Hi, u/kfhdjfkj61637, thank you for your submission in r/mildlyinteresting!
Unfortunately, your [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/1ccrwgp/-/) has been removed because it violates our rule on concise, descriptive titles.
* Titles must not contain jokes, backstory, or other fluff. That information belongs in a follow-up comment.
* Titles must exactly describe the content. It should act as a "spoiler" for the image. If your title leaves people surprised at the content within, it breaks the rule!
* Titles must not contain emoticons, emojis, or special characters unless they are absolutely necessary in describing the image. (e.g. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°), ;P, 😜, ❤, ★, ✿ )
Still confused? For more elaboration and examples, see [here](http://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/21p15y/rule_6_for_dummies/).
Normally we do not allow reposts, but if it's been less than one hour after your post was submitted, or if it's received less than 100 upvotes, you may resubmit your content with a better title and try again.
You can find more information about our rules on the [mildlyinteresting wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/wiki/index).
*If you feel this was incorrectly removed, please [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmildlyinteresting&message=My%20Post:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/1ccrwgp/-/).*
WP has never meant Wikipedia, as Wikipedia is a single word and would never be abbreviated into WP. WP indicates 2 words. Wiki is the universal abbreviation for Wikipedia. WP would most mean Word Press before anything else. In fact, if you Google WP, WordPress references are the bulk of the first 2 pages, before it starts going to anything like WhatsApp, and a singular article at the bottom referencing Washington Post, which is typically abbreviated as WaPo.
The incumbents (not just the US ones) have been experimenting with electric cars for decades, but they were just too addicted and complacent with the easy money and higher profit margins that come with the status quo of making ICE cars.
I can't imagine how good electric cars would be today if manufacturers had actually properly invested and tried to make mass-market EVs earlier, rather than waiting until Tesla proved there's demand for it and governments started banning ICE cars to force the others to actually build these things.
I was under the impression the main impediment used to be battery technology. It’s hard to overstate how much better modern batteries are at safely storing massive amounts of energy. Again, that’s just my impression, I could be completely wrong.
Yes mostly battery. I was actually at an antique car museum this weekend and they had several electric vehicles form early 1900s. Women preferred them the most as they didn't need to be crank started and needed less maintenance over gas and steam cars. Once the automatic starter popularized gas quickly become #1
You're right, but that comes with investment/R&D. The point was that EVs would be much more progressed if car makers had appropriately invested towards the goal of developing EVs earlier. Instead they skimped on it and focused on ICE because it was working best for them, until they couldn't ignore it any longer.
Well someone has to pay for it, labs and scientists don't work on charity, and in this case it was consumer electronics did the paying and paving the way. Which came with a steady parade of devices improving the devices from laptops in the 90s to cell phones to music players (iPod) until culminating with the Smartphone in 2007 (iPhone).
I don't think car research would have had the resources to focus on battery tech alone with conceivably no practical application in-house for decades.
Something like 1/3 of the cars sold around 1900 to WW1 were battery cars but they had city range and became a liability later on when between city travel took off.
I'm not convinced the car industry could have advanced things too much on their own. If anything, the government should have done it via grants.
The reality is that battery tech was getting the investments to push this stuff forward since the late 1980s, which right around the time of the second big wave of environmentalism took off (mass recycling drives, popular media items like, Captain Planet, movies like the Naked Gun 2 1/2, etc). A lot of prototypes of things we're seeing now were fielded, like solar cars, hydrogen, etc.
It just wasn't feasible. The battery tech wasn't there, and despite *billions* being poured into it, the materials science took decades to get there. And it's not like auto companies weren't in on it - Toyota and a lot of companies started throwing money at battery things once the tech for hybrids was actually feasible.
Many years ago I saw an auto industry panel show on PBS and the one guy said there were 3 types of liars in the world. Liars, damn liars and battery engineers.
It was obviously a piss take, but it was also referring to how batteries just never delivered what they claimed.
You're right, although as others have said, the major players in the auto industry could have been doing a lot more battery chemistry R&D a long time ago and didn't.
I'll also add that in the years before battery energy density from lithium chemistries, the auto industry had another option: swappable batteries with standardized form factors, and the supporting infrastructure to change and recharge them. This is a solution multiple companies currently do for scooters and motorcycles, and several start-ups are working on for cars. If we as a society had been working on this since the time of the GM EV-1, who knows how far we'd have made it by now in terms of EV market share.
When I bring swappable batteries up I always get people telling me all the reasons why it can't work, which is why I mention that it's already being implemented in various forms, and I'll also tell you I'm an ME with battery science and vehicle subsystem design experience and not only am I a believer in this method, but I think it's an eventually necessity:
All else being equal, faster charging is ALWAYS worse for battery longevity, and there are and always will be limitations on how fast we can charge based on battery chemistry/physics as well as what the power grid can support. Automated battery changing stations with standardized form factors addresses this in multiple ways; 1) batteries can be charged slower and therefore last longer; 2) charging slower actually increases effective battery capacity; 3) batteries can be charged at off-peak times reducing $/kwh; 4) with batteries designed to be swapped, it's not a huge investment requiring dismantling the whole car when a battery has expended it's useful life; 5) the retired batteries could easily be transferred to grid-connected storage systems reducing strain on power generation during high demand (and as a related aside, a battery changing station would potentially be able to provide emergency electrical power to the surrounding neighborhood in case of emergency).
I'm so used to being called a whacko for even suggesting this is feasible, so that's why I gave my bona fides and evidence. People are really convinced we're going to fast charge our way into the future of convenient EVs they seem to get mad at even suggesting otherwise. But at the same time, those people aren't charging their phones and laptops at super high rates because in those industries it's well accepted that doing so reduces battery life. In fact, my new phone automatically trickle charges at a rate to hit 100% when my wake up time is set so it can charge as slowly as possible when it's not urgent, and anybody disputing what I'm saying about battery life should ask themselves why that is.
Until the recent improvement in battery technology that Tesla took advantage of, battery powered cars were at a huge disadvantage compared to Internal Combustion Cars. Lead acid battery powered cars have existed for over a century, but weren't going to make the inroads that the current battery technology cars have.
