Are Classic Cars More Sustainable Than New Cars?
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 06. 2024
- The production of a car has a major environmental impact. Building a modern electric car, for example, produces 26 tons of CO2 emissions. By the time a classic car could emit this amount of pollutants, its owner could theoretically drive it for an average of 2000km a year, for 46 years. But still, classic cars seem to be on the brink of extinction, why is that and could they actually be the key to a greener future? Join us as we explore the clash between heritage and sustainability.
00:00 The Clash of Eras
02:45 E-Fuels: Niche Solution or Game Changer?
05:03 Electrifying the Classics: Conversion Dilemma
06:34 Germany's Oldest Street-legal car
09:10 Old Classics vs. New Regulations
10:12 Defining 'Classic': A Battle of Legislation
13:23 Looking Forward: The Future of Classic Cars
► Liked the video? Let us know by giving us a thumbs up!
► Want to see more? Make sure to subscribe
► Check our website: dw.com/REV
REV - The Global Auto and Mobility Show from Deutsche Welle
#DW #DWREV - Auta a dopravní prostředky
are we still pretending that thr majority of carbon emissions in the world are from passenger cars? not from private jets, shipping companies etc?
Exactly, like bringing “ avocado “ from 10.000 miles away! This is insane …everything in the name of profit !
I'll never trust electric cars as they are tracked and can be controlled by governments.
Plus the EV is heavily polluting the environment with lithium mines and a boom to inhumane child labor and detrimental health injuries to workers.
The EV is going to die as it did in the 20th century.
BTW, Gas/petrol/diesel ... is pure organic that doesn't effect the environment.
Climate change is just bullshit as the earth has had spikes of weather much hotter and cooler even when people used animal and foot travel.
Cars are a major source of carbon emissions that are easier to do some thing about in comparison to many other sources. That is why they are still in focus.
I deal with classics every day, all day for my job. 2500 miles per year is about the maximum 98% of classic car owners drive. They are such an absurdly low contributor to emissions because they only see 20 mile trips to get ice cream and show off locally.
In fact, I guarantee you'd get similar looks of disgust if you mentioned commuting in your classic as when they asked about EV swaps. It goes against preserving the car.
My thoughts exactly. I think if they get the numbers and facts this will show that this is a not a real problem.
I look with disgust at "classic" cars without catalytic converter and with overly rich mixture driving by. I mean, one or two of those "classics" - I am ok, but hundreds of them will turn life into the smoggy 1970s Los Angeles.
@@TinLeadHammer How often are you coming across pre-cat cars? The idea that you would ever see a traffic jam full of vintage cars is insane. 99% of commuters would hate having to drive a pre-cat car everyday.
@@joeleonard9965 Just one is one too much. When passing - or being passed by a pre-cat Civic - I close my windows and turn recirculation on.
@@TinLeadHammer So where did the hundreds in your earlier comment come from then?
Classic and older cars, and their owners should not be penalized in any shape or form. I like old cars and classic cars, and myself and relatives we use old cars, because of not being able to afford newer. I must add, I dont drive much either, I work from home and plan well my trips, because that is my attitude towards everything, not to waste, or in this case to save on fuel.
Where I live public transport is a joke. Are we going to be forced to buy a cars we cannot afford? Are going to be forced to cycle in the rain or go back to animal transportation? All I can see being done on this matter, in my country, is increassing taxation on older cars, which I might add, isn't helping much.
Where do you live?
Portugal@@DWREV
The main objective, in the long run, is limiting where you're allowed to go.
Increasing taxation on older cars actually prevents people from getting new ones. Nobody wants to drive an old car. They just can't afford one and higher taxes would simply postpone the replacement even further in the future.
It's pretty much the same situation here in Italy aswell, I'm 25 years old and I drive and LOVE my 1985 Lancia Delta 1300, without it, I couldn't even get to a supermarket... zero public transportation... and it's pretty much the same thing in any countryside in nearly any part of the world
Short answer is Yes, old cars are more sustainable than any new vehicle. Everything in old vehicles are made of real leather, top grade materials and components.
Compared to new cars wich cost fortune and have everything recycled(used materials), wich means they will fall apart in 15 years.
For me It is unnaceptable to ask full price for a product wich contains 35-50% used parts(recycled), its like paying full price(new) for a used dress in second hand shop.
Exactly why old cars will always be better in terms of build quality. Regulations decreased the build quality.
