Car and Driver's Review of the 1981 De Lorean (1981)
caranddriver.com
caranddriver.com
Besides the obvious visual "wow" factor associated with the car and the Back to the Future franchise, they're surprisingly inexpensive for such an iconic car. The main problem with them is that Delorean Motor Company didn't really follow the concept of "model years," instead changing things as they went along, so restoring one to original condition is practically impossible. I was also not a fan of the aluminum engine block, since, if it ever got just slightly too hot, there's a good chance it would be ruined forever.
My second choice vehicle, BTW, would have been some kind of van painted up like the Scooby Doo Mystery Machine. :)
I've heard there is a new car company that does something similar (not having precise model years) and also offers a car with gullwing doors.... I think it starts with a "T".... I wonder if they'll be hard to restore when collectors look back in 20 years.
Right now, a vechicle I can't modify, and work on is just not my style. If I had disposable income, it would probally be a different story.
I would gladly lease one though, but it seems impossible here in Denmark.
Especially if you want the original programming. ;)
His car is fairly low mileage (under 30K), but it needed a substantial amount of electrical retrofit (the stock relays had a propensity to short-out, apparently) and the torsion bars on the doors needed to be replaced.
They are definitely iconic cars.
It's pretty amazing that such a bad car, built in such small numbers, became so beloved. By almost any objective measure, it just sucks.
I got to see one and talk with the owner a couple of months ago. He says one of them most common questions he gets is whether anything happens when you get it up to 88MPH. His answer is that it cannot achieve 88MPH!
I'm hardly immune, of course. I love them too!
I think it must be because of Back to the Future. It's like being able to buy the Millennium Falcon, in terms of owning the star of a beloved movie. Even if the real-world item sucked, we'd all love to own one.
I forget the exact quote, by he said aomething like, 'I'm tired of only seeing only guys my age, with my income driving a nice sports car. I would like to give young guys the thrill of driving a sports car.'
I just liked him as a person, and he came across as someone I could trust. (I didn't trust most adults back then. Even now, I don't trust many of my peers. Crazy huh?). I did like the design of the car, and I really liked the stainless steel body.
Even though I liked the car; I remember thinking even if I did have the money I wouldn't buy it. I wanted an old 356 Porsche. I finally found one I could afford. My friend talked me out of the $2000 sale. He said, these old Porsche's rust from the bottom up, and eventually you can't close the doors. He was a car dealer, so I didn't buy the vechicle. He was probally right, but my dream car is still the 356 rust free Porsche.
I was so glad when he beat the cocaine rap.
I still think those cars look great, even compared to the modern cars you see in the pictures directly above it there. There's a place for De Lorean style, and I bet it makes a comeback. Not everything needs to be flowy and curved.
http://www.wired.com/2015/10/heres-a-self-driving-delorean-t...
'"The DeLorean’s a really great car," Gerdes says, "unless you want it to accelerate, brake, or turn. It’s a horrendously understeering vehicle, so it’s hard to hold a drift because the front end just keep losing grip."'
(Tires aren't the only thing getting burnt there ...)
That's a great bit of writing right there.
Those were the times...
Well, we saw how that went, albeit for reasons other than the difficulty of producing a reliable gull-wing door.
1953 Corvette: 150 horsepower
1963 Corvette: 250 horsepower
1970 Corvette: 300 horsepower
1971 Corvette: 270 horsepower
1973 Corvette: 190 horsepower
1975 Corvette: 150 horsepower
The 1970s were dark, crummy times, due to emissions regulations and the oil crisis. By 1981 when the Delorean came out, the Corvette was still stuck at 190 horsepower.
So, building a powerful engine isn't hard, but building a powerful engine that fits within post-1970s emissions standards is.
So it was not unusual at all for something like a caddy to go from 400 gross HP with no exhaust no water pump no cooling system nothing to 250 HP pushed out the wheels.
Now a caddy has a ridiculous exhaust and addons, but even a vette has some. Its highly likely that the 270 HP bare engine and the 190 HP car are the same.
Another complication is HP = torque * RPM I had a commuter car in the 80s with a 2.2L engine that on paper only output 100 HP because its redline was something ridiculous to modern standards like 4000 rpm however the torque (acceleration) was huge compared to my current 100 HP commuter car that winds up like a motorcycle to 8000 RPM or whatever it is. My current car has the acceleration of a 50 HP car but the redline has doubled, so...
Still, cars now are amazing. I mean, you could pick up a $60k 700hp mass produced monster this year. I can't think of the last time i've heard of a tire failing. Stuff is made by machines, they're unbelievably reliable. You should easily get 100k out of any new car.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/PR/FirestoneRecall
edit: I guess my meaning with 'a few' was that it was recent enough to be in the "modern" era of vehicle technology.
Before the change, they would test the engines with no accessory drive, not even a water pump, use headers instead of a full exhaust, and adjust the carburetor/ignition to provide the best numbers per RPM on the dyno instead of reflecting what the engine actually did in the car.
Mr D L successfully persuaded the Allstate Insurance Company to part-fund the two DSV prototypes on account of the safety emphasis.