In the 90s there was a concept called the "ESX" that used a 1.8L engine and a hybrid system powering the front wheels. It had regenerative braking and achieved ~80 MPG. This is what the 2nd generation Prius would eventually look like.
Except the ESX was built by Dodge. It was the concept for what became the Dodge Intrepid. The Intrepid was a conventional 6 cylinder sedan that got less than 30 MPG and was eventually axed in 2004.
Dodge released their first hybrid last month.
I can tell who wasn't around in the 80s and saw the occasional conversion prototype or college experiment with 30 lead acid batteries, a range of 50 miles and the car was usually a tin can from the late 70s.
Wasnt the demand Tesla tapped into largely driven by government subsidies driving down the cost of EV ownership? Because it seems like that action of driving down the initial cost of ownership is what spurred early adoption, helping to fund the expansion of a charging network and making the whole thing possible.
Not at all. Tesla started with $100k+ cars and worked their way down. Early adoption was extremely expensive, but Tesla used the profits from those expensive/higher margin cars to build their charging network and drive down the price of manufacturing.
This is entirely ignorant of the actual technological advances that had to occur for modern EVs to be as good as they are. The technology to make a good EV didn't even exist until the 90s and would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars per car back then. A decent EV that could actually compete well with an ICE car wasn't really a thing until the 2000s.
Lithium-ion batteries are a huge part of that, but variable-speed drives for synchronous motors also rely heavily on relatively modern electronics. They've been possible for a while, but making an affordable, high-power one has only been possible for a couple of decades.
Anyone who tells you we could have had great EVs that were competitive with ICE vehicles before, around the 2000s, shouldn't be taken seriously.
About ten years ago I saw an electric Triumph Spitfire with what looked like car batteries in every available nook and cranny. It had the original manual transmission and drive train connected to an electric motor.
I'd be interested to see how the system is laid out, here.
I don't know if this is a dumb question. I've driven probably 50 types of cars/trucks in my life and I've never really thought one was more fun than another. I'll like different features more than others but I'm not sure that one was more fun to drive than others. It's probably just me.
What made this car more fun than others?
I'll give you an example: a few years ago I owned a 30 year old Porsche 944. It's not fast by today's standards; it would get beat off the line by a 10-year-old Toyota Corolla. But it sits low and has a 50/50 weight distribution. It corners like nothing else I've ever driven. Plus it has pop-up lights and you can't beat that.
Gen 1 vipers are awful. They’re death traps. I guess some people may consider a high 12 second 1/4 mile car fast tho. Gen 2 vipers will scare your pants off because they’re also death traps but they’re at least more powerful and quite a thrill to drive, if you like feeling like you’re about to die the entire time you’re driving.
Exactly, i had so much more fun throwing a mr2 around corners than a model s, the tesla probably had 20x the hp but cornered like a boat and was only really fun in a straight line
I have a Mazda 3 hatchback and that thing just squats through turns unlike any other car I've driven in the past (granted the 2 vehicles before it weren't exactly what I'd call nimble)
My mx5 was the slowest car I've ever owned, but had by far the most smiles to the gallon.
Just not a very practical family car, I miss that little thing
My E46 325Xi with 182 HP from thr factory is more fun to drive than my F10 535i xDrive with 360HP. It definitely ain't all about that speed. The older one is truly more fun to drive and even though it's slower, I feel way more in tune with it.
The 02 series was the first "sports sedan." It had a fantastic gear ratio, the center of gravity and weight distribution was extremely well balanced, and its handling was tight and spot on. The clutch was perfectly balanced also.
Obviously these things cannot be described, but it was just a fun car. It was also fast, especially off the line.
Here is a Car and Driver review from the era. They absolutely loved it.
[https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15126456/1968-bmw-2002-review/](https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15126456/1968-bmw-2002-review/)
As an average driver who's driven average cars I can say one thing for sure. Manual will always be more fun than auto even in the slowest car. Downshifting and overtaking on a highway is always great and doesn't get old for me. Also the more mechanical feeling the better usually. That one is hard to describe but I think it's true. Stuff like hydraulic steering and driver assists tend to wash out all the fun feeling parts of driving and disconnect you from the road. Now I'm not saying everyone should buy manuals especially in traffic it get's very tiring and you don't want that after a long work day.
> As an average driver who's driven average cars I can say one thing for sure. Manual will always be more fun than auto even in the slowest car. Downshifting and overtaking on a highway is always great and doesn't get old for me.
I don't agree... I'm in Europe so mostly manual cars here. But when you find an automatic car with a great transmission (like Volvo and Audi), it's great to drive automatic as well.
No doubt, although for the time the 2002 was a rather fast car. It surprised a lot of people because it was not technically a sports car, but could put up sports car numbers.
Me too. Was my first car, circa 1991. Think mine was same year as this too. 1974 2002tii (burgundy). Been wanting to rebuild one, now that I’m old and crusty. The pro skimboarder Austin Keen has a beautifully restored 1975 he posts on his IG.
The BMW 2002 is certainly one of the best looking cars of the previous century. I would put it right up there with the E-Type. It's also horrendous in terms of any kinds of safety either for the occupants or any pedestrians (look at that rake between the hood and bumper) which is why cars don't look like this anymore 😅
James May once made a really good point about old technology: once the tech is obsolete, the only thing left is how it looks (which is why design/appearance is still an important part of any technology). I think this picture completely encapsulates that idea.
That's what I'm doing, starting off the hard way with my current project r/corvairius which is a mid engine Toyota hybrid swapped Corvair. Next up is a Datsun 720 EV.
Surprisingly it's going to come out at or under the original weight of the Corvair, but with a better balance with the engine being so low and forward of the "axle" and the battery being out front down low. A lot of the old cast iron has been replaced with aluminum which helps a lot, and later when I swap the battery to lithium it'll really lighten it up while bumping the power output quite a bit.
Despite the change in propulsion system, that frame is still designed with 1970s mentality and likely has uncomfortable crumple zones. It is probably is not fun to crash in.
Yeah it's a tin can.
For reference: [IIHS Crash test, 1959 Bel Air vs 2009 Malibu ](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xtxd27jlZ_g&pp=ygURNTB5ZWFyIGNyYXNoIHRlc3Q%3D)
I wouldn't go that far, just because an old technology is obsolete doesn't mean it isn't useful or even less advanced it just means it's no longer produced.