I don't understand how anyone can say that putting a large battery in a classic car "makes it more environmentally friendly". The ecological fingerprint starts from the beginning and the energy in the form of newly produced parts such as the battery and drive train will never be able to catch up by the converted classic vehicle compared to its untouched brother with ICE. The only long term solution I see are e-fuels . By the way, old diesel engines have been able to run on vegetable oil for years, but this is banned in Germany, for example, due to tax evasion.
Exactly, these cars are running low mileage overall, the impact to environment is very very low!
I absolutely agree that our society does not appreciate history and by doing so it has a negative impact as we evolve.
First, let me thank DW Rev for being a thinking persons’ car channel. As for the future of classic ICE vehicles, I think it’s very likely that they will endure, given their ubiquity and status as items that have already repaid their carbon debts. Moreover, the infrastructure already exists for liquid fuels - be that fossil- or e-based - so it’s likely this will remain in place for some time, even if the business models of fuel stations evolve and broaden to include electric recharging and other retail operations. Thank you for an excellent video.
Now keep the same title and do a video about how it could be cheaper to restore lightly used cars (10-15 years) and upgrade them instead of buying a new car. Some mass produced car part are way cheaper than brand new electric car part, that should also be included in the conversation...
i wanna watch this too. always wondered about this on a grander scale.
reusing/uplifting/repurposing.. its the sustainable way to go, i feel.
reducing waste and fostering greater appreciation for our past and it builds the character needed to build better future.
+ cars dont need an upgrade to run e-fuel. Running what we have on the roads now on e-fuel is the only way forward. New cars should also be hybrids, since you can make 10 hybrids for every EV and then run E-fuel on longer trips, its the way forward.
Documentary is only focusing on collectors cars but I wonder about old cars that are still driven daily. Are they still polluting less than new EV given the complete environmental footprint from mining rare minerals for battery production until end of life and (potential) recycling?
A good point. A more realistic comparison would be something like Volkswagen Golf Mk2 or Opel Kadett E. Which are now both valid as classics in Germany since they were in production in 1992.
there are some modern cars spending more fuel than some well maintened old ones; I think it's just a matter of creating space for the aristocracy and take more money from those who really need a car.
I have yet to drive a new car that consumes significantly less than cars from 10-20 years ago.
@@100brsta en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Grand_Vitara_(2022) the 114hp strong hybrid version goes up to like 27 km/L. And it's not that expensive. I don't recall any similarly specced car 20 years ago pulling this off.
In depends on the energy mix in the country. In most cases, conventional cars are still more eco-friendly than EVs, because the energy for running EVs comes from mining coal. Then, the factors you mentioned, seal the deal.
I think synthetic fuels integrated into classic cars are a great sustainable model
i think based on how few antique cars are on the road compared to new ones, and the high likelyhood of engine damage by synthetics fuel and the extra price of that fuel that you don't know what your talking about.
@@markseehawer3762 except that I have a 78 Datsun, 71 charger, looking to purchase a xk140, along with my 94 Rx7, my Supra pictured, 85 Supra and I’m not even going to list cars I sold. I am in the process of converting them all to flex fuel the Supra and Rx7 are already converted. I’d rather convert them the cool part is you get the same sound way more power and torque then if conventional fuel is available it reverts the tune. If they don’t have enough money to convert and maintain their cars then they can’t afford to keep the cars simple. I love my cars and can afford to modify them is unfortunate if others can’t but hey that’s life which is a result of decisions
@@drjdmtuning4982 Its not always decisions that set you back. i'm a licenced mechanic since 1985, licenced welder/fabtrcator since 1996 i have a crushed disc in my back, both knees replaced, kdidney cancer in 2011 one kidney left, and 6 detached retinas in my right eye last year. i've been on diability for 11 years, yet i'm dept free. i have a 1951 dodge mayfair 2 door hardtop Canadian build only that i have managed to restore over the last 13 years, the only change i've made is modern brakes and 12 volt conversion. So no l don't have alot of money even if i did i would not put that senthetic fuel through my old flat head engine. the trades are hard your body and at 63 i'm glad im still out in my garage ounce in a while. best of luck with all your cars.
Ethanol from sugar cane, problem solved.
It’s funny that Karl Heinz Rehkopf relies on pharmacies just as Bertha Benz did on her historic first-ever long distance drive in the Patent-Motorwagen on the 5th August 1888…
His 1894 Benz Victoria is a not a Mercedes-Benz, though: the Mercedes name only came along with Emil Jellinek in 1901 and was trademarked in 1902.
The future is not electric. The real future are efuels/biofuels and public transport/choices of transportation. Instead of changing the whole system, we should keep the cars, fuel stations and infraestructure that we already have and invest in alternative methods of transport. If the reason to change to EVs is speed and cleanliness, I rather have trains: Way faster (No stop lights and speed limits) and efficient. Trains do not emmit tire particles as well!
