Forums

Anybody put a Delorean body on a Tesla Model 3

Anybody put a Delorean body on a Tesla Model 3

Both cars have a 95 inch wheelbase so it is theoretically possible. Anybody did this? May I contact you for advice? Yes, I know Rich's (of youtube rich rebuilds) friend did a Delorean with nissan leaf batteries & tesla motor. I want tesla everything and only keep the delorean outer cosmetic shell. Yes, I know that Rich's friend says it will be unsafe because it would be all batteries with no crumple zone, but I ride motorcycle with no helmet so I don't care about stupid crumple zones.

suddled | 20 maj 2019

He's my advice, wear a helmet!

jimglas | 20 maj 2019

good advice for anyone riding a donorcycle

lbowroom | 20 maj 2019

Same wheelbase makes it possible? Sure, ok. What about width, height, front and rear overhangs, component locations? Keep it a 5 seater? How "real" do you want it to be? I'm sure if you dropped off a Delorean and a Model 3 at Kindigit Design with a check for $400,000, they could make it nice for you.

If someone had already done it, I think we'd have seen pictures already, no?

emf4dgs | 20 maj 2019

FYI, Tesla Model 3 wheelbase is 113 inches, not 95 inches.

PTdenver | 20 maj 2019

where are you getting your info? I see 3 has a 113" wheelbase??

SteveWin1 | 20 maj 2019

Also, crumple zones protect other participants in a collision, not just the people in your vehicle. Its cool if you want to kill yourself by not wearing a helmet, but intentionally removing crumple zones is a dick move.

Magic 8 Ball | 20 maj 2019

I think I can get you into a Delorean Hovercrap for a reasonable price.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MI20YTgdc2A

dsvick | 20 maj 2019

"Anybody put a Delorean body on a Tesla Model 3"

Good god, why would anyone want to do that ... ?

spuzzz123 | 20 maj 2019

Ah cmon who wouldn’t enjoy driving a Delorean that actually performs like a Tesla.

jordanrichard | 20 maj 2019

Ok, you do realize that cars are no longer built using a “body on frame” construction anymore, correct? Also the floor pan of a DeLorean can not accomondate a battery pack.

lordmiller | 20 maj 2019

@dsvick Well said! Who would do such a horrible thing.

dmastro | 20 maj 2019

Maybe you could find someone with a DeLorean and swap... so one could drive a Tesla shell on a DeLorean and the other could drive a DeLorean shell on a Tesla.

EAPme | 20 maj 2019

Best of luck with your project. Probably the most esoteric question I've seen on this forum.

DeDarwin body might be a better fit.

TeslaMarque | 20 maj 2019

Please please do not take this deathmobile out on public roads. Modern cars are designed with the damage they can do to other cars in an accident taken into consideration and mitigated as much possible/legally required.

Even if you do manage to get this project to work, and I’m all for experimenting, just make sure you do not put others in danger and only operate on private property.

Thanks!

coleAK | 20 maj 2019

As others have said to do what your asking it would be putting a Tesla drivetrain in a DeLorean. And yes if you had enough money I’m sure somone would figure it out. So a nice DMC is $40-50k and a model 3 is ~$50k so is guess you could have one converted for $150-$250k

Wait a quick search and somone is already making parts.
http://www.teslorean.com

tomasrey88 | 20 maj 2019

coleAK, thanks for that link, man! He lives in Texas, too! I'm gonna contact him and see if we can meet. I wanna buy this guy lunch!

derotam | 21 maj 2019

....going to warn the guy to watch out for a crazy dude coming his way...

lordmiller | 21 maj 2019

@derotam LOL! Hilarious.

PTdenver | 21 maj 2019

jordanrichard , crown vics were the last body on car, before that prior to 84 corvettes also sadly now .... none

ReD eXiLe ms us | 22 maj 2019

Unibody construction with engineered ctumple zones... works. Helps keep occupants alive, and mostly uninjured, in most accidental collisions. That is, I think, a good thing. Sure, we could go back to drum brakes, bias ply tires, plate glass, and eliminate seat belts and air bags to satisfy the nostalgic tendencies of those who think Amercans are coddled 'too much' by what they term 'the nanny state'. I remember how when I was a kid the gasperations from a tailpipe were always visible. I'm sure there are those that miss that sight, along with the odor, and the smog.

dmastro | 22 maj 2019

I find it ironic that so many are espousing the modern safety features of Tesla, when I see so many posts shouting down people who suggest that Tesla should incorporate such features as blind-spot monitoring, cross traffic alerts, HUD displays to keep eyes on the road, and so on.