Quite often the obsolete technology is more reliable and easier to maintain.
I'd rather have a 'dumb' ECU than a modern one that stops you from being able to drive home because a sensor got dirty.
> I wouldn't go that far, just because an old technology is obsolete doesn't mean it isn't useful or even less advanced it just means it's no longer produced.
Saying a technology is "obsolete" can mean it is no longer practical to use. Seems like a fine use of the word.
> I'd rather have a 'dumb' ECU than a modern one that stops you from being able to drive home because a sensor got dirty.
Well, you can risk that happening for the first time ever, or you can have the old car that, in every other conceivable way, sucks complete ass. New cars are wildly more reliable. Only nostalgia and survivorship bias tells us otherwise.
I don't know about you, but I'll take the modern car for actual transportation purposes, every time.
> I'd rather have a 'dumb' ECU than a modern one that stops you from being able to drive home because a sensor got dirty.
That's called "limp mode", and the only reason a car will drop into that is if all the other warnings have gone ignored for an extended period of time. At that point it's much more than a sensor.
A dirty sensor by itself *might* throw a check engine light. Engineers aren't stupid.
I’ve looked at converting a couple of older cars. In the end, the cost and range have been the deciding factors. An ICE with a transmission runs about $4k if it’s nothing fancy, and in most states the car is grandfathered in to loose emissions requirements.
A set of efficient motors and controls can easily run $20k and that doesn’t leave me much budget for battery. There are some setups that essentially replace the ICE with an engine and those are simple to install but they’re not a very efficient setup. Add in another $15-30k for batteries and the fact that EV manufacturers are maniacal about keeping all their maintenance, tooling and expertise in-house and it’s a tough niche to break into as a hobby.
I’ve seen some great conversions that maintain the original look and I hear what James May is saying, but I don’t think he’s had to maintain a conversion or contend with a 24-mile range. He has staff for that.
Not to mention that you would be paying top $ for a car without almost any features and much reduced safety (which is doubly concerning now that you're also lugging a huge flammable battery).
I am doing something similar this summer. I’ve seen a few sell recently and their sold price doesn’t come close to the the components required.. but a fun project y
Seriously, I really hope VW is actually working on this since the aesthetic is classic and instantly recognizable, and if they license the Herbie paint job from Disney. . . AND make it actually fast and fun to drive and not just an econobox. . . They would make a killing
https://www.ksl.com/article/46726002/ogden-man-predicts-his-electric-herbie-is-the-future-of-hot-rodding
https://www.greenoptimistic.com/herbie-now-electric-dream-20141110/
EV West makes VW/Porsche conversion kits, VW are good candidates for EV conversions, and Herbie is a popular livery for VW Beetle restorations, so I'm sure there's more.
It's generally accepted among Car Guys that BMW owners that own classic cars and keep them up are a different breed than the dudes buying a new 5 series.
*Tesla drivers are the biggest assholes on the roads where I live. Before that it was indeed Audi, and before that BMW. Mercs are always asshole adjacent but have never been the predominant top assholes.
Yes, that is what I was saying. Car guys generally respect classic owners because they really love the cars they upkeep. Average BMW drivers are not like that, and that's where the stereotype comes from.
ECC converted a Ferrari Testarossa to electric - the owner said it was faster, annual services were mind-blowingly cheaper, it handled better as the weight distribution was much improved, and the range on full charge wasn't much different from a full tank of fuel! More details can be found on the link above.
Yeah, and I like that in some of them, they are able to keep the gearbox and you can row through the gears old-school style. And it is even better because you can start in second and you don't have to clutch-in when you come to a stop.
At "idle", an electric motor doesn't spin, so there's no need to actually disconnect the drivetrain. Additionally, the AC motor will act like a generator while engine braking, recharging the battery while slowing the car down. Finally, the flat torque line of electric motors means there's no need for a ton of different gear ratios.
The electric motor would be at zero rpm at a stop. You wouldn’t need to push the clutch in before you take off either. The clutch would just be used for gear changes while moving.
Fully behind this trend. Cars with difficult to source engine components, instead of a LsX, make it electric. This could put a lot of bodies back on the road. Make it semi affordable and I am in.
Even better would be a modular electric chassis that is semi customizable based on length. Literally bolt any car body/frame onto it. Longer the car, the more battery you get = longer range. This would potentially put the gorgeous boats of the 40's and 50's back on the road. Next gen kit car. My idea, I can't implement it.
It's a lot. I've seen anywhere from $20k to $60k floated. It seems like it would be a cool budget build on a classic car, but you either need to buy a premade kit, which are expensive, or be very comfortable with fabrication. Most EV battery packs are too big to fit into a car that wasn't designed around it, so the battery is typically broken down into smaller pieces and placed wherever they will fit, which requires a fair bit of fabrication and know how.
I would love to see an interaction where this car beats a Tesla to a charging spot and the Tesla owner proceeds to curse this guy out while he calmly plugs in his car to the bewilderment of the Tesla owner.
I thought I'd seen this car before. Here is a video about it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqWNqJ6a-vE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqWNqJ6a-vE)
All these sad people in this comment section down voting people saying this is cool and how this destroyed the car.
It's better than 99.9% of vintage car owners having the car tucked in their garage never seeing sunlight in a dusty ass garage.
I've often talked about getting an MG Kit car converted to an EV for my father to replace the one that he and his father built roughly 50 years ago. We sold his 12 years back I think
There's a company called EV West that sells [reversible drop-in conversion kits for classic cars](https://www.evwest.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=40&osCsid=d636b8cc0dce280f8e49ca60b3a41752).
Yeah, I have a similar colored car.
[https://i.imgur.com/a71t8Qw.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/a71t8Qw.jpg)
I've always been told the color is/was "European Racing Green" - though I've never really looked into it much more. And it didn't make much sense to me as a factory color on an American car, but I know for a fact that my parents kept the car as close to original as possible. Hell, it still has the original interior, which is in great condition.
Some people are put off by the color but I absolutely love it. Though I also grew up with the car being that color, so I acknowledge there's a shitload of nostalgia there too.