Also lithium and other minerals associated with batteries are probably not abundant enough to have that many EVs.
Lowering the relying on cars would probably be better overall.
@@reinertgregal1130 not to mention, how is the electricity used to charge the batteries are produced.
I understand the new ULEZ (Ultra Low Emissions Zone) legislation in the UK is resulting in renewed buyer interest in cars over 40yrs old.
These vehicles are exempt from the ULEZ charge incurred by drivers of younger vehicles, 1983 onwards, unless the vehicle has Euro 6 emissions compliance (around 2012 on) or is electric powered.
It’s ironic to think the new rules could result in higher emissions per vehicle than prior to the change in legislation, as the fleet of vehicles on our city streets becomes older, not newer.
Do you drive a 1983 or older car? 1st off you need to prove it's a classic age that matters less than you think in this regard, insurance-wise, meaning your 40-year-old transit doesn't cut it unfortunately for vintage insurance though they are fantastic and you will take mine from my cold dead hands. (I can't get it insured and taxed as a classic and as a work vehicle at the same time). Literally any day labourer can't fully take advantage of it and the saving for a typical user would not be worth it for the loss of features (and man they are all so cold and leaky).
So in the low emissions zone, do you know literally even 2 people who take advantage of it using classic cars?
That's what happens when laws are written by idiots.
Euro 6 is required for diesel 2015 onwards
Euro 4 is required for petrol 2006+ but petrol cars as old 2001 are Ulez complaint.
Surprising to see such an establishment organisation as DW, even cover this topic at all
I prefer to believe that even "Fossil ⛽️ Fuels," WILL HAVE a future for "Classic Cars," since they are hardly ever driven all too far and there are a great number of people, who want to keep them from just becoming motionless museum pieces!🌠 Take the steam 🚂 "Locomotive," for example, there are still even brand new replica pieces being created, that are still driven by coal and/ or liquid fuel!🏞🌠 Not to mention, all of "The Hartley Davidson Motorcycle Enthusiasts" out there, who would NEVER even dream of "Switching to Electric!"🌅🌄🏞🌠
Finally, "E- ⛽️ Fuels," as well, WILL BECOME much less expensive over time, as the demand WILL INCREASE!!🌅🌄🏞🌠
This segment ignored the two easy solutions, LPG & CNG. For older classic cars, Liquid Propane Gas is cleaner and cheaper. And for newer classics, Compressed Natural Gas or Methane is still cheaper and produces half the carbon as Diesel or Gasoline. Too bad DW ignored these two solutions which have been used for decades in the very engines of so called "classic cars"...
To make billions of EV’s that in short time will be replaced by another billion, each with a production CO2 footprint of 26tonne, is not sustainable
There will not need to be billions of EVs.
@@unconventionalideas5683 Its the law, in most countries
Not only are classic cars more sustainable than modern EVs, but so are hybrids and even ICE cars. Unless we change the way we produce electricity, mine rare metals and recycle batteries, we are simply exporting the pollution from one place to another. Damage to the environment does not consist of CO2 only. In fact, CO2 is needed by plants to produce oxygen. There are other, more polluting substances, which need to be addressed not only during the exploitation period, but also in the manufacturing and post-use stages of the vehicles.
I don't really like the idea of changing old classics into ev's, but there are some classics that the engine was never a high point of the overall car such as a citroen or an old Rolls-Royce where something super quite and powerful would be a bonus 😊
Well presented, and some beautiful machines!
I like how companies converting old cars to electric ones never talk about where the electric energy comes. :)
Song starting @3:58 please?
How much CO2 is being produced in the research of new car technology, new battery technology and discussion on social media. Compared to an ICE car, it takes six times as many minerals to manufacture an EV. How much CO2 is being created mining the minerals for EV.
Additionally the high technological advancements of vehicles, has a chance to make the duration of owning a car as short lived as an iphone or laptop.
My Golf GTI MK1 uses some 9ltrs/100kms of fuel and was built 40 years ago. A brand new big SUV with ECO Tag averages 12 and needs to be replaced every 4 years, let alone the amount of tyres it uses: what approach is "greener"??
Exactly my thoughts. In my case besides other I drive Peugeot 106 1.5D (currently 27 years old). If I remember correctly my top lowest was 4,5l/100km. So it makes me kinda angry whenever I see big SUV, thinking green brains want to end my car in favor of THAT ?
Also I can (but don't) mix in other types of oils and it will take it .. good ol' smell of fries.
