New Deloreans with over 300hp coming?

[John U]

Interesting article..
http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2015/12/08/low-volume-replica-car-builders-get-a-boost-in-latest-highway-funding-bill/?refer=news

[louielouie2000]

I remember folks here commenting when the law was passed earlier this year that it seemed tailor made for DMC-Texas.

So, 3.7L 360hp V6 which is currently EPA certified? The first thing that comes to mind is a Ford powerplant. Or possibly the Nissan VQ. Hmm.

[OverlandMan]

I remember folks here commenting when the law was passed earlier this year that it seemed tailor made for DMC-Texas.

So, 3.7L 360hp V6 which is currently EPA certified? The first thing that comes to mind is a Ford powerplant. Or possibly the Nissan VQ. Hmm.

So aside from the new build part, I am curious how it will affect the parts shop. I would think the tooling and creation of new parts would benefit current and prospective owners, provided the program exists for a substantial period of time. I'm just hoping they (DMCH) offset the cost of the tooling and production to the new build program and not the "legacy" owners like us.

[louielouie2000]

So aside from the new build part, I am curious how it will affect the parts shop. I would think the tooling and creation of new parts would benefit current and prospective owners, provided the program exists for a substantial period of time. I'm just hoping they (DMCH) offset the cost of the tooling and production to the new build program and not the "legacy" owners like us.

Yes, that's what interests me most about this as well: the prospect of suddenly having no longer available parts reproduced. However, the amount of NLA parts which will need to be tooled and recreated makes me wonder exactly how they're going to pull this off without going bankrupt. I'm not even talking about mechanicals, either; I'm thinking strictly cosmetic: left front fenders, torsion bars, interior b-pillar trim, knee pads, binnacles, console trim... the list goes on and on.

[Mark D]

I have mixed thoughts on this news and how it relates to the DeLorean...

On the one hand I'm hopeful that this opens the door for real growth at DMCH that will eventually lead to more high quality reproduction parts for current DeLorean owners. I hate to bring up the B word, but it's been damn near a decade the repro binnacles have been in development with only a few prototypes to show for it. Apparent failures in quality (parts warping under heat) seemingly have pushed development back several more years since prototypes were shown. I'm hoping that the prospect of truly new builds will bring some of these dwindling repro projects back on the priority list so that they may actually see the light of day.

On the other hand, I am thinking critically about the likelihood of what is presented in the article actually happening, IE 500 new DeLoreans built from existing NOS, reproduction parts, and new EPA certified engines. Those kinds of numbers don't seem impossible if the NOS parts actually exist, but as far as I'm aware there aren't 500 sets of NOS torsion bars laying around, nor 500 left front fenders, 500 binnacles, or 500 sets of wheels. To scrounge together enough NOS or good used existing parts seems like it would be possible for say, 50 cars, but somewhere above that line would require actually reproducing all of those NLA parts instead of drawing from existing stock.

I don't pretend to know the finances of DMCH, but it seems like given the current size of the company that it would be an impossible task to bring all of those missing links back into production in the 5 year time span mentioned in the article and doing so at a price that doesn't bankrupt the company. DMCH would need to go out and hires a bunch of engineers and purchasing staff to work with suppliers to reproduce all the missing parts. From a financial standpoint 500 becomes an extremely small production number when you're talking thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in tooling costs for each part. The payback period on tooling would not make sense in such low volumes. Either they're going to have to build 5000 cars to justify the investment or more likely, we'll see 50 or less cars built a similar fashion as the current remanufactured cars. IE, a donor car will be stripped, the hard to find NLA parts will be reused and everything else replaced with NOS. The only difference being that instead of reusing the existing engine or a 30 year old crate motor an EPA compliant engine will be installed and a new VIN assigned.

I am trying to think as optimistically as possible, but at the end of the day I really don't see this helping along the reproduction of any currently NLA parts any more than the current "new" build process does. From an owner standpoint I think the market may see these new cars in a similar light as current engine swapped cars, although with slightly more support due to the DMCH build.

[DMCVegas]

I remember folks here commenting when the law was passed earlier this year that it seemed tailor made for DMC-Texas.

So, 3.7L 360hp V6 which is currently EPA certified? The first thing that comes to mind is a Ford powerplant. Or possibly the Nissan VQ. Hmm.

Yep, that was me. The rep who drafted the entire bill is literally only 8 miles down the road from them.

The only thing that I know for certain about DMCH is that they're not fond of turbo charging. But they are however rather fond of supercharging. So having said that...

The Nissan VQ37VHR right out of the box hits about 350 bhp with a NISMO controller, and it has dual intakes on either side, so the symmetrical look fits rather well into the engine bay. But personally, I don't think it's the correct choice. There are super charger kits available, but they're up in the $10K range. And that's just for a kit alone. And there are other problems...

Now the Ford Duratec 3.7 engine... Right out of the box, it's 310 bhp. A rather substantial upgrade for the DMC-12 as it is. And that is naturally aspirated. Then because these things are so well built, we have companies like ProCharger that are selling 100% bolt-on supercharger kits that are dropping only 8 psi boost and hitting 50%-60% power increases. From there we can hit even more if we actually decide to go inside of the engine. And you'd still pay as much for the individual engine AND performance upgrade as you would just for the aftermarket it. PLUS these engines come with a 2 -Year warranty directly from Ford.

Now I don't know about Nissan. I don't see them selling their engines externally at all. Ford by contrast not only sells crate engines and turn-key engine controllers (though not publicly on the 3.7 Duratec right now), but they DO already sell the Duratec 3.7L engine and controllers directly to Ginetta for the Ginetta G60 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginetta_G60). So Ford already has not only quick turn-key engines that meet CARB and EPA standards, but they already have comfortable working relationships small-scale car companies in supplying entire engines to them (Bricklin SV1 anyone?). And then there's fuel economy with the VQ37VHR only getting 18 City & 26 Hwy, whereas the Ford Duratec is getting 19 City, and 28 Hwy with only a 300 lbs. difference between the two. But shave that off, and the economy goes up, as do the 0-60 times.

I don't know what might go on behind the scenes, but the only advantage I can see with the Nissan engine is the allure of an "exoitic" engine. Especially given how many GM guys there are around here. But the Ford is an engine right now that is ready to go, and meets the statement Espy had of being able to be serviced anywhere in the country. And yes, with it you would actually get a full OBD-II system in your DMC-12 to tune & monitor everything.

HOWEVER, remember, that isn't the only choice. The 3.7L is but one of two engine choices available according to the quote. GM does have the 4.3L LV3 V6, but it's a (rather wheezy) truck engine and no other viable EcoTec engines. Other people do have smaller engines as well, but V6 is really the best way to go. Both in terms of engine length, as well as weight since it is rear engined.

Now Chrysler does have a darkhorse with the 3.6L Pentastar engine. It also supposedly is not only rather light and compact, but with FCX's problems all over the place, I wouldn't put my money on them being the best of vendors out there.

So far, trying to be as unbiased as possible, Ford definitely looks like the best company to partner with. Which is pretty much coming full circle here since the Cologne Engine eventually evolved into/superceded by the Cyclone Series that is marketed as the current Duratec 3.7L we're talking about here. So this engine actually does already have somewhat of a heritage with the DMC-12.

http://41.media.tumblr.com/f300cdf575b159608a2f3cc30f34daa1/tumblr_mgwdaoehEN1r2dcdfo1_1280.png

[Dangermouse]

we'll see 50 or less cars built a similar fashion as the current remanufactured cars. IE, a donor car will be stripped, the hard to find NLA parts will be reused and everything else replaced with NOS. The only difference being that instead of reusing the existing engine or a 30 year old crate motor an EPA compliant engine will be installed and a new VIN assigned.

.

Why not just rebuild an old VIN with a new EPA motor?

[Mark D]

Why not just rebuild an old VIN with a new EPA motor?

Based on how the law is written I don't think that is an option.

Either you rebuild an existing VIN with existing/modified engine

OR

Build new/rebuild chassis with 2017 EPA certified engine and new VIN

I would assume the old VIN plates could be reused to build/rebuild other cars not using the 2017 certified engines that may have an undesirable scrap or rebuilt title.

[DMCVegas]

I don't pretend to know the finances of DMCH, but it seems like given the current size of the company that it would be an impossible task to bring all of those missing links back into production in the 5 year time span mentioned in the article and doing so at a price that doesn't bankrupt the company.

Now while I too cannot state anything as absolute fact, there was an article many years ago that really put things into perspective about all of this.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2005/0919/090.html

[David T]

Now while I too cannot state anything as absolute fact, there was an article many years ago that really put things into perspective about all of this.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2005/0919/090.html

It is not just about the EPA. The DOT has a lot of safety requirements too. Consider this, when DMCH bought all of the parts in Ohio, many of the parts are not the kind that wear out or need to be replaced. The only way to use that kind of part up is to build a whole car. That is what it is about. The appeal to owners of Deloreans is that DMCH can continue and be profitable so they can support the Delorean community by making available reproduction replacement parts. The fleet can continue only so long on parts scavenged from cannibalized wrecks, cross references, and NOS parts.

[DMCVegas]

Based on how the law is written I don't think that is an option.

Either you rebuild an existing VIN with existing/modified engine

OR

Build new/rebuild chassis with 2017 EPA certified engine and new VIN

I would assume the old VIN plates could be reused to build/rebuild other cars not using the 2017 certified engines that may have an undesirable scrap or rebuilt title.