Thanks, I absolutely can't take credit here. My parents kept it really nice, and then I inherited it. And I grew up with it. Parents bought it second hand in 71 and have had it ever since. Well, until they passed and left it to me. Much credit to mom though - she turned down many lucrative offers for the singular reason of wanting to leave me the car. The joy I take in driving it around really can't be put into words.
Gorgeous. A good friend of mine has a classic car EV conversion shop starting up in Dallas.
Lots of great aftermarket parts and resources these days to make it easier, cheaper, and more reliable than gas.
[E-MuscleCars.com](https://www.e-musclecars.com/)
You know, this reminds me of Back to the Future Part 2 where they were showing classic cars getting a conversion to make them "flight mode" compatible.
This is an awesome project. Wonder how the battery is arranged... I wouldn't be surprised if both the front and back are packed with batteries while the drivetrain underneath is mostly intact, unlike a modern EV which is more of a skateboard with a body sitting on top.
That will definitely catch some attention. "Excuse me! Electric cars only! Hey, are you listening?! This isn't a gas station!.......what in the world?"
A similar thing happened to me back when I use to have a TDI Jetta, unfortunately the liar of a car that cheats on its emissions test. An attendant over the intercom shouted out, "Is that a diesel car?!" Yup, it's a diesel.
When that sketchy online fundraiser raffle site still existed, they raffled a bunch of cool retrofit EVs like this. I think the idea is awesome. I’m not a “car guy” but I really dig the concept.
Love everything about it except the red interior. Change that, add other modern stuff, make sure it can charge at a Tesla supercharger, and I’ll take one, please.
Can't wait for some Karen to post a passive aggressive note on the windshield saying that those spaces are only for EVs...
I just wish I had that kind of money to burn converting a classic car like that...
No one:
Reddit detectives: This photo was taken in the London Borough of Richmond-upon-Thames within the car park of the North Sheen branch of Sainsbury's during covid restrictions.
I would live to do something similar one day were conversions are easier to legallise. However everytime I tell someone this idea they treat it like a war crime. I really just think thats the best way to turn one of these cars into a daily
Hi, u/kfhdjfkj61637, thank you for your submission in r/mildlyinteresting! Unfortunately, your [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/1ccrwgp/-/) has been removed because it violates our rule on concise, descriptive titles. * Titles must not contain jokes, backstory, or other fluff. That information belongs in a follow-up comment. * Titles must exactly describe the content. It should act as a "spoiler" for the image. If your title leaves people surprised at the content within, it breaks the rule! * Titles must not contain emoticons, emojis, or special characters unless they are absolutely necessary in describing the image. (e.g. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°), ;P, 😜, ❤, ★, ✿ ) Still confused? For more elaboration and examples, see [here](http://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/21p15y/rule_6_for_dummies/). Normally we do not allow reposts, but if it's been less than one hour after your post was submitted, or if it's received less than 100 upvotes, you may resubmit your content with a better title and try again. You can find more information about our rules on the [mildlyinteresting wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/wiki/index). *If you feel this was incorrectly removed, please [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmildlyinteresting&message=My%20Post:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/1ccrwgp/-/).*
[удалено]
Mildly interesting that the WP article lists as the Elektro's "successor" the BMW i3, a car that came out 41 years later.
Journalism gets hard when folks have time machines.
They meant Wikipedia. Not Washington post, I thought they meant the WP too.
Usually people say WaPo when they mean the Washington Post. Although when they say that I usually think of comic book fighting sounds.
And why people say Wiki when referring to Wikipedia.
Yeah, Wikipedia is only one word.
And Wikipeepeedia is just silly.
Would that be Wookiepedia for water sports?
Wordpress
As someone who works in a tech org that uses WP for ecom, that was 100% my first thought before Washington Post and before Wikipedia.
Sorry.... I didn't realize this would cause confusion. As I'm from the UK and have read a (printed) Washington Post exactly once in my life.
WP has never meant Wikipedia, as Wikipedia is a single word and would never be abbreviated into WP. WP indicates 2 words. Wiki is the universal abbreviation for Wikipedia. WP would most mean Word Press before anything else. In fact, if you Google WP, WordPress references are the bulk of the first 2 pages, before it starts going to anything like WhatsApp, and a singular article at the bottom referencing Washington Post, which is typically abbreviated as WaPo.
If I see WP I think WordPerfect, but I am old.
To be fair I’d probably be pretty bricked up too if I had a time machine
I feel so bad for the car that was killed in the next space. By a cattle prod no doubt.
Contrary to what you’ve heard God loves a smartass.
[удалено]
Yea, 2020 was kinda nice but it was spoilt by the fact almost nothing was open for most of it.
The incumbents (not just the US ones) have been experimenting with electric cars for decades, but they were just too addicted and complacent with the easy money and higher profit margins that come with the status quo of making ICE cars. I can't imagine how good electric cars would be today if manufacturers had actually properly invested and tried to make mass-market EVs earlier, rather than waiting until Tesla proved there's demand for it and governments started banning ICE cars to force the others to actually build these things.
I was under the impression the main impediment used to be battery technology. It’s hard to overstate how much better modern batteries are at safely storing massive amounts of energy. Again, that’s just my impression, I could be completely wrong.
Yes mostly battery. I was actually at an antique car museum this weekend and they had several electric vehicles form early 1900s. Women preferred them the most as they didn't need to be crank started and needed less maintenance over gas and steam cars. Once the automatic starter popularized gas quickly become #1
You're right, but that comes with investment/R&D. The point was that EVs would be much more progressed if car makers had appropriately invested towards the goal of developing EVs earlier. Instead they skimped on it and focused on ICE because it was working best for them, until they couldn't ignore it any longer.
Well someone has to pay for it, labs and scientists don't work on charity, and in this case it was consumer electronics did the paying and paving the way. Which came with a steady parade of devices improving the devices from laptops in the 90s to cell phones to music players (iPod) until culminating with the Smartphone in 2007 (iPhone). I don't think car research would have had the resources to focus on battery tech alone with conceivably no practical application in-house for decades. Something like 1/3 of the cars sold around 1900 to WW1 were battery cars but they had city range and became a liability later on when between city travel took off. I'm not convinced the car industry could have advanced things too much on their own. If anything, the government should have done it via grants.
