Upon stepping
off my connection flight from Toronto, Canada and onto the bustling streets of
Rome, Italy, I immediately noticed very peculiar and quite interesting, at least
in my eyes, difference between the roads of North America and Europe. Moreover,
throughout my travels and adventures in Italy for the past few days, I continually
observed a particular trend among a majority of automobiles on the road. You
may all be thinking right now, “THE CARS DRIVE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE ROAD!,” very
close but not quite (Italy and many other nations actually drive on the right),
rather most of the vehicles in Europe are very small and compact, specifically
either hatchbacks or coupes. Being a car enthusiast, I have never seen such a phenomenon
in the United States, where there are a wide variety of automobiles in terms of
size on the road; as a matter of fact, I have yet to see a consumer SUV or
pick-up truck, both of which are very popular classes of cars in the State. I
figured there must be an engineering and even a scientific reason behind the
abundance of small cars and absence of large cars in Europe, so I set out to do
some research and find out the logic behind this idea, and little do I know, there
are several legitimate and realistic explanations.
 |
Now
that everyone knows which cars I’m talking about, there are several reasons why
these small cars are so popular in Europe. One obvious reason is the size of
the car and fitment into the streets of Europe. As I noticed, evident in Siena
and Rome, roads here in Europe are very narrow, often times just wide enough
for a single car to pass through, and are usually crowded with other vehicles
and pedestrians. Henceforth, hatchbacks and coupes, as the smallest classes of
automobiles, are the most suitable and appropriately fitting cars in terms of
size for European streets. In addition to size, the popularity of small cars
can also be attributed to their eco-friendliness. When Professor McCormick
mentioned that Europeans are very conscious about the environment and are actively
green, this idea and reason for the smaller cars immediately arose in my mind. Compared
to larger vehicles, compact cars have relatively smaller engines consuming less
gas, which in turn is better for the environment. The explanation behind the
greener engines is a matter of a simple chemical reaction occurring in car
engines. In particular, the reaction is the combustion of octane (C8H18),
which is more commonly known as gasoline, with oxygen (O2) to form
water (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2), which are both
harmless and safe. However, the combustion is often imperfect when the mixture
of reactants is flawed with gasoline not burning completely. The partial
burning of gasoline produces carbon monoxide (CO) in the exhaust gases, which
pollutes the air. By having a smaller engine and using less octane (gasoline), the
reaction in compact cars would produce less product (simple stoichiometry) and
run a lower risk of producing less carbon monoxide, polluting less air. Being
more eco-friendly and smaller, hatchbacks and coupes would be much more appealing
than large “gas-guzzlers” to the European consumer.
Hatchbacks
and coupes are also more “powerful” and more versatile on various terrains than
4-door sedans and other classes of small cars. On the bus ride from Rome and
through the hilly streets of Siena, everyone must have noticed all the different
topographies and environments that cars travel through in Europe, from steep
hills and mountains to speedy, sea-level freeways. In essence, to survive in
Europe, small cars must have the power to climb inclines, the speed to travel
long-distances on highways, and the potency to endure severe elevation changes.
Hatchbacks and coupes have the ideal characteristics and features for these
requirements, which can be seen through a combination of physics and geology
with chemistry.