Well... You can't swap VIN plates across cars. They're supposed to remain in place permanently. Yes, I know you transfer them between dashboards. That's a rather gray-area people turn a blind eye to. But at least the cab, or in our case underbody, must have it's tag remain in place permanently. Even if the vehicle ends up with a new state-assigned number.

Engine swaps can be rather tricky. The first thing is that you can only swap in newer engines.. You can't roll back to older engines. Even if it's the same model and two separate years. Beyond that, it then has it have it's original emissions equipment remain with it. So in the case of the DMC-12 Application of the PRV, that means it MUST always use the LAMBDA ECU. But, let's say that you upgrade to a newer PRV. Like the 3.0L out of the Dodge Monaco. Guess what? In places like California, you're required to move over the exact same ECU and engine harness, AND "Check Engine" light functionality along with the thing can't throw any codes at all. Lots of fun there. But even with non-DeLorean examples, you'd have problems. So let's say you wanted a newer engine that had lots more power and reliability. If it was made after 1996, you had to move the entire OBD-II system over. 1995 and older, you'd have to keep things like smog pumps in place. We really take for granted the Control Packs that auto makers sell.

With the ability to create new VIN numbers, this removes many of the constraints against older replica cars. They can run cleaner, more efficient emissions systems, and can set their own rules as to what can, and cannot be used. Rather than having to ensure that a vehicle abides by the restrictions, you're now writing the new parameters at the time of creation. The biggest realization of this is with the engine. The cost of upgrading a PRV for only a 70hp gain can easily be applied towards another engine that pumps out more than twice as much power, for only a bit more. Now you're not swapping an engine. You're installing a factory engine since DMCH is now the factory. So the rules make far more economical sense.



It is not just about the EPA. The DOT has a lot of safety requirements too. Consider this, when DMCH bought all of the parts in Ohio, many of the parts are not the kind that wear out or need to be replaced. The only way to use that kind of part up is to build a whole car. That is what it is about. The appeal to owners of Deloreans is that DMCH can continue and be profitable so they can support the Delorean community by making available reproduction replacement parts. The fleet can continue only so long on parts scavenged from cannibalized wrecks, cross references, and NOS parts.

Exactly! To hear a complaint about, "They're gonna use up all the parts! What about the fenders?!" is ridiculous when you realize just how many people out there are really driving around on original body panels. Not a whole lot of demand for them. This was also a great compromise too for the entire auto industry. For many years there have been exemptions for low-volume vehicles when it comes to *certain* safety testing. The most glaring example of this are convertible vehicles that are not as safe as regular cars thanks to the lack of their occupant cages since there is no roof. For many years, Ferrari kept on flaunting this law to avoid even putting things like airbags in their cars, and that jeopardized the entire low-volume car production industry. But this regulation actually does protect the little guys.

So now, one of the key exemptions of this law is that this is meant solely for the cottage industry. So GM and Ford can't go out and just crank out old 60's era Camaros and Mustangs since they manufacture so many other cars. BUT, since you have to own the rights to a particular vehicle, that prevents others from counterfeiting their cars. Maybe only a handful of other cars would ever meet this requirement besides DMCH, but it is indeed tailor made for them.

[sdg3205]

Oh great. So when some know it all ass clown at a car show comes up to me in 2020 claiming deloreans are kit cars, he'll technically be right.

Not a fan of this could mean for deloreans as collectables or classics, but so be it.

[Dangermouse]

Based on how the law is written I don't think that is an option.

Either you rebuild an existing VIN with existing/modified engine

OR

Build new/rebuild chassis with 2017 EPA certified engine and new VIN

I would assume the old VIN plates could be reused to build/rebuild other cars not using the 2017 certified engines that may have an undesirable scrap or rebuilt title.

No, I meant, pre-this law being passed, or irrespective of the law. Can a customer not go to DMCH and ask for a re-manufactured car (with original 1981 VIN) with any engine that will fit, including new Ford crate engines, or whatever. Obviously it is a "used" car

[Michael]

I personally do not see this ever happening. Remember the Solstice stunt? So why did it take a new law to be able to do a engine swap? What parts would they be changing in order to offer a faster car that would require a law such as this? The only benefit I could see is they would be able to sell cars as new for assembled cars that did not previously have a title or vin plates.

This was the big hold up on refurbs, in order to have a complete car, firet there must be a clean title and plates, now that requirement is gone.

[OverlandMan]

The payback period on tooling would not make sense in such low volumes. Either they're going to have to build 5000 cars to justify the investment or more likely, we'll see 50 or less cars built a similar fashion as the current remanufactured cars. IE, a donor car will be stripped, the hard to find NLA parts will be reused and everything else replaced with NOS. The only difference being that instead of reusing the existing engine or a 30 year old crate motor an EPA compliant engine will be installed and a new VIN assigned.

I am trying to think as optimistically as possible, but at the end of the day I really don't see this helping along the reproduction of any currently NLA parts any more than the current "new" build process does. From an owner standpoint I think the market may see these new cars in a similar light as current engine swapped cars, although with slightly more support due to the DMCH build.

5000 cars per year, which is the maximum under the new law if I read that right, equals building just over 13 cars per day, 7 days a week. That type of operation requires a significant facility, staff, overhead, etc. I would guess hypothetical production to be around 50-100 cars in year one.

I'm not sure what the profit margin would be per car or what the new cars would actually sell for (and conversely what niche consumers would be willing to pay). For grins, say 75 cars are built and 60 of them sell in year 1. Lets say they sell for $65k and the margins are 20% (total guess here). That would net a $780k profit.

Minus the margin, the $52k per car would consume all the overhead including the tooling, new drivetrain and parts, labor, NOS parts, etc.

I'm leaving a lot off here but from a macro-level, it's conceivable this might be a money maker for DMCH. I wouldn't guess we'll be seeing the market flooding with "new" DeLoreans to the degree that it will affect the "legacy" DeLoreans from a valuation perspective any time soon. If anything, the original cars may over time command a premium because of the originality factor.

[Mark D]

No, I meant, pre-this law being passed, or irrespective of the law. Can a customer not go to DMCH and ask for a re-manufactured car (with original 1981 VIN) with any engine that will fit, including new Ford crate engines, or whatever. Obviously it is a "used" car

I'm pretty sure that would be legal as long as the engine is the same model year or newer than the car it's going into and it was used in some other vehicle in the US and is EPA compliant for the model year it was produced. I think depending on the state you are in would determine some of the rules.

The big deal with this new law though isn't so much about new engines as it is about using up NOS parts that don't currently have demand. THAT is where DMCH is seeing dollar signs. They currently have millions of dollars worth of inventory...doors, quarter panels, fenders, and other high dollar parts that have extremely low demand compared to the available supply. The only current avenue to turn this inventory into cash are as replacement parts for existing cars. With this new law DMCH can use one of their new lightweight body tubs, assign it a VIN and finally start liquidating those high dollar, low demand parts.

In an ideal world DMCH would also have all the other parts needed to build a complete car. But therein lies the huge problem that I mentioned in my last post.... In order to sell 500 cars worth of existing stock of fenders, quarter panels, and hoods they need equal supply of left front fenders, torsion bars, wheels, binnacles, and other complex NLA parts that would need expensive tooling to reproduce. My armchair quarterback theory is that the tooling and production cost to reproduce all these NLA parts exceeds the amount of money that could be realized in liquidating the existing stock of parts on hand.

The more likely scenario will be that DMCH will end up building many fewer than 500 cars... Few enough so they would not have a need to reproduce many or any of the currently unavailable parts. For example, building 50 new cars with new VINs would get a million dollars of NOS parts off their current dusty shelves in Texas and onto new DeLoreans. All the NLA parts would be sourced from whatever limited stash DMCH has along with used parts from existing cars. There is some 'perfect' number of cars that would use up as much NOS as possible while not crossing the line where reproduction parts would be required. Once that line is crossed I think it could all go downhill quickly.

Current pricing for DeLoreans, availability of engine swaps from other vendors, and consumer demand for "new" DeLorean vs an original will be big factors in the potential for success... I'm really curious to see what other people think about how many of these new cars would actually be sold. I think the actual demand will be equal to or less than the current demand for Stage II fully rebuilt cars.

Another thing to consider is the upfront cost in R&D money before a single car can even be sold. If a high number of cars need to be sold to break even that could also spell an end to this project before it starts.

[DMCVegas]

Oh great. So when some know it all ass clown at a car show comes up to me in 2020 claiming deloreans are kit cars, he'll technically be right.

Not a fan of this could mean for deloreans as collectables or classics, but so be it.

No, that still would not be right. A "kit car" is one that you build yourself. Excluding body kits and whatnot for things like VWs and Fieros that still remain VWs or Fieros once completed, let's talk strictly about building a car from the ground up that has no VIN and will be assigned one by the state once completed. This falls into one of two categories:

You purchase all (or most) of the parts from a kit car manufacturer. Chassis, body panels, wiring, seats, engine, etc. Then once you have all of the pieces in your garage, you simply bolt them together and complete the construction of the vehicle. Thus you have built the car.
The manufacturer assembles a rolling chassis. They get to the point where they have literally built an entire car. EXCEPT for the engine. The engine remains uninstalled. So they sell you the rolling chassis, and THEN you separately purchase the engine. Once you get it home, you install the engine, and thus you have again "completed" the construction of a vehicle.