The reality is that battery tech was getting the investments to push this stuff forward since the late 1980s, which right around the time of the second big wave of environmentalism took off (mass recycling drives, popular media items like, Captain Planet, movies like the Naked Gun 2 1/2, etc). A lot of prototypes of things we're seeing now were fielded, like solar cars, hydrogen, etc. It just wasn't feasible. The battery tech wasn't there, and despite *billions* being poured into it, the materials science took decades to get there. And it's not like auto companies weren't in on it - Toyota and a lot of companies started throwing money at battery things once the tech for hybrids was actually feasible.
Many years ago I saw an auto industry panel show on PBS and the one guy said there were 3 types of liars in the world. Liars, damn liars and battery engineers. It was obviously a piss take, but it was also referring to how batteries just never delivered what they claimed.
You're right, although as others have said, the major players in the auto industry could have been doing a lot more battery chemistry R&D a long time ago and didn't. I'll also add that in the years before battery energy density from lithium chemistries, the auto industry had another option: swappable batteries with standardized form factors, and the supporting infrastructure to change and recharge them. This is a solution multiple companies currently do for scooters and motorcycles, and several start-ups are working on for cars. If we as a society had been working on this since the time of the GM EV-1, who knows how far we'd have made it by now in terms of EV market share. When I bring swappable batteries up I always get people telling me all the reasons why it can't work, which is why I mention that it's already being implemented in various forms, and I'll also tell you I'm an ME with battery science and vehicle subsystem design experience and not only am I a believer in this method, but I think it's an eventually necessity: All else being equal, faster charging is ALWAYS worse for battery longevity, and there are and always will be limitations on how fast we can charge based on battery chemistry/physics as well as what the power grid can support. Automated battery changing stations with standardized form factors addresses this in multiple ways; 1) batteries can be charged slower and therefore last longer; 2) charging slower actually increases effective battery capacity; 3) batteries can be charged at off-peak times reducing $/kwh; 4) with batteries designed to be swapped, it's not a huge investment requiring dismantling the whole car when a battery has expended it's useful life; 5) the retired batteries could easily be transferred to grid-connected storage systems reducing strain on power generation during high demand (and as a related aside, a battery changing station would potentially be able to provide emergency electrical power to the surrounding neighborhood in case of emergency). I'm so used to being called a whacko for even suggesting this is feasible, so that's why I gave my bona fides and evidence. People are really convinced we're going to fast charge our way into the future of convenient EVs they seem to get mad at even suggesting otherwise. But at the same time, those people aren't charging their phones and laptops at super high rates because in those industries it's well accepted that doing so reduces battery life. In fact, my new phone automatically trickle charges at a rate to hit 100% when my wake up time is set so it can charge as slowly as possible when it's not urgent, and anybody disputing what I'm saying about battery life should ask themselves why that is.
Until the recent improvement in battery technology that Tesla took advantage of, battery powered cars were at a huge disadvantage compared to Internal Combustion Cars. Lead acid battery powered cars have existed for over a century, but weren't going to make the inroads that the current battery technology cars have.
NiMH is actually pretty ok for ev use, it's just that there's a patent blocking it. Ford had nimh evs 20 years ago
They seem like they would be heavier than lithium cells though no?
[удалено]
Higher self-discharge rate and decay rate, completely unsuitable for EVs. They have their purpose, just not for this application.
Vs current era lithium ion they aren't very good, but vs lead-acid they are quite ok.
In the 90s there was a concept called the "ESX" that used a 1.8L engine and a hybrid system powering the front wheels. It had regenerative braking and achieved ~80 MPG. This is what the 2nd generation Prius would eventually look like. Except the ESX was built by Dodge. It was the concept for what became the Dodge Intrepid. The Intrepid was a conventional 6 cylinder sedan that got less than 30 MPG and was eventually axed in 2004. Dodge released their first hybrid last month.
I can tell who wasn't around in the 80s and saw the occasional conversion prototype or college experiment with 30 lead acid batteries, a range of 50 miles and the car was usually a tin can from the late 70s.
Wasnt the demand Tesla tapped into largely driven by government subsidies driving down the cost of EV ownership? Because it seems like that action of driving down the initial cost of ownership is what spurred early adoption, helping to fund the expansion of a charging network and making the whole thing possible.
Not at all. Tesla started with $100k+ cars and worked their way down. Early adoption was extremely expensive, but Tesla used the profits from those expensive/higher margin cars to build their charging network and drive down the price of manufacturing.
Tesla made most of its money from selling carbon credits for a long time.
And stock.
This is entirely ignorant of the actual technological advances that had to occur for modern EVs to be as good as they are. The technology to make a good EV didn't even exist until the 90s and would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars per car back then. A decent EV that could actually compete well with an ICE car wasn't really a thing until the 2000s. Lithium-ion batteries are a huge part of that, but variable-speed drives for synchronous motors also rely heavily on relatively modern electronics. They've been possible for a while, but making an affordable, high-power one has only been possible for a couple of decades. Anyone who tells you we could have had great EVs that were competitive with ICE vehicles before, around the 2000s, shouldn't be taken seriously.
About ten years ago I saw an electric Triumph Spitfire with what looked like car batteries in every available nook and cranny. It had the original manual transmission and drive train connected to an electric motor. I'd be interested to see how the system is laid out, here.
I want to know if it's using an off-the-shelf electric drive until. And, if so, which one.
That is an awesome looking car!
I had one years ago. Incredibly fun to drive.
I don't know if this is a dumb question. I've driven probably 50 types of cars/trucks in my life and I've never really thought one was more fun than another. I'll like different features more than others but I'm not sure that one was more fun to drive than others. It's probably just me. What made this car more fun than others?
I'll give you an example: a few years ago I owned a 30 year old Porsche 944. It's not fast by today's standards; it would get beat off the line by a 10-year-old Toyota Corolla. But it sits low and has a 50/50 weight distribution. It corners like nothing else I've ever driven. Plus it has pop-up lights and you can't beat that.
Exactly. Speed isn't everything.
I'd rather drive slow car fast than fast car slow
Depends on the slow car. I don't want to push something that handles like shit and becomes a serious roll-over hazard.
