3 ms·

I've driven one, and honestly, it wasn't that fat/slow/heavy. It could have used more power, but it was fairly fun to drive. Not everything needs "five hunnert

• jandrese 6y ago
  It was slow compared to similarly priced luxury sport vehicles of the day. Compared to ordinary sedans and the like it was perfectly fine, although obviously far more expensive. They definitely needed to iterate on the design a few times. The gull wing doors were super cool, but also highly failure prone. The engine desperately needed a turbocharger which was in the works when DMC folded. The electrics were typical British 80s fire hazards. One good thing is that unlike many cars of the era it is not plagued with blistering or peeling paint.
• blackrock 6y ago
  It only needs to hit 88 mph before it hits the wall, for things to be interesting.
• mywittyname 6y ago
  There's a lot of room between 130 (SAE NET) hp and "five hunnert horsepower" The DMC-12 is roughly as fast as a Prius. I can appreciate the complaints in that department. I wouldn't dare call 2900lbs fat though.
  • mikestew 6y ago
    I wouldn't dare call 2900lbs fat though. My 1982 Honda Accord weighed 2100lbs. Everything back then, before air bags, ABS, and other safety features, weighed considerably less. Honda CRX with a manual transmission weighed in at 1700lbs. So I stand by my statement, the DeLoren was chunky. :)