In both cases you the individual take credit for the final assembly of the vehicle, and as such it is a "kit" built by a private individual. This was precisely what Lotus did for many years. Hell, this is even what General Motors currently does with Buicks. Build an entire car in the USA without an engine, and then ship it off to China. When it gets there, they ship the engine separately, but because the engine was bolted in and mated to the car in China, that becomes it's final assembly point and thus it's country of origin.

Now the kicker here is that beleive it or not, this actually makes YOUR car worth a whole lot more. You see, this is a law to make "replicas". You will continue to own a genuine, bonefide DeLorean. These new cars? Well now, *technicly* speaking, these will not be "Real" DeLoreans. They're just going to be replicas. And that isn't simply my opinion here. That actually is a part of the law itself. Read it here:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr2675/text

So no, these won't be kit cars, but under the letter of the law, they're not real DeLorean DMC-12s either. They can be built with the same exact parts and everything that once right on the factory floor in Dunmurry, but they're not considered the genuine article. They are only replicas.

And that worries me. Not because of values, but because there will be this whole "Us Versus Them" mentality we're beginning to have from the animosity so many already have against this project.



No, I meant, pre-this law being passed, or irrespective of the law. Can a customer not go to DMCH and ask for a re-manufactured car (with original 1981 VIN) with any engine that will fit, including new Ford crate engines, or whatever. Obviously it is a "used" car

From a Federal standpoint, No.
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/engswitch_0.pdf
All of the engine derivatives that DMCH uses currently are of the PRV type, because that is apart of the EPA "Certified Configuration" for the DMC-12 platform. Such as when Volvo got the PRV Certified for use in the US, DMC only needed to do minor testing to show it's application in the DMC-12 platform would conform to US regulations. Now we see at the end not only does the EPA state that they prohibit an engine swap unless it is a "Certified Configuration", they also go on to say that it's not their business to enforce the law, and leave it up to states.

But from a State standpoint, *maybe*. Whereas here we have states like California here that just want to make sure that the engines are newer and come equipped with their necessary emissions controls, and ignore the EPA's laws and instead substitute their own.
https://www.bar.ca.gov/Industry/Engine_Change_Guidelines.html

Which (and I'm not getting political here) as you may have heard some of the biggest political arguments as of late have been about over States' Rights versus Federal Rights. This is a prime example. Fed says one thing, state says another, and the laws are not applied equally let alone properly. So it becomes this nasty legal quagmire that is best left alone. Which brings me to...

And finally from DMCH's standpoint: No!
Each improper engine swap could result in a maximum $25,000 fine from the federal government. And that's not including legal fees. Then you've also got states to deal with and their fines. And that would be the same liability for every car that they did such a swap on. And we're not even talking about how Homeland Security just loves to conduct multi-jurisdictional raids on impounding cars to crush, and then the resulting lawsuits. So it makes perfect sense that DMCH isn't getting into engine swaps for existing cars.

But with this new law, that all gets invalidated in a sense, but only on the new vehicles. Because after all they're now the manufacturer that is setting up all of the rules and determining the "Certified Configuration" for these new vehicles. I'm really curious as to what the first 3 VIN number assignments for them is going to be.

[sdg3205]

No, that still would not be right. A "kit car" is one that you build yourself. Excluding body kits and whatnot for things like VWs and Fieros that still remain VWs or Fieros once completed, let's talk strictly about building a car from the ground up that has no VIN and will be assigned one by the state once completed. This falls into one of two categories:

You purchase all (or most) of the parts from a kit car manufacturer. Chassis, body panels, wiring, seats, engine, etc. Then once you have all of the pieces in your garage, you simply bolt them together and complete the construction of the vehicle. Thus you have built the car.
The manufacturer assembles a rolling chassis. They get to the point where they have literally built an entire car. EXCEPT for the engine. The engine remains uninstalled. So they sell you the rolling chassis, and THEN you separately purchase the engine. Once you get it home, you install the engine, and thus you have again "completed" the construction of a vehicle.

In both cases you the individual take credit for the final assembly of the vehicle, and as such it is a "kit" built by a private individual. This was precisely what Lotus did for many years. Hell, this is even what General Motors currently does with Buicks. Build an entire car in the USA without an engine, and then ship it off to China. When it gets there, they ship the engine separately, but because the engine was bolted in and mated to the car in China, that becomes it's final assembly point and thus it's country of origin.

Now the kicker here is that beleive it or not, this actually makes YOUR car worth a whole lot more. You see, this is a law to make "replicas". You will continue to own a genuine, bonefide DeLorean. These new cars? Well now, *technicly* speaking, these will not be "Real" DeLoreans. They're just going to be replicas. And that isn't simply my opinion here. That actually is a part of the law itself. Read it here:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr2675/text

So no, these won't be kit cars, but under the letter of the law, they're not real DeLorean DMC-12s either. They can be built with the same exact parts and everything that once right on the factory floor in Dunmurry, but they're not considered the genuine article. They are only replicas.

And that worries me. Not because of values, but because there will be this whole "Us Versus Them" mentality we're beginning to have from the animosity so many already have against this project.




From a Federal standpoint, No.
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/engswitch_0.pdf
All of the engine derivatives that DMCH uses currently are of the PRV type, because that is apart of the EPA "Certified Configuration" for the DMC-12 platform. Such as when Volvo got the PRV Certified for use in the US, DMC only needed to do minor testing to show it's application in the DMC-12 platform would conform to US regulations. Now we see at the end not only does the EPA state that they prohibit an engine swap unless it is a "Certified Configuration", they also go on to say that it's not their business to enforce the law, and leave it up to states.

But from a State standpoint, *maybe*. Whereas here we have states like California here that just want to make sure that the engines are newer and come equipped with their necessary emissions controls, and ignore the EPA's laws and instead substitute their own.
https://www.bar.ca.gov/Industry/Engine_Change_Guidelines.html

Which (and I'm not getting political here) as you may have heard some of the biggest political arguments as of late have been about over States' Rights versus Federal Rights. This is a prime example. Fed says one thing, state says another, and the laws are not applied equally let alone properly. So it becomes this nasty legal quagmire that is best left alone. Which brings me to...

And finally from DMCH's standpoint: No!
Each improper engine swap could result in a maximum $25,000 fine from the federal government. And that's not including legal fees. Then you've also got states to deal with and their fines. And that would be the same liability for every car that they did such a swap on. And we're not even talking about how Homeland Security just loves to conduct multi-jurisdictional raids on impounding cars to crush, and then the resulting lawsuits. So it makes perfect sense that DMCH isn't getting into engine swaps for existing cars.

But with this new law, that all gets invalidated in a sense, but only on the new vehicles. Because after all they're now the manufacturer that is setting up all of the rules and determining the "Certified Configuration" for these new vehicles. I'm really curious as to what the first 3 VIN number assignments for them is going to be.

Argue all you want. It's not me you'll have to convince.

[Delorean Industries]

No, that still would not be right. A "kit car" is one that you build yourself. Excluding body kits and whatnot for things like VWs and Fieros that still remain VWs or Fieros once completed, let's talk strictly about building a car from the ground up that has no VIN and will be assigned one by the state once completed. This falls into one of two categories:

You purchase all (or most) of the parts from a kit car manufacturer. Chassis, body panels, wiring, seats, engine, etc. Then once you have all of the pieces in your garage, you simply bolt them together and complete the construction of the vehicle. Thus you have built the car.
The manufacturer assembles a rolling chassis. They get to the point where they have literally built an entire car. EXCEPT for the engine. The engine remains uninstalled. So they sell you the rolling chassis, and THEN you separately purchase the engine. Once you get it home, you install the engine, and thus you have again "completed" the construction of a vehicle.

In both cases you the individual take credit for the final assembly of the vehicle, and as such it is a "kit" built by a private individual. This was precisely what Lotus did for many years. Hell, this is even what General Motors currently does with Buicks. Build an entire car in the USA without an engine, and then ship it off to China. When it gets there, they ship the engine separately, but because the engine was bolted in and mated to the car in China, that becomes it's final assembly point and thus it's country of origin.

Now the kicker here is that beleive it or not, this actually makes YOUR car worth a whole lot more. You see, this is a law to make "replicas". You will continue to own a genuine, bonefide DeLorean. These new cars? Well now, *technicly* speaking, these will not be "Real" DeLoreans. They're just going to be replicas. And that isn't simply my opinion here. That actually is a part of the law itself. Read it here:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr2675/text

So no, these won't be kit cars, but under the letter of the law, they're not real DeLorean DMC-12s either. They can be built with the same exact parts and everything that once right on the factory floor in Dunmurry, but they're not considered the genuine article. They are only replicas.

And that worries me. Not because of values, but because there will be this whole "Us Versus Them" mentality we're beginning to have from the animosity so many already have against this project.




From a Federal standpoint, No.
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/engswitch_0.pdf
All of the engine derivatives that DMCH uses currently are of the PRV type, because that is apart of the EPA "Certified Configuration" for the DMC-12 platform. Such as when Volvo got the PRV Certified for use in the US, DMC only needed to do minor testing to show it's application in the DMC-12 platform would conform to US regulations. Now we see at the end not only does the EPA state that they prohibit an engine swap unless it is a "Certified Configuration", they also go on to say that it's not their business to enforce the law, and leave it up to states.