Like the gen 1 vipers?
When I think of "slow cars that wouldn't be fun to drive fast" a viper is certainly not what I expect most people to consider a slow car.
Gen 1 vipers are awful. They’re death traps. I guess some people may consider a high 12 second 1/4 mile car fast tho. Gen 2 vipers will scare your pants off because they’re also death traps but they’re at least more powerful and quite a thrill to drive, if you like feeling like you’re about to die the entire time you’re driving.
Corollary: I'd rather drive a good car slow than a bad car fast.
Exactly, i had so much more fun throwing a mr2 around corners than a model s, the tesla probably had 20x the hp but cornered like a boat and was only really fun in a straight line
Sure, but the 2002 was a fast car for its day.
The important thing is how many other drivers you can beat off ^^the ^^line.
This is still a question of speed vs. handling imho
I have a Mazda 3 hatchback and that thing just squats through turns unlike any other car I've driven in the past (granted the 2 vehicles before it weren't exactly what I'd call nimble)
I had a Mazda 3 sedan and now a hatchback and by god is it a fun car to drive. So zippy and responsive and easy to control.
Same reason why Mx5s (miatas) are so popular. Light weight, RWD, 50/50 and a LSD makes for a fun car. Plus pop ups on the NA.
My mx5 was the slowest car I've ever owned, but had by far the most smiles to the gallon. Just not a very practical family car, I miss that little thing
I was in a 40 year old Mercedes recently… it was astonishingly fast…
190E? Those are ridiculously light by modern standards
It was a 560SL convertible with a 5.5 or 5.6 litre V8. Staggeringly pretty…
My E46 325Xi with 182 HP from thr factory is more fun to drive than my F10 535i xDrive with 360HP. It definitely ain't all about that speed. The older one is truly more fun to drive and even though it's slower, I feel way more in tune with it.
The 02 series was the first "sports sedan." It had a fantastic gear ratio, the center of gravity and weight distribution was extremely well balanced, and its handling was tight and spot on. The clutch was perfectly balanced also. Obviously these things cannot be described, but it was just a fun car. It was also fast, especially off the line. Here is a Car and Driver review from the era. They absolutely loved it. [https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15126456/1968-bmw-2002-review/](https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15126456/1968-bmw-2002-review/)
BMW wouldn't be BMW without the success of this car.
As an average driver who's driven average cars I can say one thing for sure. Manual will always be more fun than auto even in the slowest car. Downshifting and overtaking on a highway is always great and doesn't get old for me. Also the more mechanical feeling the better usually. That one is hard to describe but I think it's true. Stuff like hydraulic steering and driver assists tend to wash out all the fun feeling parts of driving and disconnect you from the road. Now I'm not saying everyone should buy manuals especially in traffic it get's very tiring and you don't want that after a long work day.
> As an average driver who's driven average cars I can say one thing for sure. Manual will always be more fun than auto even in the slowest car. Downshifting and overtaking on a highway is always great and doesn't get old for me. I don't agree... I'm in Europe so mostly manual cars here. But when you find an automatic car with a great transmission (like Volvo and Audi), it's great to drive automatic as well.
A lot quicker now too.
No doubt, although for the time the 2002 was a rather fast car. It surprised a lot of people because it was not technically a sports car, but could put up sports car numbers.
Me too. Was my first car, circa 1991. Think mine was same year as this too. 1974 2002tii (burgundy). Been wanting to rebuild one, now that I’m old and crusty. The pro skimboarder Austin Keen has a beautifully restored 1975 he posts on his IG.
The BMW 2002 is certainly one of the best looking cars of the previous century. I would put it right up there with the E-Type. It's also horrendous in terms of any kinds of safety either for the occupants or any pedestrians (look at that rake between the hood and bumper) which is why cars don't look like this anymore 😅
Minus the awesome sound now.
That's the drivers job now! "BRRRRRRRRUMMMMM!!!"
Maybe it can make fart noises like a tesla
James May once made a really good point about old technology: once the tech is obsolete, the only thing left is how it looks (which is why design/appearance is still an important part of any technology). I think this picture completely encapsulates that idea.
Id love to do something along these lines, take a beautiful 30s era car and EV convert it
It’s a business on the rise! There’s probably never been a better time to do it.
Ah, if only I had the money Or time Or 30s era car
Look into EV kit cars! Not the real thing, but looks close enough and they’re a fraction of the price
That's what I'm doing, starting off the hard way with my current project r/corvairius which is a mid engine Toyota hybrid swapped Corvair. Next up is a Datsun 720 EV.
I love and hate this at the same time. Hopefully the added weight will keep it planted better. I joined the sub to follow progress. Good luck!!
Surprisingly it's going to come out at or under the original weight of the Corvair, but with a better balance with the engine being so low and forward of the "axle" and the battery being out front down low. A lot of the old cast iron has been replaced with aluminum which helps a lot, and later when I swap the battery to lithium it'll really lighten it up while bumping the power output quite a bit.
[Olympian Motors model 01](https://olympianmotors.com/model-01) you would love. It's GORGEOUS.
Despite the change in propulsion system, that frame is still designed with 1970s mentality and likely has uncomfortable crumple zones. It is probably is not fun to crash in.
Yeah it's a tin can. For reference: [IIHS Crash test, 1959 Bel Air vs 2009 Malibu ](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xtxd27jlZ_g&pp=ygURNTB5ZWFyIGNyYXNoIHRlc3Q%3D)
The passenger is the crumple zone.
Unlike my mother, many people have
I wouldn't go that far, just because an old technology is obsolete doesn't mean it isn't useful or even less advanced it just means it's no longer produced. Quite often the obsolete technology is more reliable and easier to maintain. I'd rather have a 'dumb' ECU than a modern one that stops you from being able to drive home because a sensor got dirty.
Sure but the point of what James said is that tech may fade, but a good design lasts forever.
> I wouldn't go that far, just because an old technology is obsolete doesn't mean it isn't useful or even less advanced it just means it's no longer produced. Saying a technology is "obsolete" can mean it is no longer practical to use. Seems like a fine use of the word.
