4 ms·
"Saving" might be a bit of a controversial turn of phrase in terms of classic cars. Is it really saving beyond aesthetics if you gut the engine in favour of an
by yur3i__ 5y ago
"Saving" might be a bit of a controversial turn of phrase in terms of classic cars. Is it really saving beyond aesthetics if you gut the engine in favour of an electric that just looks like a classic on the outside?
(Disclaimer: I don't know anything about cars, its a genuine question)
- tentacleuno 5y agoA lot of people are going to respond to your question with "no", especially in the classic car community. Old engines are a lot easier to repair in many ways, from what I've heard.
- libertine 5y agoI don't think it's in the realm of impossibility that in a near future certain types of cars, within an age/engine range, will stop being allowed to drive in public roads. Some cities are doing this in Europe, where some areas of the city don't allow cars prior to 2005 or so. So if everything goes well, these classic cars with their original engine configurations will be limited to private tracks/garages/museums. This startup seems to want to keep them on the public roads. Imagine you have the a project to restore a car, would you spend thousands to only have 10-15 years of driving on the roads? Or would you go electric?
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago>I don't think it's in the realm of impossibility that in a near future certain types of cars, within an age/engine range, will stop being allowed to drive in public roads. Most of the rules about emissions have exceptions for old cars. In the UK cars over 40 years old are exempt from the MOT (hence no emissions test) and road tax.
- libertine 5y agoI understand that, but why keep those rules? There are plenty of rules about emissions that make little to no sense in the light of what we know today. That's kind of my point: the rules are already changing, and they are trending in one direction.