But from a State standpoint, *maybe*. Whereas here we have states like California here that just want to make sure that the engines are newer and come equipped with their necessary emissions controls, and ignore the EPA's laws and instead substitute their own.
https://www.bar.ca.gov/Industry/Engine_Change_Guidelines.html

Which (and I'm not getting political here) as you may have heard some of the biggest political arguments as of late have been about over States' Rights versus Federal Rights. This is a prime example. Fed says one thing, state says another, and the laws are not applied equally let alone properly. So it becomes this nasty legal quagmire that is best left alone. Which brings me to...

And finally from DMCH's standpoint: No!
Each improper engine swap could result in a maximum $25,000 fine from the federal government. And that's not including legal fees. Then you've also got states to deal with and their fines. And that would be the same liability for every car that they did such a swap on. And we're not even talking about how Homeland Security just loves to conduct multi-jurisdictional raids on impounding cars to crush, and then the resulting lawsuits. So it makes perfect sense that DMCH isn't getting into engine swaps for existing cars.

But with this new law, that all gets invalidated in a sense, but only on the new vehicles. Because after all they're now the manufacturer that is setting up all of the rules and determining the "Certified Configuration" for these new vehicles. I'm really curious as to what the first 3 VIN number assignments for them is going to be.


Us vs. Them. I like this. Sounds like a Civil War. Hope it plays out like that flick coming out next May!!!!! This is going to be an exciting chapter in the cars history!

All joking aside this is nothing short of amazing. Your competitor being branded by their own doing as a "replica" company is something dreams are made of and a blow nearly impossible to deal from a business standpoint. It opens up to a level of "good enough" quality standards that are the norm in the kit and replica world. There are so many clean vins available to start with that everyone in play currently couldn't deplete successfully in our life times.

[Mark D]

There are so many clean vins available to start with that everyone in play currently couldn't deplete successfully in our life times.


But are they legally available to use with an engine other than a PRV?

[Dangermouse]

Why not?

As DMCH are not legally linked to the original DMCltd, are they no different to SEOmotorsports or DPI if they do an engine swap essentially?

They are not the original manufacturer.

[Delorean Industries]

But are they legally available to use with an engine other than a PRV?

All comes down to context and point of view. It is messy like many things when it comes to the legality of what is what.

I'm in the process of finalizing new PRV's. IE I have improved where required and set into motion the required components I haven't already developed. Just like any other after market engine manufacture at this point. It being a Delorean engine has no bearing. Think of how there are 50 plus people making small blocks these days.

[DMC-81]

Hi there,
I personally see this as great news for DMCH, current owners, and all vendors… along the lines of “a rising tide floats all boats”. Imagine the marketing exposure to the public that new DeLoreans will be available. Sure, there may be few actually built, but who knows, maybe not? Some will buy the new ones, others will become interested in acquiring an “original Delorean”, and I think we will all benefit from the exposure. As mentioned, DMCH will have to re-create NLA parts that are common to both versions ( Left Front fenders etc) and the anticipated sales from monetizing all that “dead inventory” will help contribute to that task. Sounds like a win-win scenario to me.

I think it is a great time to own a DeLorean. :thumbup:

[Delorean Industries]

Summing up quickly why this is going to go badly if it were ever to move forward:

___ Owners will constantly deal with "is that a replica" problem. This alone will be the undoing of the situation. IE pissing off current customer base.
___ DMCH can't tell people to buy a replica car without saying it is superior to an original car.( directly hurting existing cars and customers)
___ The market will become clouded as the misinformation pushed into mass media will skew the real cars value.
___ Business expenses do not flow to future but current customer bases. The community will shoulder the expense of this regardless of what is said.
___ This will fail on its own by default. The market place is not there for this and never will be. People that want this car are willing to spend for the real thing. Unless it is going to be priced like a civic the target market isn't there. Which is impossible. I know manufacturing and what it costs.

The price of greed becomes abundantly clear all of a sudden.

[louielouie2000]

5000 cars per year, which is the maximum under the new law if I read that right, equals building just over 13 cars per day, 7 days a week. That type of operation requires a significant facility, staff, overhead, etc. I would guess hypothetical production to be around 50-100 cars in year one.

I'm not sure what the profit margin would be per car or what the new cars would actually sell for (and conversely what niche consumers would be willing to pay). For grins, say 75 cars are built and 60 of them sell in year 1. Lets say they sell for $65k and the margins are 20% (total guess here). That would net a $780k profit.

Minus the margin, the $52k per car would consume all the overhead including the tooling, new drivetrain and parts, labor, NOS parts, etc.

I'm leaving a lot off here but from a macro-level, it's conceivable this might be a money maker for DMCH. I wouldn't guess we'll be seeing the market flooding with "new" DeLoreans to the degree that it will affect the "legacy" DeLoreans from a valuation perspective any time soon. If anything, the original cars may over time command a premium because of the originality factor.

You are totally on the right track, but a bit conservative with your numbers. For instance, DMCH is currently advertising a former New Build (ie: a used New Build) car right now for $62k. So when and if these 21st century DeLoreans are made, they are going to command much higher prices. DMCH advertised that one-off electric DeLorean they had built a couple of years ago for $100k; this is probably the neighborhood they are going to target, if not higher. Much like that one-off electric DeLorean, these new cars will have entirely new powerplants/drivetrains. This is going to carry a much higher premium for the customer than former New Build cars did, simply because DMCH won't be plucking paid-for components off their own shelves. Not to mention the cost of engineering a new powerplant into an existing 35 year old car while maintaining emissions compliance and accessories like A/C has to be exorbitant. I don't know the state of DMCH's liquidity at all, but I honestly can't imagine that something like this is going to be within their abilities.

It's also important to keep in mind that the biggest limiting factor here is going to go back to one thing: the supply of certain NLA components. DMCH may have 500 sets of doors, but where are they going to source left front fenders, binnacles, etc? Their only current option for dozens of NLA components is to scavenge them from existing 1981-1983 cars, and refurbish them. From what I have seen, the stock of parts-car quality DeLoreans has greatly diminished over this past decade, so there is a real hurdle to overcome in that regard. I'd have to imagine the reengineered underbodies are on the chopping block, too as they have not been federally crash tested.

Another limiting factor is economies of scale. During the best of times, I think DMCH only churned out 1-2 New Build cars a month. Since these new cars would likely be much more expensive, and no longer be genuine DeLoreans- exactly how big is the market for such a product? It'll be very interesting indeed to see how all of this unfolds. Whatever the case, I wouldn't count on it being quickly. After all, the gestation period for the Stage III cars was a decade, and the binnacles are taking much longer than that. This sort of a project isn't even in the same solar system or galaxy of those in terms of scale. I'm thinking the only way they could pull off such a feat would be to partner with a much larger company. However, this leads to yet another chicken and egg question- why would it be advantageous for a larger company to partner on such a pricey, special interest project with a tiny market? And around we go again...

[DMCVegas]

Argue all you want. It's not me you'll have to convince.

Sadly, you're absolutely correct.



Why not?

As DMCH are not legally linked to the original DMCltd, are they no different to SEOmotorsports or DPI if they do an engine swap essentially?

They are not the original manufacturer.

But the vehicle already exists prior to modification. Yes there is the existential argument that has raged for years of, What makes a DeLorean a "DeLorean", and at what point after a car has been heavily modified that it is so far from it's "stock" configuration that it ceases to be considered a DeLorean? But that's not the thing here. That is simply debating originality. What this is that we're dealing with is the actual provenance of the vehicle. These will absolutely be "new DeLoreans", and perhaps even just "DeLoreans", but never "original DeLoreans" from the legal standpoint of things.

Mechanically they are DMC-12s built from the same literal NOS parts supplies that have sat dormant for decades. Not like Avanti, where those just eventually became nothing more than coachbuilders that simply completed vehicles. But these will be true DeLoreans in the mechanical sense. But regrettably, not in the legal one. Those VIN tags will not show DMCL as the builder, but DMCH. That wording will have to be changed. Clearly it will not simply have the wording of, "This vehicle conforms to all federal motor vehicle safety and bumper standards in effect on the date of manufacture shown above." In fact SEC. 24405 of the new bill is as follows:

“(3) PERMANENT LABEL REQUIREMENT.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall require a low-volume manufacturer to affix a permanent label to a motor vehicle exempted under paragraph (1) that identifies the specified standards and regulations for which such vehicle is exempt from section 30112(a), states that the vehicle is a replica, and designates the model year such vehicle replicates.

“(B) WRITTEN NOTICE.—The Secretary may require a low-volume manufacturer of a motor vehicle exempted under paragraph (1) to deliver written notice of the exemption to—

“(i) the dealer; and

“(ii) the first purchaser of the motor vehicle, if the first purchaser is not an individual that purchases the motor vehicle for resale.


Now what is very interesting here about all of this though is this section:

“(9) STATE REGISTRATION.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to preempt, affect, or supersede any State titling or registration law or regulation for a replica motor vehicle, or exempt a person from complying with such law or regulation.”.