Great for apocalypse .. I'm gonna keep it 😂
Converting internal combustion engine car into electric is a castration.
Running old-timers on fossil fuels is unsustainable, while running them on e-fuels or converting them to EVs just shows that you have a lot of money. Modern cars, on the other hand, are not only expensive, but have 'planned obsolescence' written all over them. This is especially true for EVs, the battery packs of which may not last for more than 12-15 years at best, while often being prohibitively expensive to replace (it would be a big step forward if e.g. the EU were to mandate the use of standardized, replaceable and recyclable battery packs). This feels like a Catch-22 situation: I'm damned if I drive an older, more reliable ICE car and I'm damned if I drive an EV. Aargh! The future just ain't what it used to be.
all new technologies are expensive, but if already used globally, the costs will goes down,, like EV, also the E-fuel ..
EV prices are only going up.
The trick is to have two old cars .
Old internal combustion engines are not an environmental disaster. Lithium Ion batteries are! And so is producing electricity from Coal or Natural Gas! Politicians who make the laws concerning this subject are ill informed and are penalising the easy target ... the motoring public.
E-fuels works in new cars, dont forget that. A hybrid car with a smaller battery and E-fuel for longer trips is the future.
The CO2 needed for the construction of the e-motor and batteries to convert a classic car to electric far offset the emissions emitted by that car if it would have been driven with its original power-kant in the manner most classic cars are used nowadays, sparsely. It will never benefit the environment knowing that classic cars average less than 2000km per year.
I have my mother's last car, a 1991 Buick Park Avenue,
which has been maintained to the 'nth' degree, however,
my garage is no longer taking cars older than 2000.
One thing that will have a major impact in decades to come will be the availability of fuel. As a greater proportion of vehicles on the road become electric, the business case for fuel stations will diminish and they will close down in increasing numbers, to the point that you might find in 2060 that a city of 250k people might end up only having a single small fuel station catering for what would then be a niche market. Based on UK/EU proposals, I anticipate mass rationalisations of fuel stations starting in the 2040s with those being the safest from closure being on motorways or other routes used by lots of goods vehicles which will still be using diesel for longer. The economics would mean that even if classic car owners wanted to keep running their cars, they may struggle to fuel them.
GREAT VIDEO!! Very informative, lots of food-for-thought. I myself am itching to get into the EV conversion business to stop the crunching of all these beautiful classic cars; as well as saving our environment. Goodonya!
It is interesting that, everyone says that the problem is the classic cars, but, nobody remembers that, the EVs get energy from coal-burning thermoelectric plants, and that polutes a lot more than the classic cars, but the e-fuel would be a good idea.
In my mind, if people of the world wanted to reduce CO2s, use public transport. It doesn't matter it is powered by diesel engine, natural gas engine, or even electric. Public transport could carry lots of people into one single piece of room. For example, city bus. City bus could take up to 60 people or even up to 100 people. With cars, cars mostly have 4 seats which mostly only 1 is used (the driver seat), it has more CO2 released instead of public transport which is only one big diesel engine or natural gas engine.
Think of North Korea. People are forced to use public transports and only some of the people could drive their own cars. It is one of the most cleanest country in the world in terms of emissions. Yes it is dictatorial, but at least the emissions are low because the main use of the public transport and also the regulations of public transport is highly stringent to ensure that it will be on time and dependable.
I did not to promote ban driving cars or personal mobility, no. I just propose to limit the use of personal mobility. I like classic vehicle because even though most of them are build long way before I was born in 2003, I kind of feel that, yes, the classics are a form of technological steps of our society and have to be preserve and in running order so that future generations not only know the future but also knowing the past that make the future possible. I don't mind that old vehicles still being used. They are used because of their build quality. Forget the crumple zones, airbags, etc. nowaday's vehicles aren't the same as they were built back then in the 2000s, 1990s, 1980s, 1970s, 1960s, 1960s, and way before.
So, I stand for classic vehicles, either it is cars, motorbikes, lorries or trucks, busses, trains, vessels, and even aeroplanes. No need to e-Fuels or even turn it to battery-electric vehicle, just create something that could turn the engine on even though the fuel isn't designed for the classics.
On the other hand, a classic car is only considered sustainable when it replaces a modern vehicle. In almost all cases it is an addition to a modern car so it does not prevent the modern car from being build. you can argue if the classic car is an necessity and should be allowed to use the roads simply because there are few and they don’t cover many miles. The Mille miglia is basically an unnecessary event and the world can do without. But when for historical purposes you intend to keep allowing events like this a change to e-fuels would be compulsory.