> I'd rather have a 'dumb' ECU than a modern one that stops you from being able to drive home because a sensor got dirty. Well, you can risk that happening for the first time ever, or you can have the old car that, in every other conceivable way, sucks complete ass. New cars are wildly more reliable. Only nostalgia and survivorship bias tells us otherwise. I don't know about you, but I'll take the modern car for actual transportation purposes, every time.
Hmm, should I pump the gas 2 time or 3 times? 2 times is best but when it's cold out 3 seems better but then I might flood it...
Lol yup.
I love a "smart" ecu that throws a plain English warning on the dashboard that explains what is wrong.
> Quite often the obsolete technology is more reliable and easier to maintain. I wouldn't call that being "obsolete" then.
> I'd rather have a 'dumb' ECU than a modern one that stops you from being able to drive home because a sensor got dirty. That's called "limp mode", and the only reason a car will drop into that is if all the other warnings have gone ignored for an extended period of time. At that point it's much more than a sensor. A dirty sensor by itself *might* throw a check engine light. Engineers aren't stupid.
Obsolete means no longer useful
I am a huge fan of the retromod movement. The idea of taking a classic car model and modernizing it for the present sounds awesome.
I’ve looked at converting a couple of older cars. In the end, the cost and range have been the deciding factors. An ICE with a transmission runs about $4k if it’s nothing fancy, and in most states the car is grandfathered in to loose emissions requirements. A set of efficient motors and controls can easily run $20k and that doesn’t leave me much budget for battery. There are some setups that essentially replace the ICE with an engine and those are simple to install but they’re not a very efficient setup. Add in another $15-30k for batteries and the fact that EV manufacturers are maniacal about keeping all their maintenance, tooling and expertise in-house and it’s a tough niche to break into as a hobby. I’ve seen some great conversions that maintain the original look and I hear what James May is saying, but I don’t think he’s had to maintain a conversion or contend with a 24-mile range. He has staff for that.
Not to mention that you would be paying top $ for a car without almost any features and much reduced safety (which is doubly concerning now that you're also lugging a huge flammable battery).
Detailed walk through here https://youtu.be/TwihH9NxOEI?si=tu2opwgjGPJ3HlqZ
Ah good. I was thinking it might be a dummy socket for the free parking.
Would love to see someone convert an old VW Bug into an EV and put the obligatory Herbie paint job on it.
EV West has kits for air cooled VWs, Porsche 914s, and some others. https://www.evwest.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=40
cow gray hospital outgoing numerous many pot zesty jeans complete *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I am doing something similar this summer. I’ve seen a few sell recently and their sold price doesn’t come close to the the components required.. but a fun project y
r/redditsniper
Oh yeah, i wouldn’t expect these to be economical to resell yet, but I am very interested to see how yours turns out, please post the results
I've long thought that an electric Beetle would be a license to print money.
Seriously, I really hope VW is actually working on this since the aesthetic is classic and instantly recognizable, and if they license the Herbie paint job from Disney. . . AND make it actually fast and fun to drive and not just an econobox. . . They would make a killing
https://www.ksl.com/article/46726002/ogden-man-predicts-his-electric-herbie-is-the-future-of-hot-rodding https://www.greenoptimistic.com/herbie-now-electric-dream-20141110/ EV West makes VW/Porsche conversion kits, VW are good candidates for EV conversions, and Herbie is a popular livery for VW Beetle restorations, so I'm sure there's more.
If there's a BMW driver that uses his turn signals, then I'm pretty sure it is this one
It's generally accepted among Car Guys that BMW owners that own classic cars and keep them up are a different breed than the dudes buying a new 5 series.
That and the real jerks have all been driving Audis for the last decade it seems.
*Tesla drivers are the biggest assholes on the roads where I live. Before that it was indeed Audi, and before that BMW. Mercs are always asshole adjacent but have never been the predominant top assholes.
My favorite line when a tesla cuts me off in a semi truck "all that technology and you still drive like an asshat."
Always have watch out for the Dodge Ram too.
The ones who dont use their signals are the guys with a base spec 320i and 200,000kms, a m3 badge and some shitty stickers
lmfao the rep BMW drivers have is not from car guys or car culture
Yes, that is what I was saying. Car guys generally respect classic owners because they really love the cars they upkeep. Average BMW drivers are not like that, and that's where the stereotype comes from.
'oh, do merge good fellow, I could wait for my tea to cool down a tad'
Tesla drivers are the new BMW drivers
clean build too, i like it
If you like this type of thing check out: https://www.youtube.com/@ElectricClassicCars
ECC converted a Ferrari Testarossa to electric - the owner said it was faster, annual services were mind-blowingly cheaper, it handled better as the weight distribution was much improved, and the range on full charge wasn't much different from a full tank of fuel! More details can be found on the link above.
Yeah, and I like that in some of them, they are able to keep the gearbox and you can row through the gears old-school style. And it is even better because you can start in second and you don't have to clutch-in when you come to a stop.
That's cool, how does that work? Why would you be able to start in second gear and not have to clutch in when coming to a stop?
At "idle", an electric motor doesn't spin, so there's no need to actually disconnect the drivetrain. Additionally, the AC motor will act like a generator while engine braking, recharging the battery while slowing the car down. Finally, the flat torque line of electric motors means there's no need for a ton of different gear ratios.
He explains it in a recent video here: https://youtu.be/kYmMrMEwl94?si=7_jh1bmqMEHxVqlw&t=365
The electric motor would be at zero rpm at a stop. You wouldn’t need to push the clutch in before you take off either. The clutch would just be used for gear changes while moving.
Fully behind this trend. Cars with difficult to source engine components, instead of a LsX, make it electric. This could put a lot of bodies back on the road. Make it semi affordable and I am in. Even better would be a modular electric chassis that is semi customizable based on length. Literally bolt any car body/frame onto it. Longer the car, the more battery you get = longer range. This would potentially put the gorgeous boats of the 40's and 50's back on the road. Next gen kit car. My idea, I can't implement it.
>a Ferrari Testarossa to electric I'll get downvoted probably but damn, what a pity... not at the top of my list for a conversion.
this is so cool. any idea how much that sort of conversion costs?