Keep that in mind while you read this:

(b) Vehicle Emission Compliance Standards For Low-Volume Motor Vehicle Manufacturers.—Section 206(a) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7525(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:


“(5) (A) A motor vehicle engine (including all engine emission controls) may be installed in an exempted specially produced motor vehicle if the motor vehicle engine is from a motor vehicle that is covered by a certificate of conformity issued by the Administrator for the model year in which the exempted specially produced motor vehicle is produced, or the motor vehicle engine is covered by an Executive order subject to regulations promulgated by the California Air Resources Board for the model year in which the exempted specially produced motor vehicle is produced, and—

“(i) the manufacturer of the engine supplies written instructions to the Administrator and the manufacturer of the exempted specially produced motor vehicle explaining how to install the engine and maintain functionality of the engine’s emission control system and the on-board diagnostic system (commonly known as ‘OBD’), except with respect to evaporative emissions;

That is very interesting here. CARB reserves the right to deny vehicles registration into California if they're not compliant with state regulations. Now if the engine is CARB Certified, then it's fine everywhere. But the problem there is that Evaporative Emissions Control legislation. DMCH and everyone else still needs approval from California to sell/register cars there. And that permission lies within having CARB Certify the evaporative emissions system on the new DMC-12. *Maybe* if there are certified parts they can only go through minor paperwork to get a "certified application" of the applied parts for this configuration. But as of now, any Replica DMC-12s would only be 49- State legal. Unless CARB decides to adopt the Federal exemptions for replica cars, the biggest market, California is still not got a true green light. In fact, it's rather off-limits right now.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/?1dmy&urile=wcm:path:/dmv_content_en/dmv/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr29


Oh yeah, one more thing....

“(b) Exemption For Low-Volume Manufacturers.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall—

“(A) exempt from section 30112(a) of this title not more than 325 replica motor vehicles per year that are manufactured or imported by a low-volume manufacturer; and

“(B) except as provided in paragraph (4) of this subsection, limit any such exemption to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards applicable to motor vehicles and not motor vehicle equipment.

[DMCVegas]

Oh, I almost forgot...

Don't get your hopes up about driving to Houston and picking your new DeLorean up at the factory. That's illegal.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/14/abbott-tesla-dealership-model-works-just-fine/

Can't sell cars directly to consumers if you're a manufacturer. Gonna need to establish a separate franchise dealer network now to get those cars out there.

[Echoplex]

As a prospective buyer who is currently on the hunt, this news makes me want to "wait and see". Am I willing to wait until 2020? I don't know. But this news definitely changes and complicates things for me. The thought of a 360 hp shiny new replica is enticing to a newbie such as myself. Darn you, speculation...

[Nicholas R]

As someone that like seeing different high powered engines (tastefully) installed into DeLoreans, I am all for this. That being said, it does seem a little odd. One article stated how one of the objectives was to use up some of the stockpile of NOS parts that would otherwise never get used. One of DMCH's biggest stockpiles is engines correct? It would surprise me if this wasn't one of the parts they were trying to use up (installed in stage I, II, III configuration, or other) Still, if it brings new innovation and designs to the DeLorean community, then I'm excited to see what they come up with.


As a prospective buyer who is currently on the hunt, this news makes me want to "wait and see". Am I willing to wait until 2020? I don't know. But this news definitely changes and complicates things for me. The thought of a 360 hp shiny new replica is enticing to a newbie such as myself. Darn you, speculation...

You know this raises a very interesting question. As a perspective buyer, how much are you influenced by the desire to own a car with stock/original components (specifically drivetrain since that's the biggest proposed change) vs. updated/aftermarket? Also, are you putoff at all by the idea of not owning an "original" car from the factory, but rather a replica? Or does that information seem irrelevant? Thanks! :thumbup:

[dmruschell]

One of DMCH's biggest stockpiles is engines correct?

I had heard that they ran out of NOS engines a few years ago.

For a while, they were only installing Stage 2 systems in customers' 50,000 mile or less engines or their own NOS crate engines. Then, I heard that their crate engine supply dried up, so they were only installing the Stage 2 in customers' engines. Many of their NOS engines already had block rot, including the engine in 3196 (a New Build with a Stage 2), which had to be replaced by DPI before I bought it.

[mluder]

I had heard that they ran out of NOS engines a few years ago.

For a while, they were only installing Stage 2 systems in customers' 50,000 mile or less engines or their own NOS crate engines. Then, I heard that their crate engine supply dried up, so they were only installing the Stage 2 in customers' engines. Many of their NOS engines already had block rot, including the engine in 3196 (a New Build with a Stage 2), which had to be replaced by DPI before I bought it.

I was in Houston just 2 years ago and can show you a picture I took - Hundreds of NOS engines and transmissions sitting on storage racks.

Cheers
Steven

[Echoplex]

You know this raises a very interesting question. As a perspective buyer, how much are you influenced by the desire to own a car with stock/original components (specifically drivetrain since that's the biggest proposed change) vs. updated/aftermarket? Also, are you putoff at all by the idea of not owning an "original" car from the factory, but rather a replica? Or does that information seem irrelevant? Thanks! :thumbup:

At this point in time, as a newbie who is just beginning to understand these cars, I am more intrigued by the idea of owning a fresh new vehicle with a fast engine. However, I suspect that as I become more familiar with all the facets of the DMC world, I could easily turn purist. At this point in time I am not put-off at all about not owning an original. I want the iconic look. If I can have the look AND speed, then consider me very interested! I have to wonder how these potential replicas would be priced though. If I can buy a fully-restored and original D for less, then that would complicate decisions further.

[Michael]

As a prospective buyer who is currently on the hunt, this news makes me want to "wait and see". Am I willing to wait until 2020? I don't know. But this news definitely changes and complicates things for me. The thought of a 360 hp shiny new replica is enticing to a newbie such as myself. Darn you, speculation...

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Are these the same "journalists" that reported the George Clooney was going to star in the new DeLorean biopic? The internet blew up overnight all because Stephen Wynn said in a interview he thought Clooney would be good for the part.

This will never happen. First, where you gonna get left fenders? Right fenders are pretty close to extinction themselves. Are they going to construct a die? I remember reading (maybe in JZD's biography) that the dies were one of the most expensive aspects to construction.

Again....this is just free press for DMCH.

Nothing wrong with working the media however.

[opethmike]

I'll quite confidently bet that not a single car gets built.

[DeLoreanman]

Yes, that's what interests me most about this as well: the prospect of suddenly having no longer available parts reproduced. However, the amount of NLA parts which will need to be tooled and recreated makes me wonder exactly how they're going to pull this off without going bankrupt. I'm not even talking about mechanicals, either; I'm thinking strictly cosmetic: left front fenders, torsion bars, interior b-pillar trim, knee pads, binnacles, console trim... the list goes on and on.

They could take the path that Terry Tanner took with the Bricklin and simply use fiberglass panels instead of stainless steel. I don't have high hopes for this plan of theirs, it's just a PR stunt to drum up interest in the business. Whatever happened to the Solstice project, the Ev project or even the redesigned interior project from 12 years ago? Have the binnacles been released yet or are those still pending? If those couldn't get off the ground how could this get off the ground? I could be wrong but I have my doubts.

[Michael]

They could take the path that Terry Tanner took with the Bricklin and simply use fiberglass panels

Ohhh that will look beautiful. How did that work out for Terry?

[DeLoreanman]

Ohhh that will look beautiful. How did that work out for Terry?

Still doing it, as far as I know. You can have a Bricklin in any color you like as long as it's black.

[16949]

Summing up quickly why this is going to go badly if it were ever to move forward:

___ Owners will constantly deal with "is that a replica" problem. This alone will be the undoing of the situation. IE pissing off current customer base.
___ DMCH can't tell people to buy a replica car without saying it is superior to an original car.( directly hurting existing cars and customers)
___ The market will become clouded as the misinformation pushed into mass media will skew the real cars value.
___ Business expenses do not flow to future but current customer bases. The community will shoulder the expense of this regardless of what is said.
___ This will fail on its own by default. The market place is not there for this and never will be. People that want this car are willing to spend for the real thing. Unless it is going to be priced like a civic the target market isn't there. Which is impossible. I know manufacturing and what it costs.

The price of greed becomes abundantly clear all of a sudden.

I agree. In fact, as a newer owner, I found the article and quotes alone to be alienating. There is nothing about this change that would improve the value of our cars for existing owners. And like has already been posted, some of the buying market is already cooling off while they "wait and see". Depress our car values, use up available parts, "flood" the market and hurt the value by everyone thinking we have the kit versions: not the best marketing strategy to existing owners who have been paying the bills for decades.

[DMC-81]

Summing up quickly why this is going to go badly if it were ever to move forward:

___ Owners will constantly deal with "is that a replica" problem. This alone will be the undoing of the situation. IE pissing off current customer base.
___ DMCH can't tell people to buy a replica car without saying it is superior to an original car.( directly hurting existing cars and customers)
___ The market will become clouded as the misinformation pushed into mass media will skew the real cars value.
___ Business expenses do not flow to future but current customer bases. The community will shoulder the expense of this regardless of what is said.
___ This will fail on its own by default. The market place is not there for this and never will be. People that want this car are willing to spend for the real thing. Unless it is going to be priced like a civic the target market isn't there. Which is impossible. I know manufacturing and what it costs.

The price of greed becomes abundantly clear all of a sudden.