When I was at work I regularly did 20 to 25000 a year for work and probably another 5 to 6000 for leisure . Now I’m retired I have a 2.2ltr diesel Landrover and a 4.2ltr V8 Jag XK8 both on 4,000 miles a year limited insurance so I can only do a max of 8000 miles
The Landrover is a 2014 and the Jag a 2005 , I have no intention of selling either of them, I’m not sure what the rest of the world does but I do know the UK and most of Europe makes all owners put the vehicles in for an annual test to check they are
A safe to drive
B comply with what ever emissions rules are in force
So if you can’t afford to TAX , Insure and they have passed the relevant test (ours in an MoT ) you can’t drive your vehicle
Brand new vehicles do not need to pass these tests but anything over 3 years does
So as far as being green is concerned I think the UK is doing a good job , the amount of dirty diesel’s and petrol vehicles is being reduced, half the problem is the amount of slow moving vehicles in big towns and cities makes the problem worse. If like a lot of big conerbations in Europe we could improve our public transport people may stop using their cars
The classic cars are part of our life, connection with the past, freedom, heritage, culture etc!!! The impact to environment is so so little, we using this cars only few times / month. The fuel for this cars must still be available, and politicians to listen us! The cars like old Mercedes’s are so well build and with good maintenance lasting forever, which is good for environment. The politicians must focus domestic poor quality and life cicle products. Most of cities are overcrowded because chaotic developed, we importing avocado from 7.000 km and so other many things also. The classic cars are last problems for humanity!
There was a mention of cars over 30 years old there are many 30 year old Toyota's driving around in Australia and l can drive my 26 year old Toyota around Sydney including the city without out any penalty and to electrify it no way it would definitely take away its soul because of its engine makes it so reliable and it has a carburettor also no cat converter
#190e fan right here🤗
I am from India and its sad our government join hands with car companies and force law to recycle cars olden more than 10 and 15 years so sad
What is e-fuels and synthetic fuels? I only know is fuels.
Certainly worth watching!! Intrigued by the title, worried by some of the responses by its contributors.... 'only to be used in proper historic conditions'???? We are talking about human rights in free movement... are we (ordinary people) only allowed to move in our authentic 'breechcloths'... What & who are allowed to own & use historical vehicles... is Mille Miglia, Concorso d'Eleganza, Pebble Beach, etc. the referential points (only accessible for the ultimate rich...)... surely it is already well known (from science to politics), that classic car use, is of a negligible factor in humans contribution in/influence on climate change... especially as the latter part (humans influence) is already highly controversial, let alone the 'classic car part in it'.... Taking out the 'heart' of a genuine historic vehicle, putting 'a heavy polluting EV technology' back; until Ralph Laurens collection is 'converted' and participating in an 'appropriate historical event' I might laugh about it, but for now 'what a baloney,'... a future without a living history, only emperors & lunaztics think like that and I love fairy tales... but don't like the WEF as they are the main culprit, prohibiting real future thinking, mis-influencing from the EU to the UN. I do believe in the E of Emotion (EQ etc.), Environment....but the E of Economic is the curse of this planet! If the coming generations are interested in the future of this planet, let them solve that E problem and leave our historical mobility significance in our old(-er) more modest, ordinary hands...
Much like we did with both Diesel and gasoline powered vehicles, we shall look for a diverse solution.
Meaning, we shall look at EVs, but also to Hydrogen, alternative fuels, Hybrids, LPG, Natural gas, etc...
EVs are a great solution for urban mobility, going short distances to work, shop, and play.
However, for long distances we might find that Hydrogen is a better solution.
Moreover, for heavy loads Diesel might be a better option.
Each category has different requirements.
Even inside commercial applications, we may have:
- Mining needs a truck to carry really heavy loads, on short distances, at a low speed;
- Logistics needs a truck to carry a certain weight, for a long time, at high speeds;
- Cities need a bus to carry lots of people, but a autonomy either for a full shift or a day, at medium speeds;
- Transport needs a bus to carry some people, with a greater autonomy and quick refuel, at high speeds.
Hence, the solution shall be diverse.
The current approach, of a all electric solution, is no viable.
Especially when it solely focuses on efficiency, disregarding repairability.
Every product MUST be repairable, especially when it holds many resources, like a vehicle.
Moreover, the repairs MUST be available to independent contractors - and not only to a solo market party, like the OEM.
If we not protect this, we will end up throwing out a car after 10 years of use.
My friend's Nissan Leaf, after 4 years, is a paper weight due to a big reduction on its autonomy.
He is not able to go somewhere reliably.
The battery pack (including taxes, hourly rates, and other components required) costs as much as a used car - or 50% of its original value.