One immediate criticism and doubt
concerning hatchbacks and coupes is the perceived lack of power. Although hatchbacks
and coupes do fall short in terms of sheer horsepower (a measure of power most
commonly used for cars), people often do not consider the small size of these “powerless”
cars. Proven in physics by Newton’s Second Law of Motion, which states that
acceleration is inversely proportional to mass given a certain force, cars with
less mass and a lower weight would obviously require less power to move and
accelerate. By this logic in Newtonian physics, if hatchbacks and coupes
produced the same amount of force (essentially horsepower) as sedans and other
cars, then their lower amount of mass would give them superior acceleration and
“power.” This reasoning is shown in an automobile measurement called the power-to-weight
ratio, which is a proportion calculated by dividing a car’s horsepower over its
weight. Unlike pure horsepower, the power-to-weight ratio of a car is a much
better measurement and more appropriate representation of a vehicle’s
performance as it basically considers actual physics. To exemplify a comparison
between a common hatchback and sedan, according to CarSort.com, a 2011 Mini
Cooper (hatchback) has a weight-to-power ratio of 13.5lb/hp, whereas 2011
Toyota Corolla (small sedan) has a weight-to-power ratio of 20.7lb/hp (*note:
on CarSort.com, a weight-to-power ratio was measured in which a lower ratio
would deem better performance; normally, a power-to-weight ratio is the exact
opposite, the higher ratio calls for superior performance). As demonstrated
with these two common automobiles, sedans and other cars (especially V8 SUVs) would
undoubtedly surpass many hatchbacks and coupes in terms of brute power and
force, but true performance, as proven by physics, must take into consideration
both power and weight, a category in which hatchbacks and coupes would prove to
be superior, allowing them to climb the steep hills of Siena and speed on European freeways.
Along with speed and performance,
hatchbacks and coupes are suitable to endure the strenuous terrains in Europe. Did
you know in Italy alone the highest point is Mont Blanc at 4807m high? And in
Siena, the average elevation is 295m? With such differences in elevation,
ranging from sea level to mountain tops, the diversity of conditions would pose
a serious problem to automobiles. In particular, a staggering threat and
drawback to cars at high altitudes is the supply and density of air. Generally
speaking, as elevation increases above sea level, air density and pressure steadily
decreases; for example, look at mountain climbers, due to decreasing air
density and in turn difficulty breathing, mountaineers carry around oxygen
tanks in order to have a continuous supply of air at high altitudes. (Refer to
the graph showing the decreasing density of air as elevation increases.) This
same concept applies to cars and their air intakes (of course, minus the oxygen
tanks, such supplies of air would be unfeasible). Have you ever wondered what
the liters in a “4.6L V8 engine” refer to? That actually means that the air
intake on the car consumes 4.6 liters of oxygen per cycle of the engine. Think about the combustion reaction of hexane
that occurs in the engine; the reactants are hexane (or gasoline) and oxygen,
which is obtained through the air intake. At high elevations, the air intake on
a car would struggle to pull in oxygen due to the extremely low air density,
and with a lack of air, the oxygen would act as a limiting reagent in the
combustion reaction, staggering the performance of the automobile. This seems
like a problem all cars would face, which is true, but the situation is
particularly better for hatchbacks and coupes because of their smaller engines
and turbochargers. Hatchbacks and coupes have smaller engines that would
consume less gasoline and would require less oxygen to combust causing a less
of a struggle on the intake. Furthermore, many hatchbacks and coupes are
equipped with turbo- or super-chargers to provide an added push to their “puny”
engines. This feature allows a vehicular concept called forced induction, which
is focused on forcibly providing air to the engine. Forced induction is induced
by a mechanically driven turbine, or the turbo/supercharger, collecting and
building up air pressure in order to provide more oxygen for the combustion
reaction. At high elevations, the turbo/supercharger would be able to act as a supplementary
source of oxygen for the engine in addition to the air intake, practically
resolving the problem of low air density and lack of air. The turbo/supercharged,
smaller engines on hatchbacks and coupes would allow them to survive and drive
without much difficulty at higher elevations because of the extra oxygen supply
and their lesser need for air.
Although we in America would much
rather drive bigger and more powerful cars, the Europeans’ choice of small
hatchbacks and coupes are very suitable and actually perfect for their needs of
an all-around automobile. As a matter of fact, hatchbacks and coupes really
seem like the way to go for personal transportation needs: green, high
performance, versatile, and even cost efficient. Why not small cars?
Resources:
Great entry, Kenny. Good explanations and enough background information for those who are not car enthusiasts to follow.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Dr. Weinschenk will appreciate this article. He drives a Mini Cooper.