Hmm... Interesting. My opinion is:

- We already deal with the "is that a replica" question. In my experience, people that ask that can't believe that it's a real Delorean. I'll continue to proudly say. "No, it's a REAL DeLorean". Then they get even more excited at what they're looking at. No problem here.

- DMCH will be able to say that the new ones will have a more powerful modern engine....which really is superior. I bought my car knowing that it had a (insert derogatory word) 130 HP engine, and that it was not known for its power, reliability, or build quality. That's not why I bought the car, and despite that, I have spent time and money making that 130 HP engine look as original and best working as possible, and other areas of the car. This is no threat to me. I continue to see at least 2 markets. One for people like myself that want their car to be as original as possible, and one for people that want a DeLorean but with more modern upgrades, and perhaps don't want to/unable to be their own mechanic.

- We already have misinformation. Coke in the doors anyone? But other Marques have sorted out real cars values versus replicas. We can do the same.

- Business Expenses don't have to fall on current customers, especially in a vendor market with competition. Significant future expansion costs is traditionally financed by loans or investor equity. Regardless, we have a shrinking supply of NOS parts. Prices have to go up anyway in the long term either by pure supply and demand, or to pay for reproductions, or both. That in turn makes our cars values go up. But it's better to have the tooling up for NLA parts at least partially borne by new car sales.

- Will it fail? No market? I prefer to support the initiative, especially if it helps one of our major part suppliers finance part reproductions. If there was no market, why are various vendors innovating on the DeLorean? Wasn't there a guy just in the last week or so that was looking for a similar car that this law is allowing?
In the Corvette world, as an example, there are people that want an original 63 split window, and those who will buy a 63 retro rod, neither car is in the same price bracket as a Civic. But both are amazing in their own right. The guy I work with that has the original top flight 63 doesn't worry about the retro rod.

- I wouldn't call it greed. I think it is called capitalism. That's exactly what I would do to monetize the dead inventory. Build cars that will also eventually need parts.

[Delorean Industries]

Even capitalism is governed by rules. Market place stupidity negates capitalism's ability to flourish. It's all in the calculation of give and take associated with the stance taken.

[DMC-81]

Even capitalism is governed by rules. Market place stupidity negates capitalism's ability to flourish. It's all in the calculation of give and take associated with the stance taken.

Yes. It is. That's what this exciting new law is doing. Regulating a previously un-regulated market. The market will tend to sort out "stupidity", or failed attempts. The market rewards continued attempts. Examples: WD40 (the 40th attempt).

With 50 to 75 companies backing the law, I can't wait to see what new and interesting cars come to fruition.

Josh, what are your plans to leverage this change?

[DMCVegas]

I agree. In fact, as a newer owner, I found the article and quotes alone to be alienating. There is nothing about this change that would improve the value of our cars for existing owners. And like has already been posted, some of the buying market is already cooling off while they "wait and see". Depress our car values, use up available parts, "flood" the market and hurt the value by everyone thinking we have the kit versions: not the best marketing strategy to existing owners who have been paying the bills for decades.

And aside from your feelings of alienation (which while I admittedly do not understand, that opinion is absolutely and rightfully yours to have), exactly what are you basing the remainder of your statements off of?

Let's just talk about the several elephants in the room here, ok?

First and foremost, a car is a horrible financial investment. It's an almost perfect one if the investment is in your own personal recreation and entertainment. But financially? It either has to be a legendary toy for the hyper-wealthy with an emphasis on exclusivity, or the random lottery-eqsue jackpot of buying that first car that no one wanted, and then it just winds up sitting unused some garage somewhere until the day it sells for a ridiculous price because unforeseen circumstances creating future pop culture quantifies it. Cars very, VERY rarely just magically appreciate in value. So unless you hit one of those two prior scenarios, or you deal in reselling vehicles strictly for profit, you're not going to be making money. So there really isn't anyone to blame. It's just the nature of the game, so this really isn't a valid complaint. More to the point, if this really bothers a person, cars in general just clearly are not the hobby for them.

Along these lines, are we just going to start finding ways to blame everyone for whatever we can when it comes to perceived devaluation based upon counter desirability? Let's blame Renault for selling DMC the Manual transmission because it makes the automatic less desirable. Let's get pissed about Bridge of Weir because the gray interior is more desirable. Let's get pissed about BAE and Island turbo kits because they make N/A cars less desirable because they're so fast. Let's blame collectible makers for memorabilia that makes a car for sale more desirable.

Second, yes, I know that many, MANY DeLorean owners have a beef with Stephen Wynne and James Espy. There are various reasons, but most that I just cannot for the life of me figure out. Mostly it just seems to revolve around "proving" that they're not the "original" DeLorean Motor Company. That alone I cannot understand. Especially when as many die-hard GM fans there are on here that not a single one of you bitches that not only has William Crapo Durant NOT been in charge of that company he founded for about a century, but that it is literally NOT the same company since it's total bankruptcy of just a few short years ago. But some little warehouse in Houston picks up a niche name, and everyone takes to social media to gather the tiny e-pitchforks and e-torches.

Third, enough with the whining about the parts inventory already. So now DMCH says, "Hey, we need to sell some parts so we'll build new cars out of 'em.", and people start complaining that those parts need to be saved in order to "preserve" the *original* cars. But you know what? I've seen many, MANY times over the years wrecked DMC-12s that needed moderate to even significant repair. Yet in the big picture of things, it was only a fraction of the sum of complete parts that the cars were that needed replacement. Difficult repairs, yes. But not impossible. Otherwise they were totally complete vehicles with valid VIN numbers, and there ain't nobody making any more of those. But whenever people like me would advocate saving these cars, all most everyone ever did was bitch that they were too far gone and NEEDED to be parted out! Really? For the past 3 decades you people have been advocating the destruction of DMC-12s, yet NOW you want to complain that DMCH shouldn't use the parts to build new cars simply because that fits nicely with this whole anti-Houston agenda? Because everyone has also complained about their "new builds" for years when they would simply refurbish/rebuild old cars and gave those new life. Am I really understanding this correctly? Help me out here.

Fourth and finally, how many goddamed left front fucking fenders do you need?! Seriously, raise your hand if your car does NOT have the same body panels that it left the factory with. I mean, you all *do* realize that even if the metal has been stretched beyond working back into shape, it can still be cut with new sections welded in and returned back into shape with no visible scars. Also, like Proto One did, you do realize that you can have limited run stamping dies made at a fraction of the price for Kirksite ones intended for mass production. Hell, a better question is just how many of you are actually using parts from wrecked DMC-12 vehicles because you had no choice to? Because DMCH or any other vendor didn't have the part available via NOS, and you just HAD to get that part out of necessity to get your car running? Not because it was cheaper, but because it was the only choice you truly had.


Personally? I think this whole speculation thing right now just that: useless speculation. And truthfully, we're not the only ones here dealing with this. There are many other marques out there that will see production start back up. Interestingly enough though, my own speculation is probably that we're the only ones bitching and complaining about this. Everyone else is excited as all get out, and we're here pissed about it. For so many years everyone has thought it would be so cool to see a new DMC-12 get built. And now here we are where that is about to become a reality, and most people are mad about it.

[GRINCH]

So "if" a 2020 DeLorean is offered, one would think the MSRP would be around the $80-100k price range?

[Delorean Industries]

Yes. It is. That's what this exciting new law is doing. Regulating a previously un-regulated market. The market will tend to sort out "stupidity", or failed attempts. The market rewards continued attempts. Examples: WD40 (the 40th attempt).

With 50 to 75 companies backing the law, I can't wait to see what new and interesting cars come to fruition.

Josh, what are your plans to leverage this change?

Nothing other than continuing to provide a wider gap of differentiation between mass marketing confusion and superior products. I can now say when asked that we do "this" and they are a "replica" company. As a whole I don't subscribe or concern myself with such laws and regulations. If I want to build, invent or do something I'm going to do it. If need be there is a way around everything just step out of the box and look. People telling other people what to do and how to live is kinda against my very being. Mainly because it doesn't seem to work very well. So I simply don't bother myself with it.

My facts and associated statements have nothing to do with the market regulations people follow or what it makes others comfortable with doing in other marques moving forward. I'm not speculating on the legislation passed in any way. My points are facts completely based off the consequences associated with steering a market place and building a brand only to abandon for something that appears more profitable while directly hurting the existing market. Capitalism doesn't subscribe to how great of a product you have to offer or how good you are at providing a service. The consumer must believe in you, trust in your business, side with your ethics, ideals, direction and so on. Capitalism is completely dependent on emotion. VW makes a superior product and is more than able to indulge in capitalistic gains. They emotionally damaged the existing base and have paid the price.

[louielouie2000]

Everyone else is excited as all get out, and we're here pissed about it. For so many years everyone has thought it would be so cool to see a new DMC-12 get built. And now here we are where that is about to become a reality, and most people are mad about it.

I don't see anyone here who is angry- we're just digesting the announcement, and dissecting exactly how feasible the proclamation is. Healthy skepticism regarding either is just common sense, given all of the variables.


So "if" a 2020 DeLorean is offered, one would think the MSRP would be around the $80-100k price range?


Take a look at other replica makers- Shelby American, for example. Their most basic Cobra with a fiberglass body starts at $90k- the aluminum bodied ones start at $155k; double both of those prices for their Daytona coupe models. Now just think how rudimentary Shelbys are compared to DeLoreans. These things, if made, will not be cheap.