It simply does not make sense!
What is he supposed to do?
My small city car has 22 years of age, and keep maintaining it.
It has low emissions, because (a) it was built in 2001, with some restrictions on CO2 emissions, and (b) it only consumes 5.5 L/100km (42.77 mpg US, or 51.36 mpg UK).
It requires very little fuel to move because it is light (1.100 kg or 2.400 lbs), low power (1.2L with 75hp), and I drive slow (in inter city roads).
I am sorry, but I cannot understand how a 2.500 kg (~5.000 lbs) vehicle is environmentally friendly.
Plus, it battery pack requires a lot of energy.
If we all have a 90 to 150 kWh battery, from where will all that energy some from?
The original BMW 5 series of 1972, and in particular the 1981 fantastic restyling of Klaus Luthe and Ercole Spada of 1981 is 100 times better than the transnistrian today's horrible 5 series.
Agreed, the new BMW 5 series is hideous 🤮
@@geoffoakland The top of the tops of the BMWs was in the Eighties.
@@giuliopedrali4794 yes, I always wanted a mid 80s 535i or the first M5. 😍
In my taste, the better and the sole masterpieces of the BMW marque (in the modern times) are the 3 Series of 1975, 1982 and 1990 and the first two series of 70s and 80s of the 5 serie.
No car can ever be sustainable.
It’s called planned obsolescence
In a period of 2 weeks my 95 Nissan Pickup..
1. Starter went out
2. Turn signal/headlight switch stopped working
3. Passenger side mirror unglued itself from age (23 years)
4. Spark plug cable was loose
5. Front Turn signal terminal needee cleaning from corrosion
And some other crap where I was pulling my hair out since I was having trouble passing my California Bi-yearly Smog (emmissions) test. All in all I spent not even $400 for replacement parts and Labor. I still get compliments on the truck but I am working on selling it since it is a tempramental hobby kerping it. It feels like having a girlfriend that costs too much money and doesn't really love you and treats you like crap but you're too big of a wussy to dump her.
Sounds like my relationship with my 23 year old Audi daily driver😂 I'll never get rid of it though.
Classic car use e-fuel future, because if that car change electric..no soul anymore and resale value low.
This 60 y.o RR... was converted in EV ...and in maximum 10 years the battery would lose its capacity and this trans-RR would end up in a junkyard
It's really a crime doing this bodge works.
The word is called planned obsolescence
In a way it's a moot point because most of the older cars and trucks on the road are driven by older people who aren't going to give them up and are dying anyway of old age , what retiree who has 5/10 years left to live will give up a perfectly fine car that's driven to the grocery store and doctors office for a new one that costs 50 to hundred thousand dollars , my 45 year old pickup gets better mpg than the new ones , and my old 911 porsche has airbags and a frunk that will hold all of our camping gear with room in the back for a trip , a new 911 has no front trunk space it's taken up by intercoolers for the twin turbos you don't need and only comes with an automatic you don't want an the normal hefty price of stuff breaking to keep the dealership in business , so i would be giving away a porsche paid hundred thousand for to buy a new one for two hundred thousand that i don't like anyway , in whose mind does any of that make sense ?
Classic cars need to stay on the road and must be driven. The issue will be the fuel infrastructure. However, even if new combustion engines will be banned, the existing stock of such vehicles will remain on the road for quite some time
Doubt it will happen, but what if you can't insure it anymore?
Converting an old classic V8 car into an EV, is in utter bad taste! Its disguisting and a bit insane. The vehicle's main interesting object is being removed and replaced with a silent computer - and thats like making a techno remix of Swan Lake, or painting Buckingham Palace pink...
Sadly like many things.... visceral.... feeling... satisfaction of learning how to operate and maintain cars and other things mechanical or lightly electronic is quickly going away.. Sure an EV is fast, loaded with every imaginable tech and no tailpipe emissions. But no feel. Anyone can make it do amazing things.... to me, where's the satisfaction? Like what I see today with people and things in general. We want it instant. We want it to do what we want without having to know how. We only care about the end result. We don't need to know feeling or history. We don't need to know how it even works. I want to hop in and go. Plug it in and go. When it breaks... just get another one. My old one.... who cares.
Maybe that rationality should prevail over emotions of nostalgia.
The solution is a possible preference but the true is the original classic car is complet not a car with a electric motor, the old cars have the power to transform the driver and feel in other time, the sound of the motor and the mechanic naturality of the machines.
I agree with Porsche for create a new fuels to save the combustion engine.
The electric car is grate but in the new Cars.
Politicians just need to stop forcing to drive electric I will not buy one and how more they force it how bigger the engine will be I drive daily.
