How on earth in all that's holy can an EV classic be green?
Discussion
I truly believe EVs have a place. The idea now extends to classics, and if that’s what you want, then so be it.
Only, what I can't stand is the stench of hypocrisy.
How on earth in all that's holy can an EV classic be green, or even greener? It just isn't.
A classic is about as green as it'll get. It's environmental impact now at best, a sunk-cost. Can anyone explain how using yet more of this earth's resources to power a classic-car - something which will rarely be driven - is green?
It'll still stink, except not via an exhaust pipe.
It'll do a few thousand miles and in (insert number between 5 & 10 here) years, the cells will need doing again? If you want your classic green, leave it alone. It's about as green as it gets BEFORE conversion - which - by the way - isn't green. Just the best of a bad job.
Leave the fake halo out of it.
If you actually drive your classic daily, rather than buy new; this in February too, I suspect this is greenest of all. We’re not using heaps of energy, pollutants etc to manufacture its replacement. Sadly too few do this.
An EV classic? Nope… How will buying more stuff and watching it degrade ever make a classic greener?
Only, what I can't stand is the stench of hypocrisy.
How on earth in all that's holy can an EV classic be green, or even greener? It just isn't.
A classic is about as green as it'll get. It's environmental impact now at best, a sunk-cost. Can anyone explain how using yet more of this earth's resources to power a classic-car - something which will rarely be driven - is green?
It'll still stink, except not via an exhaust pipe.
It'll do a few thousand miles and in (insert number between 5 & 10 here) years, the cells will need doing again? If you want your classic green, leave it alone. It's about as green as it gets BEFORE conversion - which - by the way - isn't green. Just the best of a bad job.
Leave the fake halo out of it.
If you actually drive your classic daily, rather than buy new; this in February too, I suspect this is greenest of all. We’re not using heaps of energy, pollutants etc to manufacture its replacement. Sadly too few do this.
An EV classic? Nope… How will buying more stuff and watching it degrade ever make a classic greener?
The ;break even' point for a classic is likely to be significantly lower than a new EV. So instead of around 75k miles it may well be as low as 30k. But probably higher as the EV materials do carry a significant carbon load, versus simple steel bodyshells.
So if you keep it long enough ok. But that really means using it frequently. And that means a ot more maintenance, paint, rust proofing etc. Will it 'break even'? Well maybe but only on higher mileages, so the OP does have a point. It really is no way to wear an enviro halo.
As for all the other EV 'advantages? All you are really doing is moving the source of pollution from the vehicle to the grid. granted the grid is more efficient, but there is no way to pretend this is anything close to 'neutral'.
So if you keep it long enough ok. But that really means using it frequently. And that means a ot more maintenance, paint, rust proofing etc. Will it 'break even'? Well maybe but only on higher mileages, so the OP does have a point. It really is no way to wear an enviro halo.
As for all the other EV 'advantages? All you are really doing is moving the source of pollution from the vehicle to the grid. granted the grid is more efficient, but there is no way to pretend this is anything close to 'neutral'.
Is it always about being green?
I would love to own a nice classic but don't have the time or knowledge to look after the mechanical bits or deal with the inherent unreliability.
By replacing with an EV drivetrain, you could have a lot of the experience of owning one without the drawbacks and with the ability to just jump in and go when it's a nice day.
I don't necessarily think it should be done to anything rare or with an already nice engine but for something common which may need major engine work it seems a sensible option
I would love to own a nice classic but don't have the time or knowledge to look after the mechanical bits or deal with the inherent unreliability.
By replacing with an EV drivetrain, you could have a lot of the experience of owning one without the drawbacks and with the ability to just jump in and go when it's a nice day.
I don't necessarily think it should be done to anything rare or with an already nice engine but for something common which may need major engine work it seems a sensible option
I can’t for the life of me understand why you would want to take a classic car and remove its soul by fitting tumble drier motors to it!
I own a couple of “classics” one designed in 1940, the other in 1978. The enjoyment for me is in the driving, blending the engine, which makes nice noises, to the clutch and gearbox, feeling the brakes especially non assisted, throttle, steering without power, all go to make them so much more interesting to drive than any modern car, let alone an electric POS.
Maybe I’m just an old git now though
I own a couple of “classics” one designed in 1940, the other in 1978. The enjoyment for me is in the driving, blending the engine, which makes nice noises, to the clutch and gearbox, feeling the brakes especially non assisted, throttle, steering without power, all go to make them so much more interesting to drive than any modern car, let alone an electric POS.
Maybe I’m just an old git now though
As one who likes his old cars to be original, I thought the OP was referring to original Electric Vehicles such as Baker, Columbia, Rauch & Lang, Detroit and Electromobile but I now understand he means conversions.
Now that charging points are relatively plentiful, those Veteran and Edwardian electric cars are more useable than they were when new, 120-odd years ago.