[Dangermouse]

But are they legally available to use with an engine other than a PRV?


Why not?

As DMCH are not legally linked to the original DMCltd, are they no different to SEOmotorsports or DPI if they do an engine swap essentially?

They are not the original manufacturer.



But the vehicle already exists prior to modification. Yes there is the existential argument that has raged for years of, What makes a DeLorean a "DeLorean", and at what point after a car has been heavily modified that it is so far from it's "stock" configuration that it ceases to be considered a DeLorean? But that's not the thing here. That is simply debating originality. What this is that we're dealing with is the actual provenance of the vehicle. These will absolutely be "new DeLoreans", and perhaps even just "DeLoreans", but never "original DeLoreans" from the legal standpoint of things.

t.

I was referring to the state of play today, prior to this law.

According to the EPA document that you attached earlier, (almost) any engine swap is non-EPA-compliant, ceratinly any cross-manufacturer swap, which would include non-PRVs and even electric conversions.

[Dangermouse]

Take a look at other replica makers- Shelby American, for example. Their most basic Cobra with a fiberglass body starts at $90k- the aluminum bodied ones start at $155k; double both of those prices for their Daytona coupe models. Now just think how rudimentary Shelbys are compared to DeLoreans. These things, if made, will not be cheap.

It would be fairly simple for DMCH to build these "new", though I doubt they have every part needed for 500 cars. 2000 wheels? 500 good-condition louvers? But a cottage industry of, say, 10 cars a year would work nicely for them. Keep them exclusive and keep the price high. A 2017 DeLorean Zachary Edition perhaps. They already have plans for SS frames and previewed their carbon/fiber (?) tub a few years ago.

Sling $5k at Chris Nicholson and he could hand craft a LFF for you; no need for dies etc if you are only going to make 10 cars a year.

The problem with binnacles and dashes was making them at a reasonable cost. If the replicas are portrayed as bespoke versions of the D, there is no reason why a leather/sealskin/material-of-your-choice covered version can't be hand-crafted.

[Tillsy]

You're all way off the mark here - what this does is pave the way for flying DeLoreans :)

[refugeefromcalif]

You're all way off the mark here - what this does is pave the way for flying DeLoreans :)

That are also Self-Flying... :elmo3:

George

[DMCVegas]

I was referring to the state of play today, prior to this law.

According to the EPA document that you attached earlier, (almost) any engine swap is non-EPA-compliant, ceratinly any cross-manufacturer swap, which would include non-PRVs and even electric conversions.

Well this law only pertains to new vehicles. Which these technically are under the letter of the law, albiet brand-new while being built according to 25+ year old technology. And I imagine that is probably a liability aspect of sorts here to legally allow these vehicles back on the road by telling consumers that the safety standards of these are not on part with more modern vehicles. That disclosure is probably the 2nd biggest thing there as well to help limit said liability too.

As for the EPA, they have made it plainly clear that they are not going to be enforcing this law regarding engine swaps, and are leaving it all up to states. Although we still do not know if there may in fact be exemptions for ZEV engine swaps that make the switch to full electric conversions. That is where you have to start cross-referencing the various regulations to say with any amount of certainty on that.



I don't see anyone here who is angry- we're just digesting the announcement, and dissecting exactly how feasible the proclamation is. Healthy skepticism regarding either is just common sense, given all of the variables.

No, it's rather clear to see that there are some people here that are not at all happy about this. In particular when it comes to the discussions over vehicle valuations and parts availability to name the two biggest complains so far.

And while I don't mean any disrespect to you as this isn't aimed at you, it's rather clear that everyone is going off all half-cocked about this and isn't bothering to read a damn thing, and just wants to go off of emotion and hearsay. The proof is that I've not only linked to the official law, but I've also re-posted here the clear limitation that Replica Manufacturers are limited to only a maximum of 325 cars per year. Yet everyone still keeps going off of the 500 number from the draft based upon nothing more than it keeps being re-quoted again and again by everyone, and we're just feeding off of each other and assuming since one person said it, that's validation enough.

But hey, it is what it is. What can you do about it? It's the same reason people think JZD is still in jail: They simply heard someone else say it.

[opethmike]

38421

[DMCVegas]

38421

http://s.quickmeme.com/img/26/26748ea71b6f74b40865bf15aa2acde635714c3da3569f3ff7 49974b989dcc34.jpg

[DMC-81]

Nothing other than continuing to provide a wider gap of differentiation between mass marketing confusion and superior products. I can now say when asked that we do "this" and they are a "replica" company. As a whole I don't subscribe or concern myself with such laws and regulations. If I want to build, invent or do something I'm going to do it. If need be there is a way around everything just step out of the box and look. People telling other people what to do and how to live is kinda against my very being. Mainly because it doesn't seem to work very well. So I simply don't bother myself with it.

My facts and associated statements have nothing to do with the market regulations people follow or what it makes others comfortable with doing in other marques moving forward. I'm not speculating on the legislation passed in any way. My points are facts completely based off the consequences associated with steering a market place and building a brand only to abandon for something that appears more profitable while directly hurting the existing market. Capitalism doesn't subscribe to how great of a product you have to offer or how good you are at providing a service. The consumer must believe in you, trust in your business, side with your ethics, ideals, direction and so on. Capitalism is completely dependent on emotion. VW makes a superior product and is more than able to indulge in capitalistic gains. They emotionally damaged the existing base and have paid the price.

OK. So as a vendor, if you're not planning to leverage the new law, then in my opinion, it's in bad taste to trash talk another vendor whose planning to seize the opportunity.

Owners opinions are one thing, but a vendor is like a leader in a market. A good leader in any company doesn't stoke fears in their employees, or bad mouth other leaders.

Everyone has their favorite vendors, and we all want healthy competition, but I'm tired of reading your rants against DMC, so just like a bystander in a school yard that witnesses a bully in action and chooses to not to just watch anymore, I'm saying something.

Please stop.

You talk about emotional damage and ethics, so think how you're rants against DMC are perceived by hundreds of not thousands of potential customers that actually like DMC and choose not to say anything.

You're obviously a talented vendor. You'd be better served focusing on making great products and leveraging this forum to promote them, and on serving your customers well.

Then we all win.

[Delorean Industries]

I'm not even going to waste my time responding in detail to that. Just want you to know I'm ignoring your comments.

[uhhair]

Why has everyone seemed to neglect to mention that DMC (nor anybody else) has no way to produce the stainless body panels? Can't build new Deloreans without those, unless you make fiberglass replicas and paint the cars. I guess that's the worst case scenario?

But you know what, if they end up building new Deloreans, who cares? Wouldn't bother me one bit. More cars on the road would mean more vendors making more parts to support the car, more ingenuity for new product ideas, etc. That seems like a huge positive for us as owners, as we'd reap the benefits while simultaneously expanding our current user base.

[Dangermouse]

They can just be hand formed, can't they (body panels anyway - doors would pose a problem).

Time consuming and presumably expensive, but it would depend on how many cars per year they were thinking of making.

[DMCVegas]

Why has everyone seemed to neglect to mention that DMC (nor anybody else) has no way to produce the stainless body panels? Can't build new Deloreans without those, unless you make fiberglass replicas and paint the cars. I guess that's the worst case scenario?

This right here just proves my point.

http://2.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com/dev/57/70/4e0a242164ad6a457e58951ffd8a716a.jpg

[Iznodmad]

No official announcement has been made in this forum. We all know DMCH has members here, including SW and JE. They made the "announcement" via mass media to get their name out there again post BTTF craziness, to keep them in the public eye. The last "major" thing to be announced here by them directly was the pricing structure for their stage 3 engines. That didn't appear to do so well, and that is just an engine. There was no media blast about that to the general public. Also no formal response from them in this thread. Therefore this is just free marketing again via mass media, until proven otherwise.

I personally give kudos to DPI for being the only vendor to say anything at all about this subject. They are waaaayyyyy ahead of the game in being able to build a car from scratch, with a perfect blend of nostalgia and modernization. If DMCH were to try and build scratch cars, they would have to try and do better than what dpi can do right now.

[Rich W]

Why has everyone seemed to neglect to mention that DMC (nor anybody else) has no way to produce the stainless body panels?

http://www.pjgrady.co.uk/#!new-left-front-fender/c1ksy

[PJ Grady Inc.]

No official announcement has been made in this forum. We all know DMCH has members here, including SW and JE. They made the "announcement" via mass media to get their name out there again post BTTF craziness, to keep them in the public eye. The last "major" thing to be announced here by them directly was the pricing structure for their stage 3 engines. That didn't appear to do so well, and that is just an engine. There was no media blast about that to the general public. Also no formal response from them in this thread. Therefore this is just free marketing again via mass media, until proven otherwise.

I personally give kudos to DPI for being the only vendor to say anything at all about this subject. They are waaaayyyyy ahead of the game in being able to build a car from scratch, with a perfect blend of nostalgia and modernization. If DMCH were to try and build scratch cars, they would have to try and do better than what dpi can do right now.

As a vendor I'm going give you my two cents without saying where or why. Reproduction Delorean's are never going to happen so this whole thread is a moot point IMHO. Chalk it up to free publicity.
Rob

[Michael]

Why has everyone seemed to neglect to mention that DMC (nor anybody else) has no way to produce the stainless body panels? Can't build new Deloreans without those, unless you make fiberglass replicas and paint the cars. I guess that's the worst case scenario?