Nobody is forced to do anything. Walk if you don't like it
I’d rather have a classic car that’s been slightly modernize
Better brakes, better cooling, and better ignition with some slightly better parts so it doesn’t brake along with maybe fuel Injection for better power, fuel economy and just a over all better driver if your driving it a lot just for less head aches
All those "classic cars" are rich people toys. I can certainly see a benefit in preserving some of them for historical purposes like we do with old planes, but we certainly don't need to have hundreds of thousands of those on the road. As for EV swaps, they result in cars with batteries that can't handle the weight aénd therefore with extremely limited range. It's not worth it.
Why not you don’t need a lot of money for a classic car. And classic cars are just better built and nicer to look at. And internal combustion engine will never be replaced with stupid ev 💩
If you're not willing to work on them, then yes.
Indeed classic cars have to remain in their original state. Only a small percentage of the population can afford them anyway. So, no regulation is required. And if some prefer a conversion to an electric power train, it’s fine too. Let’s just make sure no species go extinct, though.
Yes.
Hannah!🎙
Is my maths correct, if every RV was removed for the roads in Europe, we could close all our coal fired power stations?
Audi creates cars for 8 years, officially!
No joke! For real!
I think the car worth convert to electric is any BMW with V8 turbo.
It's better to buy say a 20-10 year old car and maintain it and drive it for 15 years. Instead of buying a new car and driving it for 3 years and now because they want to be " eco friendly" they buy ev
Why should it dig the grave for classic cars?
I’m sure there will be legislative holes for them.
Did you really need to drown the video in second-rate EDM?
the problem isn't ICE engines it's the negligent consumerism that has people buying a new car every 5 years. If everyone drove their cars for 10-15 years on average it would be way better for the environment than the same amount of people switching to EVs
I hate that drive against all cars other than built now. EVs still share lesser part of market for a reason and modern fuel-based cars got extremely questionable quality and needless in my opinion "electrification" which adds to more problems with them. That's why for huge majority of population this cars are mostly driven with leasing... and then switched to new one after lease runs out. You tell me that is supposed to be eco? I think whatever piece of hardware it is if it runs 10 or 100 years, it will cost less for nature if it was okey for 100 years. How I can't be reactionist with actually good concept of eco-friendly society when it's thrown at my face in form of "pay for that, get rid of what works"?
The super rich may find a way to continue to participate in the Mille Miglia, but what about the thousands of people who own a ’66 Mustang, or an MGB? They’re going to have to scrap their cars. There will soon be no market for them.
One thing is certain: I will not scrap my beloved minis!
I just saved a 79 MGB and am taking care of it. Did the spark plugs and replaced the ignition switch. Bought new tires and will be adjusting the rear shoes before spring.
Classic cars all day long. New cars are better designed to utilization of components beyond 90-95%. No reserves for the components = after 100.000 km you need a new vehicle.
Converting these classic cars to EVs is like adding shit to a very rare wine.
EVs impact the environment in many ways during production and use. People buy EVs for a ridiculous price because they think it's cheap to run and they think it can save the world. but they don't think about the bigger picture . It's a false economy. Full EV adoption is not practical at all. EV batteries have massively increased demand for precious metals , which are mined using heavy diesel equipment . The process ruins surrounding land and habitats for 100s of miles . Electric cars are supposed to help the planet , but their batteries definitely create the next trash problem. And sometimes , lithium - ion batteries explode . Also EV charging stations have massive diesel generators to generate electricity to charge Electric cars. Those generators run 24 hours a day. Electric cars certainly reduce your carbon footprint , but making the lithium - ion batteries could emit 74 % more CO2 than for conventional cars . Not only these things, there are so many negative things happening behind the "zero emissions EV vehicles" .
It’s actually a totally wrong focus to look at these niches like racing cars or classic cars. Their added up emissions are not at all huge. Rather we should get the corollas and vw golfs to got electric. That is an impact.
Let the old cars in peace, and let their owners drive them peacefuly. Let's penalize on industries that are totally on the fault of making the most carbon emissions, because the cars are NOT the ones who make the most carbon emissions, the energy industry is the one who truly emits more carbon emissions than literally everybody else! Stop burning fossil fuels for energy, bring back clean nuclear power!
Europeans consistently behave as if ethanol doesn't exist as a cleaner fuel. Here in American we utilize E85 by adapting it to gasoline vehicles to cut fuel costs 30% and immediately cut carbon 50%. The 105 octane adds a bit more power. Many fuel stations have E85 now for a total of 5,725. They're all over this Washington DC region. Which is more than E-Fuels current station count of zero. Much easier paying $2.42/ gallon for E85 at Shell than E-Fuel's estimated price per gallon of $25.