Now that charging points are relatively plentiful, those Veteran and Edwardian electric cars are more useable than they were when new, 120-odd years ago.
To me, near all of your answers assume one thing. That our EV classic will be used as actual transport. This I find doubtful. However...
If actually 'driven' most of your arguments stack, thus best I crawl under a rock. In fact, I would think the conversion of a classic comes greener than its modern alternative. Only we know this won't happen, and for much the same reasons we don't see classics on February roads now.
Do this if you want, just skip the halo.
If actually 'driven' most of your arguments stack, thus best I crawl under a rock. In fact, I would think the conversion of a classic comes greener than its modern alternative. Only we know this won't happen, and for much the same reasons we don't see classics on February roads now.
Do this if you want, just skip the halo.
Edited by OldDuffer on Tuesday 29th August 10:49
I think it depends.
As others have said above the conversions are using parts out of crashed cars so they'd probably end up scrapped if they weren't being recycled by putting them to use in a conversion. Otherwise I tend to agree with you that most classic cars are pretty green as they consume bugger all in the way of resources these days. A bit like with steam engines, they much chuck out soot from their funnels but there are so few of them it does make sense to count it.
But my It depends comment is about ripping out the heart and soul of a classic car.
I had a classic XK150 and in the case of this car the engine is very much the heart and soul of the thing. But an ever increasing number of classic XKs have had another defining component of the XK experience ripped out, people, including me replaced the gearbox. A good Moss box is a lovely thing and if you can't cope with it, that's a you problem. I swapped mine out when the overdrive box in mine was lunched by an engine which was a little livelier than original. The people I spoke to in the XK world all thought that if I replaced the box with another one it wouldn't be long before the next overdrive box was torn to pieces. In hindsight I should have put the original non OD box back in and then followed Lowdrag's advise (alas too late) to change the rear axle ratio.
I have a X150, here again the engine is the heart and soul of the car and I couldn't see the point of the car without the engine. This isn't a classic though.
Anyway, I'd agree with you when if comes to the classic XK.
But I also have an X300 which I've had since nearly new, I like the engine in this, I think the AJ16 is nice motor, but it isn't the heart & soul of this car. Mine is the basic 3.2 so it gets the fully mechanical auto box which is the least good feature of the car. But back to the engine. The job of the engine in an X300 is to waft you from one place to another and not to intrude. Replacing the engine in the X300 with a hairdrier motor with delusions of grandeur wouldn't be any great loss as long as there are a few example of originals around.
Will it happen? No, well No unless I win the Euromillions anyway. Why not, simply because the cost of converting classics to EVs is sadly up there in the money no object sphere.
As others have said above the conversions are using parts out of crashed cars so they'd probably end up scrapped if they weren't being recycled by putting them to use in a conversion. Otherwise I tend to agree with you that most classic cars are pretty green as they consume bugger all in the way of resources these days. A bit like with steam engines, they much chuck out soot from their funnels but there are so few of them it does make sense to count it.
But my It depends comment is about ripping out the heart and soul of a classic car.
I had a classic XK150 and in the case of this car the engine is very much the heart and soul of the thing. But an ever increasing number of classic XKs have had another defining component of the XK experience ripped out, people, including me replaced the gearbox. A good Moss box is a lovely thing and if you can't cope with it, that's a you problem. I swapped mine out when the overdrive box in mine was lunched by an engine which was a little livelier than original. The people I spoke to in the XK world all thought that if I replaced the box with another one it wouldn't be long before the next overdrive box was torn to pieces. In hindsight I should have put the original non OD box back in and then followed Lowdrag's advise (alas too late) to change the rear axle ratio.
I have a X150, here again the engine is the heart and soul of the car and I couldn't see the point of the car without the engine. This isn't a classic though.
Anyway, I'd agree with you when if comes to the classic XK.
But I also have an X300 which I've had since nearly new, I like the engine in this, I think the AJ16 is nice motor, but it isn't the heart & soul of this car. Mine is the basic 3.2 so it gets the fully mechanical auto box which is the least good feature of the car. But back to the engine. The job of the engine in an X300 is to waft you from one place to another and not to intrude. Replacing the engine in the X300 with a hairdrier motor with delusions of grandeur wouldn't be any great loss as long as there are a few example of originals around.
Will it happen? No, well No unless I win the Euromillions anyway. Why not, simply because the cost of converting classics to EVs is sadly up there in the money no object sphere.
Some good arguments here.
Re hypocrisy: as an enthusiast of rusting hulks I agree that ripping apart a perfectly functioning classic to create an EV is wrong. As someone who has suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous unreliability, on occasion, I can certainly get excited about a reliable, easy to run EV conversion of something that's too far gone to be repaired economically. I wouldn't want it done on anything with any historical significance, mind (think Jim Clark's Lotus Elan, an ex-'Professionals' Capri, etc) because I believe they're more than just cars and should be preserved.