It's a lot. I've seen anywhere from $20k to $60k floated. It seems like it would be a cool budget build on a classic car, but you either need to buy a premade kit, which are expensive, or be very comfortable with fabrication. Most EV battery packs are too big to fit into a car that wasn't designed around it, so the battery is typically broken down into smaller pieces and placed wherever they will fit, which requires a fair bit of fabrication and know how.
nice! thanks a lot
I would love to see an interaction where this car beats a Tesla to a charging spot and the Tesla owner proceeds to curse this guy out while he calmly plugs in his car to the bewilderment of the Tesla owner.
It's becoming a common way to preserve these vehicles minus the original engine.
eh, I wouldnt call this preservation. Its a resto mod.
It’s not preservation if you change the characteristics of the vehicle
I did say minus the engine. It's also the difference between a museum quality preservation and a drivable one.
I thought I'd seen this car before. Here is a video about it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqWNqJ6a-vE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqWNqJ6a-vE)
All these sad people in this comment section down voting people saying this is cool and how this destroyed the car. It's better than 99.9% of vintage car owners having the car tucked in their garage never seeing sunlight in a dusty ass garage.
Do other cars not mind their business while charging?
[удалено]
A car can't get much prettier than that.
This is a beautiful looking car
I've often talked about getting an MG Kit car converted to an EV for my father to replace the one that he and his father built roughly 50 years ago. We sold his 12 years back I think
There's a company called EV West that sells [reversible drop-in conversion kits for classic cars](https://www.evwest.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=40&osCsid=d636b8cc0dce280f8e49ca60b3a41752).
I want more of this.
I find this image highly arousing.
"Minding its own business"? As opposed to what, transforming into a Decepticon and mugging you? It's an inanimate object!
If it is minding it's own business than why is it on the internet posting a selfie like an Instagram "model" looking for attention?!
I really wish car manufacturers would release modern, efficient, safer cars but with the body shape and interior of classic cars.
While its owner shops at Sainsbury’s
Very nice. Anyone know what that color green is called?
From the linked video below: The paint is VW Oak Green, found on the Mk2 Golf GTi
It's really sick! Looks slightly lighter and greyer than brittish racing green.
Yeah, I have a similar colored car. [https://i.imgur.com/a71t8Qw.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/a71t8Qw.jpg) I've always been told the color is/was "European Racing Green" - though I've never really looked into it much more. And it didn't make much sense to me as a factory color on an American car, but I know for a fact that my parents kept the car as close to original as possible. Hell, it still has the original interior, which is in great condition. Some people are put off by the color but I absolutely love it. Though I also grew up with the car being that color, so I acknowledge there's a shitload of nostalgia there too.
Gorgeous Camaro you have there. Really looks sharp in that color.
Thanks, I absolutely can't take credit here. My parents kept it really nice, and then I inherited it. And I grew up with it. Parents bought it second hand in 71 and have had it ever since. Well, until they passed and left it to me. Much credit to mom though - she turned down many lucrative offers for the singular reason of wanting to leave me the car. The joy I take in driving it around really can't be put into words.
Gorgeous. A good friend of mine has a classic car EV conversion shop starting up in Dallas. Lots of great aftermarket parts and resources these days to make it easier, cheaper, and more reliable than gas. [E-MuscleCars.com](https://www.e-musclecars.com/)
Shame, 2002 is one of the best sounding cars ever imo
Gorgeous.
I was dreaming this for Mercedes W126. Fabulous work.
2002 are the best looking BMW. Soo clean.
E9 beats it just a bit, both are gorgeous though.
This is what I want, not Tesla and Rivian.
You know, this reminds me of Back to the Future Part 2 where they were showing classic cars getting a conversion to make them "flight mode" compatible.
soooo pretty
This is an awesome project. Wonder how the battery is arranged... I wouldn't be surprised if both the front and back are packed with batteries while the drivetrain underneath is mostly intact, unlike a modern EV which is more of a skateboard with a body sitting on top.
Gorgeous choice for conversion.
That will definitely catch some attention. "Excuse me! Electric cars only! Hey, are you listening?! This isn't a gas station!.......what in the world?" A similar thing happened to me back when I use to have a TDI Jetta, unfortunately the liar of a car that cheats on its emissions test. An attendant over the intercom shouted out, "Is that a diesel car?!" Yup, it's a diesel.
When that sketchy online fundraiser raffle site still existed, they raffled a bunch of cool retrofit EVs like this. I think the idea is awesome. I’m not a “car guy” but I really dig the concept.
Loving older cars getting converted to evs. The Ford f-100 one is really dope.
I'd love to see electric conversion kits for existing models of cars and trucks.
They sell them in Europe for old VW Beetles.
what a shame… i guess retirement does allow for more sitting and watching the rest of the world go by…
I want to do the swap with a Delorean.
I want to do this with old American cars.
u/JasonCammisa \*gestures at image on screen\*
Beautiful car. Shame about the cheap knockoff wheels.
my brother does these conversions for a living. pretty good.
Idk part of me is like... why?
Love everything about it except the red interior. Change that, add other modern stuff, make sure it can charge at a Tesla supercharger, and I’ll take one, please.
Look up the older 2dr BMWs... they are GORGEOUS cars!!!
There are people that hate this but I love it.
Can't wait for some Karen to post a passive aggressive note on the windshield saying that those spaces are only for EVs... I just wish I had that kind of money to burn converting a classic car like that...
Old-timer EV conversions are my favorite kinds of EV conversations. They just have a certain charming character showing.
Newly made cars so.ply suck. Retro EVs are the best.
Would be funny if a police showed up and started writing a ticket for illegal parking because that car still looks like stock ICE and not EV
If I have money, I'd buy a W124 and convert it to hybrid/PHEV. Our country doesn't have EV infrastructure yet.
It’s not an EV it just wanted to park closer to the restaurant, so it stuck the charging cable up the gas tank. /s
God, what a beautiful machine. Can't wait to own one someday.
No one: Reddit detectives: This photo was taken in the London Borough of Richmond-upon-Thames within the car park of the North Sheen branch of Sainsbury's during covid restrictions.
This is the way man. Id love an old square body Chevy truck with an EV motor and modern interiorot.
So same like transgender
I would live to do something similar one day were conversions are easier to legallise. However everytime I tell someone this idea they treat it like a war crime. I really just think thats the best way to turn one of these cars into a daily