We don’t have enough space in Europe to grow a sufficient amount of crops to produce ethanol. But we also hinder ourselves through legislations that forbid the use of certain ethanol for fuel production.
@@Sferaristi Understood. But Europeans need not grow crops. Just permit E85's use at fuel stations to cut carbon immediately in current and classic vehicles. It's a quickly adaptable cost effective fuel. No EV to buy or need to rip the motor out of a classic car.
@@lawrencefearon6830This has already been proven to not be any cleaner.
Also Europeans don't seem to realize that EU is biggest biodiesel producer and biodiesel already has like half emissions of regular diesel's. What we buy in gas station is already kinda alternative fuel.
@@joeleonard9965 lies. Argonne National laboratory both proved and measured a 50% total carbon emissions reduction over a 15 year period utilizing ethanol. That’s the EXACT reason 10% of every gallon of fuel is ethanol in the United States. I swear lies travel faster than the truth every time. 🤦🏾♂️
Rich people problems...while the average Joe is priced out from a commuter car
You cannot drive forever they will outlaw or make incredibly expensive, to force you to get a bank loan for new electric car - everyone rich wins, you loose.
Even though I have had more than 120 German cars in my lifetime, no more. "We stand with Israel" did it for me. No more Porsches, VWs, Audis, Mercedes or BMW.
Some facts;
CO2 is 0.04% of the atmosphere. Of that only 4% is produced by humans. Germany produces only 1,76% of the worlds human emissions.
Germany is responsible for 0,00002816% of the total Worlds CO2 emissions.
Fotosynthesis does still exist in 2023...
To produce one electric car, one can produce 6 ICE cars, and not be mining for rare materials.
It means if ICE cars are being banned, that you will have no mobility in return.
The best way to fight climate change is by turning off your television, and to wipe your arse with the news paper.
I will never buy an electric car I just hate them older cars are just better.
Green horses...
Battery pack is dead. Long live engine.
Disposable Electric cars don’t help the environment.
Climate change is hardly affected by cars…
It’s a green scam. You need to drive the EV for more than 10 years before you break energy return on investment. By which time the batteries will likely need replacing and due to the heaviness of EVs the tyres multiple more times than an ICE vehicle. Not to mentioned the source of electricity generation isn’t always coming from renewables. Clearly if you want to reduce CO2 from vehicles then better town planning is the way forward. Question the journey. Question the economic capital model of continuous growth at the expense of the environment and resource depletion. Why commute to work, when better zoning with housing closer to places of work, would make the commute bike friendly. Base investor return not on financial gain but environmental enhancement and protection. Question the driving psychology behind human activity. Question our existence. What separates us from primates, the frontal cortex. Surely all probables we’ve created stem from there 😂
why is there so much talk about carbon...
Nope, classic car are expensive and you'll never know when they'll break so commuting on them is not an option
The climate changes every day.
electric push
Rust and reliability are the 2 main deciding factors that make people buy a new car. I want to drive mine, not fix it every weekend.
Classic cars owners dont use them as they primarily transport.
Many cars with were build corrosion protected are now approaching 30 years. With the unnecessary complexity of new cars it is easy to see why an old car can be more reliable and cheaper to maintain than a new car.
Drive forever!!!!! never Buy new.
Classic cars pollute a lot, and have high fuel consumption and horrible active and passive safety. Better to buy a 2005 - 2015 car if you want to drive "forever".
Classic cars are rare, not many have been made. Driving them are even rarer. They always have low mileage can't do much pollution. The everyday car you see on the road are the one make more co2.
Classic cars are not used daily. They are irrelevant to pollution.
True, 2010 was peak car. Then it went all downturn with cheap interior and unreliable overegineered engines.
Around 1995 to 2005 is the peak . Cars that still look modern while not having many electronics.
Newer cars are more reliable and much safer. In matters sustainability, modern cars still win. Modern engines are last longer. Consume less fuel than their classic counterparts and reuse exhaust fumes to give the cars more efficiency. Hence fewer emissions. Newer cars also use less minerals in their construction, a classic car is made completly out of steel, from body to the engine. Just think how much of these minerals would have to be extracted to meet today's demands. It's just not sustainable in any sense. Modern cars use very little steel, with body panels made from plastics. Comparing the two is like saying a phone made in 80s is better than an I-phone. The two serve address particular needs of their time. If you care about sustainability newer cars are just better in every way, simply because of how technology has evolved.
germans use old-timer for classic cars haha