everything in-house.”

Ford, which tapped $5.9 billion in DOE funding last year, also will launch its Focus EV in 2011, while Mitsubishi will import its iMiEV, which launched last year in Japan.

Ford has said the Focus EV will travel about 100 miles (160 km) on a single charge, taking three hours on a 240V outlet or 12 hours on a standard 120V. The car is backed by a 23 kWh Li-ion battery pack. The auto maker has not issued pricing.

Mitsubishi targets iMiEV’s sticker under $30,000. The 4-passenger sedan has a range of 100 miles (160 km) and packs a 16-kWh Li-ion battery, which takes 14 hours to recharge on a 120V outlet.

Major global brands such as Audi, BMW, Smart, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes, Subaru, Toyota and Volkswagen also promise EV products within the next 18 months.

Meanwhile, offerings from tiny startups such as Mindset, Detroit Electric and Green Automotive appear in doubt. Requests by Ward’s seeking business updates from the sample trio went unreturned.

Engle says the U.S. must continue to aggressively support development of EVs and advanced battery technology. Otherwise, the nation risks being overtaken by competitors.

The DOE reportedly has been reviewing more closely what companies receive money, which has slowed disbursement of the $25 billion earmarked for the purpose four years ago.

“If (the U.S.) wants to ensure that the very best electric vehicle manufacturers and battery development companies continue to operate and do business in the U.S., it’s important for them to support the industry,” Engle says, calling the U.S. a leader in EV policy development.

“If that policy changes, you could very well see the next generation of EV and battery development occurring in other countries,” he adds, pointing to China. “We could see (Chinese) consumers leap-frog the U.S. in terms of EV industry development and go right to vehicle electrification.

While many EV players may find themselves cash-strapped, as federal money dries up and private-equity backers see dim profit pictures and tighten their wallets, a dearth of alternative propulsion strategies in presents additional challenges in coming years.

Cheng expects increased dialogue in the U.S. soon over “the appropriate alternative powertrain portfolio,” weeding through biofuels, EREVs, PHEVs, compressed natural gas and even particular battery chemistries.

The amount of money invested in EV development is “staggering,” he says. “The question is, where would you get the biggest bang for the buck?”

In that case, success for Li-ion Motors would not be defined by seeing an Inizio racing down the freeway, or a Wave SE coasting through a supermarket parking lot.

Says Frank Ziegler, the fledgling auto maker’s vice president-new business development : “I would love to go to Ford or General Motors, one of the major American companies, and say, ‘You know what? You don’t have to spend a gazillion dollars to do this. Allow us to be the anonymous partner. You can put your name on it. We can take the back seat.”

jamend@wardsauto.com

Original article available here: http://wardsauto.com/ar/failures_electric_vehicle_110330/

Buick Asks, Who Needs V-6?

Buick Asks, Who Needs V-6?
By Tom Murphy
WardsAuto.com, Mar 25, 2011 9:10 AM

MILFORD, MI – The Buick brand faces a daunting task as it prepares to launch the ’12 LaCrosse: convincing U.S. customers that 4-cyl. engines have a place in midsize luxury cars.

Only Audi has succeeded with a long-term strategy in the U.S. that relies on an excellent direct-injection gasoline 4-cyl. in its highest-volume entry-level luxury cars.

Now, Buick is attempting to one-up the field not only by offering 4-cyl. power in the larger midsize LaCrosse but by pairing it with a mild-hybrid system that boosts fuel efficiency 25%.

General Motors’ confidence level in this new eAssist stop/start technology must be high because it will be standard on every LaCrosse that isn’t equipped with the 3.6L direct-injection V-6.

Going on sale this summer, perfectly timed as fuel prices are predicted to surpass $4 a gallon, the LaCrosse with eAssist clobbers the competition with an Environmental Protection Agency rating of 25/37 mpg (9.4-6.3 L/100 km) in city/highway driving. That beats the 4-cyl. Audi A4, Acura TSX and even the diesel 6-cyl. BMW 335d.

How is eAssist on the road? In a word, impressive.

On a short test drive along undulating 2-lane highways and an expressway here, the system performs as billed.

It propels the LaCrosse effortlessly by providing enough electrical boost under hard acceleration and on uphill grades to prevent GM’s next-generation 6-speed Hydra-Matic 6T40 automatic transmission from downshifting too often or too dramatically.