Another way to look at it: in 20 year's time, if the only way to drive something "interesting" was to drive an EV-converted classic, would you rather do that than drive another piece of white goods that looked like all the other pieces of white goods?
Re hypocrisy: as an enthusiast of rusting hulks I agree that ripping apart a perfectly functioning classic to create an EV is wrong. As someone who has suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous unreliability, on occasion, I can certainly get excited about a reliable, easy to run EV conversion of something that's too far gone to be repaired economically. I wouldn't want it done on anything with any historical significance, mind (think Jim Clark's Lotus Elan, an ex-'Professionals' Capri, etc) because I believe they're more than just cars and should be preserved.
Another way to look at it: in 20 year's time, if the only way to drive something "interesting" was to drive an EV-converted classic, would you rather do that than drive another piece of white goods that looked like all the other pieces of white goods?
OldDuffer said:
To me, near all of your answers assume one thing. That our EV classic will be used as actual transport. This I find doubtful.
I have one Riley One-Point-Five on the road and another in pieces awaiting re-assembly which I'm very tempted to 'electrify' for use as every day transport as my 'on the road' Riley covers more mileage in a year (around 4-5,000) than my Fiesta daily driver. The only reason I don't use that Riley all year round is its poor (25mpg-ish) fuel economy.Edited by OldDuffer on Tuesday 29th August 10:49
autumnsum said:
The battery cells will already be recycled from written off Teslas.
As generally are the motor and control units used in classic car EV conversions, so you're recycling both the car and the EV components. Double green!Mark A S said:
I can’t for the life of me understand why you would want to take a classic car and remove its soul by fitting tumble drier motors to it!...The enjoyment for me is in the driving...
The enjoyment for me in my classics is in driving them too...and a few years down the line if that's a choice between converting to EV or having to save up £££ to buy a tank of fuel (and only be able to drive on routes that pass the handful of remaining gas filling stations) I'll be converting to EV and carrying on driving!Randy Winkman said:
But are people making EVs out of good, original examples with decent engines and gearboxes?
You have an issue with people being able to do what they like with their own property?By the same logic should anyone with a pre-1970 house that was built with lead water pipes be forced to re-instal them, people with pre-1945 house orginally fitted with gas lighting be forced to rip out the electrics and replace the gas? Or should we accept that, with the exception of museum pieces these are objects that can, and should be upgraded and updated as time and technology advance?
Would I daily drive a classic mini or citroen ds with its original engine? ...... well, yeah I probably would, as I'd be happy tinkering and putting up with the inherent "charms" of an old car.
Does having a crashed Nissan Leaf give either of those options an EV new lease of life appeal?? Hell yes!!!
Does having a crashed Nissan Leaf give either of those options an EV new lease of life appeal?? Hell yes!!!
Mark A S said:
I can’t for the life of me understand why you would want to take a classic car and remove its soul by fitting tumble drier motors to it!
I own a couple of “classics” one designed in 1940, the other in 1978. The enjoyment for me is in the driving, blending the engine, which makes nice noises, to the clutch and gearbox, feeling the brakes especially non assisted, throttle, steering without power, all go to make them so much more interesting to drive than any modern car, let alone an electric POS.
Maybe I’m just an old git now though
Totally agree I can think of nothing worse.I own a couple of “classics” one designed in 1940, the other in 1978. The enjoyment for me is in the driving, blending the engine, which makes nice noises, to the clutch and gearbox, feeling the brakes especially non assisted, throttle, steering without power, all go to make them so much more interesting to drive than any modern car, let alone an electric POS.
Maybe I’m just an old git now though
//j17 said:
Or should we accept that, with the exception of museum pieces these are objects that can, and should be upgraded and updated as time and technology advance?
We can accept it, and they can be upgraded. It's a choice, not an obligation. The only reason it should be upgraded is if it has to be, and there's no grounds for thinking that classics or the type of fuel they use will be completely banned. My first couple of years of driving were in old cars that were modified. But, anything apart from mild performance tweaks starts to encompass upgrades to brakes, suspension, exhaust, chassis etc. I pretty quickly decided that, if that was important, I'd just buy a different car. Same with electric. I own cars to drive them more than to look at them, and wouldn't be remotely interested in an electric classic. I suspect that hardly anyone ever will be, and that it will remain a very niche thing. The conversions that are done will probably just be repeatedly butchered as electric systems are improved, will rapidly lose any desirability, and end up being scrapped. On PH, many posters who are averse to buying to classics say that the main concern is not environmental angst, but poor safety, so these conversions are not going to open up a substantial untapped market of new buyers.My first car was a Morris Minor with a twin carb A Series. I'd love to have another one. I've currently got a V12 Ferrari. It's glorious. I appreciate that doing an electric conversion is an interesting technical exercise for some, but if I had to convert to electric or find another hobby, I would do the latter.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff