Is the end of the world in automobile manufacturing achieved through integrated die-casting? What else is the use of that new material

Introduction: Only models like Tesla that have enough confidence in quickly achieving large-scale sales during development (commonly known as hot models) can introduce large integrated die-casting components without considering risks.

The large integrated cast aluminum body led by Tesla (TSLA.US) is gradually showing a trend of "human to human transmission".

At the beginning of this year, Mercedes Benz (DMLRY. US) released the concept car EQXX, which features a biomimetic structural design called "BIONEQXX" for its rear body. Its essence is a large integrated die cast aluminum alloy component.

Volvo announced that it will invest approximately 7 billion yuan in the next few years to build a new electric vehicle factory, with a focus on producing 8000 ton die-casting machines for large die-casting parts. Volkswagen plans to introduce an integrated die-casting body in the Trinity project in 2026.

The one-piece die-casting rear body appearing in the Volvo promotional video

Domestic car companies are moving faster. NIO's upcoming new car ET5, which will be delivered this year, uses large-sized cast aluminum components near the rear floor of the car body.

Gaohe and Xiaopeng (XPEV. US) have publicly or semi publicly revealed that they are developing and introducing large-scale integrated die-casting technology similar to Tesla. Due to Li Xiang's recent public discussion and praise, Lixiang (LI. US) may also have some ideas about integrated die-casting. Xiaomi Motors, which has not even completed its birth chart, has recently announced a large-scale die-casting project bidding.

Cast aluminum itself is one of the long used molding processes in the automotive industry, and casting aluminum alloys is not uncommon; Tesla's approach on Model Y focuses on using large-sized one-piece cast aluminum parts to replace several connecting components as a whole.

In contrast to the thriving positive trend in the industry, the consumer market is beginning to see some different perspectives or concerns.

In February of this year, a news that "280000 Tesla crashes will cost 200000 yuan for repairs" made headlines in major technology and automotive media. A Model Y with a "Su B" license plate accidentally hit the protruding house wall on the right rear side while reversing.

Due to the impact location being too far out and the overlapping surface being too small, it just avoided the rear anti-collision longitudinal beam, and collided with an unbreakable obstacle such as a wall. The damage to Model Y was almost "direct" to the right rear wheel arch - which is a part of the integrated die-casting rear body.

The reason for the exorbitant repair costs is also easy to understand: due to the fact that the rear body (floor) is a single integrated component, although only the right rear side is damaged, the large-sized die-casting parts that span left and right can only be replaced as a whole. Whether considering material or labor costs, this repair cost will never be low.

The huge repair costs instantly made consumers feel the risk, and the 200000 yuan repair price list was displayed there. No matter how car bloggers argue that "cast aluminum is actually more economical", it is useless.

Along with this comes concerns about insurance costs, although currently no insurance company has differentiated the premium for models that use one-piece die-casting bodies.

Leaving aside the controversies surrounding after-sales maintenance, the automotive industry's recognition of integrated die-casting technology is not a monolithic concept.

BMW CEO Zipser stated last year that they would not follow Tesla's so-called "Gigacasting" large integrated cast aluminum components because they believed that doing so would not bring any economic benefits.

Wolfram Volk, the head of the Department of Forming Technology and Casting Engineering at the Technical University of Munich in Germany, also put forward some cautious views on integrated die casting at the beginning of this year.

Overall, he agrees that large-scale integrated die-casting components are a novel, courageous, creative, and attractive solution; But at the same time, it is not as miraculous in terms of cost efficiency as advertised by car companies.

Whether it's concerns about maintenance costs or praise for advantages and benefits, they are both somewhat excessive.

It is normal for consumers to be frightened by sky high repair orders, and it is not unreasonable to worry about the increase in vehicle insurance premiums. After all, it is indeed possible to "replace half of the body structure at once" - a possibility that is usually not present in conventional car bodies.

But as many people have explained, the coverage range of integrated cast aluminum components usually belongs to the main load-bearing structure on conventional car bodies.

In other words, if a conventional car body experiences an accident to the same extent, even if it is not immediately scrapped, it is likely to seriously affect the residual value of the vehicle, commonly known as a major accident.

Everyone only sees' 280000 Tesla repairs cost 200000 ', but if a regular car body is damaged in such a way, deducting the self paid 4S store repair costs and including the vehicle depreciation, how much more can it be than' 28000-200000 '?

So the question becomes, are you more willing to pay higher maintenance fees or bear higher insurance premiums, but the vehicle can be repaired closer to before the accident, or are you more willing to pay regular maintenance fees but accept a significant depreciation of the vehicle?

Don't rush to answer, because this is not a question with ready-made answers. Perhaps you already have a biased choice, but it's hard to deny that for the whole society, the difference between these two choices is different, but there isn't a clear distinction between them - at least not yet.

Similarly, there is a growing suspicion that the praise for the miraculous effects of integrated die-casting has been exaggerated. The most widely circulated theory is that integrated die casting can save 20-30% of costs by reducing the connection process.

But both Zipser and Wolfram Volk expressed cautious skepticism about this point, and Li Xiang also stated that "Tesla is not trying to reduce costs, but to improve efficiency".

The so-called "20% -30% cost savings" may not have taken into account complex factors such as mold life, depreciation and amortization of die-casting machines, waste material loss, and energy loss in the die-casting process.

Integrated die casting certainly has the potential to provide a new "tool" for car companies to reduce costs, but first of all, this effect is unlikely to be a qualitative change (such as a 20% -30% reduction out of thin air); Secondly, the ability to truly reduce costs requires reasonable planning and utilization by car companies, or in other words, the low-cost advantage is not "on-demand".

Even taking Li Xiang's conclusion, in terms of efficiency, large-sized integrated die-casting is not always efficient. Large scale single die cast parts like Tesla Model Y obviously lose the flexibility of component application, that is, different models almost inevitably require different molds.

The rear body of Model Y cannot be used for Model X, and even the similarly sized Model 3 is difficult to directly adapt.

It is obvious that this brings about the problem of sunk costs for molds. Only models like Tesla, which have enough confidence in quickly achieving large-scale sales during development (commonly known as explosive models), may ignore risks and introduce large integrated die-casting components.

This also explains Li Xiang's understanding that the ideal goal is to create a popular product every 100000 yuan.

But not all manufacturers have the ability to do so. If large-scale sales cannot be expected, using integrated die casting will inevitably require more equipment investment to be shared among bicycles: either raising the final selling price or squeezing profit margins.

Even more than just a matter of ability, cars are a market with relatively low overall concentration and high freedom of choice.

The vast majority of large car companies offer up to ten models simultaneously, which greatly reduces their motivation to "customize" large die-casting parts for each model. Tesla, which only has two best-selling models, is actually an exception.

According to the Automotive Business Review, citing a relevant person from a certain car company, "the cost of selling models that cannot reach 50000 units per year is very high.

This number may not be precise, but it already illustrates the problem: even large car companies cannot achieve annual sales of 50000 yuan for every model, let alone some smaller and emerging car companies.

In addition to depreciation and amortization, even if car companies that produce multiple models insist on manufacturing large molds with integrated die-casting components for each model, changing molds to switch production models will still result in a loss of efficiency.

Wolfram Volk pointed out that due to the need for vertical replacement of die-casting machine molds with the assistance of cranes, the replacement time for 100 ton molds can reach 10-12 hours, while conventional stamping processes only take 3 minutes to replace molds.

The combination of small components is bound to be more free, while the integration of large sizes is bound to be more restricted. When large integrated die-casting components replace numerous component combinations, "non freedom" is an inevitable byproduct.

This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it does constrain the large-scale application of integrated die-casting technology. Tesla was the first to apply integrated die-casting technology, which had certain randomness and exceptions.