Please see post #33

[Dangermouse]

Please see post #33

Please see post #47, 56 and 59

[16949]

And aside from your feelings of alienation (which while I admittedly do not understand, that opinion is absolutely and rightfully yours to have), exactly what are you basing the remainder of your statements off of?

Simply put: Supply and Demand.

I bought a car *in part* because it was one of <9000 known cars of that model. Realistically, maybe 7000+500* allowing for DMCH to use up their pieces. And the man behind the car, is no longer around, the company is no longer around and at least some of the crucial tooling and dies having been sunk irretrievably to the bottom of the atlantic ocean. There is nothing good about more supply and less demand. High school economics.

Part of this is just truly bad PR. "“We have a lot of dead inventory, and the only way to monetize that is to build a car,” he said. “That’s found money, and that’s more money that we can put into developing reproduction parts.” <--- how does that sound to you?

Someone posted an article that said that they invested 1mm and have recurring revenue of 2.5mm 20 years later. I don't begrudge them making a profit. But what I don't hear in the article is what I would like to hear.. "We are exciting about new opportunities but our first commitment is to the owners of existing Deloreans, a one of a kind car that has survived 30+ years. We are honored to support those owners and will do everything we can to keep the dream alive while also respecting how special Deloreans really are."

Think about the difference. One is humbly communicating an appreciation for decades of business. One is all about monetizing more than 50x return on the original investment. Hey, maybe they were quoted out of context, I don't know.

*7500 being a finite number. 7000+325 per year being an essentially endless if not infinite number: quadrupling or more in my lifetime even at the 325/yr growth rate.

[DMCVegas]

Simply put: Supply and Demand.

I bought a car *in part* because it was one of <9000 known cars of that model. Realistically, maybe 7000+500* allowing for DMCH to use up their pieces. And the man behind the car, is no longer around, the company is no longer around and at least some of the crucial tooling and dies having been sunk irretrievably to the bottom of the atlantic ocean. There is nothing good about more supply and less demand. High school economics.

The problem though here is that simplistic high school economics just don't work in our world. Not in a world of short sales and derivatives. And along these lines we've been through far worse parts shortages before. Though I'll touch more on that in a second, the problem is that no one wants to bother researching any history about this.

And I've also got to say this to you, and I mean no offence. But if you bought this (or really ANY) car for any other reason than the simple "you liked it and bought it solely to benefit your own personal enjoyment", your ownership history is going to be a nightmare. You will worry over problems that you simply made up because they help justify the other justifications that you created as the excuse to buy this car. No car is ever a monetary investment by any means. And it doesn't matter what the story behind it is, if someone asks you, "Hey, why'd you buy a DeLorean?!" and you answer anything other than, "Because I wanted it, and that's all you need to know.", you are going to have a very bad experience.


Part of this is just truly bad PR. "“We have a lot of dead inventory, and the only way to monetize that is to build a car,” he said. “That’s found money, and that’s more money that we can put into developing reproduction parts.” <--- how does that sound to you?

Well, knowing what I do simply because I've been around for almost 20 years now in the community, researching things and following stories, that actually makes perfect sense to me because I know what he's talking about. And I'm not some "in-the-know" guy with "behind the scenes" connections. These are public stories. I might just be one of the few who follow them, but I digress...

Now before I begin, I'm going to do allot of writing here that if you or anyone else wants to know the answers, you MUST read. If you don't want to, that's fine. But don't anyone bother asking questions again if you're never take the time to actually learn a damn thing. Just stop posting now. As for anyone that wants to continue, I will try to keep this as short as possible:

When DMCL closed, the entire factory floor was cleared out in a hurry and eventually shipped off to KAPAC in Columbus, OH. From there KAPAC piddled around and sold the parts that they had sitting off of the shelves and in bins for the next almost 15 years. Many, and I do mean MANY parts for DMC-12s simply ceased to exist.

Later on when Steve Wynne completed the acquisition of KAPAC's inventory and moved everything down to Houston, James Espy told a nice tale of how one fateful morning an ex DMCH employee that was eager to get to lunch knocked over a massive bin with a forklift because he was in a hurry. When everyone rushed over to see what had happened, that's when they saw it: piles of multiple parts from a single bin just scattered all over the ground. Including ones that had their supplies exhausted years ago according to KAPAC. You see, go back and read my first sentance there. The Dunmurry plant was cleared out in a hurry. That apparently meant that they went down the production line and just grabbed whatever screws, bolts, compressors, alternators, mode switches, knobs, and whatever was sitting there in the parts bins, and just threw them into those mini dumpsters.

So when DMCH says that their parts inventory contains allot of "found money", they literally mean it. For years, not even Sol Shenk knew that he had enough parts to build new cars sitting right under his nose. Like Wynne first assumed when he stepped into that old warehouse, he'd see a bin, look in the top, and just assume that it was filled with only what was visible. No one knew that there were layers of hidden items in those deep bins.


Someone posted an article that said that they invested 1mm and have recurring revenue of 2.5mm 20 years later. I don't begrudge them making a profit. But what I don't hear in the article is what I would like to hear.. "We are exciting about new opportunities but our first commitment is to the owners of existing Deloreans, a one of a kind car that has survived 30+ years. We are honored to support those owners and will do everything we can to keep the dream alive while also respecting how special Deloreans really are."

First of all that someone was me. Again, this just proves my point that people only skim what they want to see, or just skip it entirely. But anyway...

Now I'm not trying to kiss anyone's ass here in the slightest. I'm just going to tell it like it is. You, and everyone else benefits more than you realize from DMCH.

Like I say, I first came into the community about 19 years ago. Not long after the DeLorean Mailing List started up having moved off of USENET. But I remember those dark times. We had 4 real vendors, and one of them was on a power trip outright "banning" people and refusing to sell them parts. Which with a then-dwindling parts supply where he was alleged to have the only missing pieces, as well as high as hell prices, and you still had to kiss that vendor's ass and NEVER post ANYTHING online, times were a whole lot tighter. Lots and lots of effort went into the DeLorean Parts Database. Which was an interactive app based off of the parts manual where you could just click on a part and find it's cross-referenced source from other cars. That is what we were down to doing. It's fantastic right now to be able to just point & click to have DMCH ship you off a set of brake pads. I've done the whole scanning through parts catalogs to stare at brake pad silhouettes, and the other staring at parts side by side, and even filing things on a bench to get them to fit. I can't say that I like it, let alone most of the new wave of owners would have the kind of grit it takes to do that.

I don't care that DMCH didn't publicly post some sort of groveling tribute. You know what impresses me? The thing that they're NOT doing: That despite all the shit that gets thrown their way, they're not quietly scanning the boards on here, writing down your VIN/Name/Email to ban you from ever buying parts from them. Go through that hellish nightmare first, and then get back to me. I've been there too, and was not happy with it.


Think about the difference. One is humbly communicating an appreciation for decades of business. One is all about monetizing more than 50x return on the original investment. Hey, maybe they were quoted out of context, I don't know.

*7500 being a finite number. 7000+325 per year being an essentially endless if not infinite number: quadrupling or more in my lifetime even at the 325/yr growth rate.

I ask this question though again: Exactly how many fenders, doors, or whatever has your car been through in the last 30+ years? It's dead inventory that doesn't affect us. And as the new and improved parts come out, we'll get those too.

And for the record, I HATE the stock binnacle. It is shit and should NEVER be reproduced. I had one of the last NOS units installed in my car. It was great for about 3 years. Then when I came back to my car on a Friday afternoon, I saw a small crack. Left for the weekend, and on Monday morning when I left for work the damn thing then had 3 huge splits. If DMCH reproduced that thing out of the same material just to get the appropriate "look", there is no way in holy hell I would buy one because I know it's just going to crack again. And you know what? DMCH would just take the blame for that, so why should they bother? Just recover the damn thing in leather and be happy.

[opethmike]

"if you're never"

if you'll*

[Delorean Industries]

That must have taken the better part of an hour to write up. Phew.

[DMCVegas]

"if you're never"

if you'll*

If the worst thing there to complain about is a typo or grammatical error, I'm fine with that.



That must have taken the better part of an hour to write up. Phew.

Nah. I type fast.

[opethmike]

38435

[sdg3205]

I wonder if we could successfully have a thread spoken only in memes

[opethmike]

I wonder if we could successfully have a thread spoken only in memes

38436

[sdg3205]

38436

38437

[opethmike]

38437

38438

[Dangermouse]

Houston are wasting their money.

Here's where the real clique Marques are at:

http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20151210-wet-bar-in-the-boot

The McBarfly ?

[DMCVegas]

I wonder if we could successfully have a thread spoken only in memes

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/56315787.jpg

Here, I started a thread to see if we can get this going.

http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?12901-MEME-FIGHT!-New-DeLoreans!

[16949]

Thanks for the mansplain on what the correct reason to buy a Delorean is.

[opethmike]

Thanks for the mansplain on what the correct reason to buy a Delorean is.

38502

[sdg3205]

The memes... they're taking over.

[davidc89]

38504

[opethmike]

38506

[16949]

38502

<3

[PJ Grady Inc.]

38506

My favorite breed!!!!
Rob