20vtguy

Agreed

I not sure using a Ford chassis but Toyota or Honda engineering with Chevy styling in the case of the HHR anyway would be a amazing combo from a total package standpoint but even as a foreign car buyer that I am it would be sac religious to take a car designed as an American retro design and have it built on a foreign platform. Same goes for building the Mustang on an Accord platform. Some things you just don't do. I remember in 1989 when Ford planned to kill the Mustang off and replace it with the Mazda based Probe. Well thanks to committed Mustang people that never happened. Whew!

No, crumple zones are important. Crumple zones regardless of metals thickness and strength are designed to absorb the force of impact and keep it from entering the passenger compartment. Thick metal that does not give on impact would cause much more force to be exerted on the occupants even if the car itself deformed less. So its either you life or your cars. Pick one. Me, as anal about my car as I am I'd probably rather sustain more injury to save my car. Ok maybe not. :-)

Kingfrog

No I understand "crumple zones" They are more a function of frame design then sheet metal. In so being stronger sheet metal would absorb more of the impact.

https://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/show...highlight=deer

The deer hit on that hood looks like aluminum foil ., That deer event would not have caused crumple zones to save the driver, I have seen deer tags cause much less damage then that to the eye anyway. THE PLASTIC GRILL SUFFERED LESS DAMAGE!!!! LOL

20vtguy

If you are talking about the type of damage suffered in light impacts such as shopping carts or even light fender benders so long as the impact is light enough where it transmits little to no g-force to the passengers. With hits like that deer strike you are right, thinner metal will sustain more damage but also that damage was caused by a large exposed semiflat vertical surface area. Its a combination of purposely engineered crumplezones and sheetmetal shape and thickness and T rating as one of the other posters said as well as thats important for the overall benefit in all areas. The VW Beetle with its real short hood amazingly was top rated in 1998 for front end crashes because of a well engineered design but I bet due to its similar deeply sloped hood it would have sustained similar damage to its hood from that deer while its chassis sibling, my VW GTI with the same great crash rating would sustain less.

GCarp

A deer hit still would have trashed the hood (and grill and fender). Does it matter if it is a little or a lot? Either way it still would have needed replacing.

Frozenspokes

Most of what I know about metals comes from the bike world. What I can tell you is that as you get metals with a higher strength to weight ratio, you will increase the costs substantially. There are many grades of steel used in bicycle manufacturing. Almost all of them are designed to gain strength when heated (as in welding and heat treating). All of them are too expensive to be used for large panels like the ones that are used for car bodies.

Auto builders use less expensive steel alloys. With the lower cost steel, the only way to truly add strength and stiffness is to add thickness. This adds to weight (HHRs already weigh over 3000lbs) and cost as you have to use more material. The cost of steel has been steadily rising. So, I am sure that GM did the cost analisys and decided that a thinner steel was a way to cut costs without cutting content. The areas that are thin are not structural, so IMHO it has little to do with crumple zones and or crash protection. What it comes down to is this, GM wanted to hit a price point, and thinner panels and cheaper interior materials were compromises that they made in order to reach that goal.

Kingfrog

I agree with your assessment. It's a price point decesion.

Those who don't get dents and dings are most likely more picky about where they park and ride than I.