The development and evolution of technology are dynamic changes, and there is no barrier that once formed, the dust settles and is absolutely unbreakable. It does not mean that with the arrival of integrated die-casting technology, all conventional body processes will become outdated, and models that do not use integrated die-casting will inevitably lag behind in performance.

People often focus only on the simplest and most understandable point, ignoring the situation and context before and after that point, and thus attribute all the reasons to that point itself.

Those popular stories are all like this: "Nokia fell", "iPhone rose", and if "one-piece die casting" eventually becomes the future, it may also be like this.

However, the consistency of the results does not necessarily lead to a 100% causal correlation.

BMW CEO Zipper expressed distrust towards Tesla's large-scale integrated die-casting approach, but in reality, BMW (BMWYY. US) is also very concerned about the large-scale production of aluminum parts, although the approach is not as extreme as the Model Y. The front and rear bodies of the iX use cast aluminum components, but not to the extent of spanning the left and right body.

The large-scale production of cast aluminum components requires the use of heat-treated aluminum alloy materials as a basis to bypass the problem of heat treatment deformation in large-sized cast aluminum parts.

But even though Tesla claims that heat-treated materials can achieve the desired performance, naturally hardened aluminum alloys still have significantly lower strength compared to conventional aluminum or steel.

This means that in order to achieve equivalent performance, large cast aluminum components may need to increase thickness and weight, which will to some extent offset the lightweight opportunities brought by the cast aluminum process. The reduction in weight advantage is also accompanied by the difficulty of benefiting from the casting process in terms of raw material costs (unable to achieve the goal with less aluminum).

One important reason why Tesla first introduced cast aluminum before the body and only recently began producing the cast aluminum front body of Model Y at its Texas factory is that the front body is significantly heavier and requires a higher performance die-casting machine.

Considering that large cast aluminum parts require heat free materials, which may have a disadvantage in strength and require additional weight reinforcement, and the front of the car requires higher strength than the rear... It is not difficult to understand why car companies' "integrated die-casting dream" started from the rear body.

The sequence of using die-casting for the front and rear body is not the key, the key is that due to a series of reasons, the application scope of replacing conventional body components with integrated cast aluminum parts is limited, and there is no need to "replace wherever you want", let alone expect to "die cast the whole car as a whole" in a short period of time.

If we summarize the above full text, the application scope of integrated die-casting is obviously limited for the entire automotive market - it should be noted that the majority of car body materials today are still mainly made of steel or even all steel.

Aluminum is a rare commodity for economical cars, not to mention cast aluminum and large one-piece die-casting components.

At the end of the last century and the beginning of this century, all aluminum car bodies were also popular. From any perspective at that time, all aluminum car bodies were an inevitable future and a "trend" - a term that sounds very familiar today.

However, today's results have become clear, with aluminum based hybrid body materials being the answer, and only a very small number of all aluminum vehicles are still persevering.

But on the other hand, the initial judgment was not wrong. People saw the potential of aluminum, but some mistakenly believed that it would fill the entire field.

The same goes for today's integrated die-casting, which is a brand new thing that gives automobile production new opportunities, new methods, new thinking, and new freedom; But seeing it as a hexagonal warrior with no shortcomings or limitations, as if it were the ultimate answer to the automotive production industry, is somewhat naive and naive.

Our generation is brainwashed by "oversimplified narratives". We grew up listening to "Occam's Razor" and watching the rise of "first principles".

It seems that the world is full of unchanging truths in one direction. Once realized, the great path is simple, and all you need to do is focus your head on that direction and charge forward.

This is simply a cybernetic artifact of the 21st century.

Once we thought that the Internet changed the world, today we find that the world changed the Internet;

We used to think that Ethernet cables would eliminate offline communication, but today we realize that it is impossible to stay at home physically;

We used to think that globalization was irreversible, but today

Unilateralization that can be understood by even the brainless has never been the true direction of the world. If there is an arrow like one-way guide easily, following it will not be wrong, just work hard without thinking, and there is no need to weigh it all the way north, the world would be too easy, wouldn't it?