At stop lights, the engine shuts off, then springs back to life when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal, sending energy directly to the front wheels from the 2.4L Ecotec 4-cyl., augmented by power stored in a 65-lb. (29-kg) 115V air-cooled lithium-ion battery pack stashed in the floor behind the rear seats.

The overall result is a smooth, seamless experience that should please the sensibilities of most Buick customers.

At the end of our test drive, the fuel-economy gauge in the LaCrosse reads 26.6 mpg (8.8 L/100 km). But GM engineers say that number includes repeated thrashing by other drivers eager to experience eAssist at wide-open throttle.

A 4-cyl. engine in a midsize luxury car seemingly would make little sense, but eAssist and the LaCrosse feel as if they were made for each other. There is no sense that performance is compromised.

Granted, a customer wanting a sport sedan will be inclined to choose the 280-hp 3.6L V-6 but will have to settle for city/highway fuel economy of 17/27 mpg (13.8-8.7 L/100 km). In these days of volatile fuel prices, that’s a meaningful compromise.

For everyone else, the eAssist version will be more than adequate. By itself, the Ecotec I-4 delivers 182 hp and 172 lb.-ft. (233 Nm) of torque, and eAssist adds 15 hp and 79 lb.-ft. (107 Nm) of thrust, as early as 1,000 rpm.

The eAssist system replaces GM’s less-impressive belt-driven alternator-starter technology that was introduced in 2006 and couldn’t compete with more advanced hybrid-electric vehicles arriving in the U.S.

The new system, although configured like the old one, relies on a 15-kW electric motor-generator that delivers three times the power. The unit is mounted directly to the engine, replacing the alternator.

During acceleration, the system provides up to 15 hp (11 kW) of additional electric power.

When decelerating to a stop, fuel to the engine is cut off, but the motor-generator continues spinning the engine, ensuring a smooth restart that is barely noticeable to the driver.

Regenerative braking further improves fuel efficiency by providing up to 15 kW of electricity to charge the battery.

Not to be overlooked is the capability of the 2.4L Ecotec, combined with eAssist, to confidently motivate a vehicle weighing 3,835 lbs. (1,739 kg). That’s significantly heavier than the three rivals targeted by Buick: the Acura TL, Lincoln MKZ and Lexus ES350; all of them V-6-powered.

Not long ago, a Buick buyer in this segment wanted at least a V-6 and occasionally a V-8. That the Ecotec with eAssist is up to the task in the LaCrosse speaks volumes about the advancing nature of today’s downsized powertrains.

The 2.4L DI I-4 has been available without eAssist in the LaCrosse since June. In that time, about 12% of LaCrosse customers have taken the 4-cyl. instead of the 3.0L or 3.6L V-6s. The 3.0L since has been discontinued.

With only the eAssist Ecotec and the thirstier 3.6L V-6 offered, volumes surely will escalate for the 4-cyl., given its impressive performance and fuel efficiency.

Even the sticker should be appealing. Pricing will be announced closer to launch, but Buick says the LaCrosse with eAssist (being produced in Fairfax, KS,) should start near $30,000. That represents a premium of about $2,200 over an ’11 4-cyl. LaCrosse.

For the ultimate fuel economy in a 5-passenger vehicle, the Toyota Prius remains the gold standard.

But the LaCrosse with eAssist has earned its place in the market by striking the right balance between performance, luxury and fuel economy.

tmurphy@wardsauto.com
’12 Buick LaCrosse eAssist Vehicle type        Front-engine, FWD, 5-passenger sedan
Engine        2.4L DOHC DI Ecotec all-aluminum I-4
Power (SAE net)        182 hp @ 6,700 rpm
Torque        172 lb.-ft. (233 Nm) @ 4,900 rpm
Transmission        6-speed auto
Electric Drive        15-kW belt-driven motor-generator
Battery        ii5V Lithium-ion
Maximum electric power        15 hp @ 1,000-2,200 rpm
Wheelbase        111.7 ins. (284 cm)
Overall length        197 ins. (500 cm)
Curb weight        3,835 lbs./ 1,739 kg
Base price        N/A
Fuel economy        25/37 (9.4-6.3 L/100 km)
Competition        Acura TL; Lexus ES350; Lincoln MKZ
Pros        Cons
No-compromise driving        Success hinges on fuel prices
Highway rating of 37 mpg        Test drive yields only 26.6 mpg
Pricing should be attractive        Likely premium above $2,000

Original article available here: http://wardsauto.com/testdrive/buick_asks_who_110325/