Magic 8 Ball | 22 maj 2019

@dmastro Everything you talk about is a matter of opinion as if the feature adds safety if it is there or in the way TESLA implements it. When people express their opinions without backing it up with something of more substance then it everyone's duty to push back especially when people try to represent those opinions as fact.

Magic 8 Ball | 22 maj 2019

I butchered the first try:

@dmastro Everything you talk about is a matter of opinion, whether or not a feature adds safety or if TESLA's implementation is less safe than others (I.E. BSM). Pushing back on opinions, if you disagree, is not irony it is mandatory.

dmastro | 22 maj 2019

@ M8B The features I mentioned have been tested and proven as fact. I'm not going to link every study, nor do I see most posts attaching relevant links to doctoral studies, NHTSA publications, and the like.

If that is your position, I suggest you ask others to present empirical data studies on the effectiveness of safety glass vs plate glass, crumple zones, etc.

Magic 8 Ball | 22 maj 2019

@dmastro You are full of it. My insurance company determines the value of safety features, not some biased study that my insurance pays no attention to.

lbowroom | 22 maj 2019

dmastro - The car has BSM and audible alert. I would welcome cross traffic and HUD too, but I don't deride Tesla for not having it.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 22 maj 2019

In Los Angeles County, as periods such as Spring Break or Memorial Day approach, public parks are decorated with the crashed heaps of hulking huge American cars in order to warn teenagers of the dangers of drunk driving. I'm pretty sure those displays never feature cars that were built after I was born in 1967. I've never seen a wreck among them with deployed airbags, for instance.

dmastro | 22 maj 2019

@M8B: I totally agree with respect to the insurance statement. My insurance company provides better rates for newfangled safety features such as BSM and cross traffic alerts - because their actuarial tables say those features will increase safety and decrease payouts.

@lbowroom: Then you're not someone I'm talking about. And I'm not talking about threads where Tesla was "derided" for not having these features, but rather someone would make a suggestion that it would be nice to have - and then was promptly shouted down by all the Tesla-guardians.

Once again, M8B has responded by changing the whole point of a post. Getting back to my point - simply that there have been many instances where people were shouted down for making a suggestion for safety features (or I will now add technology advances), but the same people are espousing them when it conveniently fits their argument in this thread. i.e. talking out of both sides of their mouth

ReD eXiLe ms us | 24 maj 2019

dmastro: Many posts here, and elsewhere, link to articles by the IIHS as 'evidence' of their conclusions. Some are willing to accept those as 'proof' of a given position. Thing is, I know the IIHS is not an official regulatory body, just as Consumer Reports isn't. The IIHS is a group formed to calculate and measure things of importance to the Insurance Industry, not to protect occupants of vehicles. Thus, it is more important to the IIHS to gather cost of repair and replacement data than to ensure the wellbeing of vehicle occupants. Further, though no official crash test exceeds about 40 MPH, video of IIHS crash tests seem a mite faster, I'm guessing between 45 MPH and 60 MPH instead -- no, I have no proof of this suspicion. I only have my own eyes. Invariably, when what is purported to be the 'same test' results in more severe damage in IIHS video as compared to NHTSA video of crash tests. You may disagree.

Pardon me, but as a longtime 'car guy' there are certain concepts regarding vehicular safety equipment I had come to consider indesputable common knowledge. I was unaware that you might require a reference whenever I refer to such points. For some reason, you have expressed doubt over the viability of Auto Safety Glass, Unibody Construction and Crumple Zones, Drum Brakes or Disc Brakes, Seat Belts and Airbags, Bias Ply or Steel Belted Radial Tires. OK. Apparently, like Carl Thompson, you have decided that I simply make shit up all the time. Fuck.

The Sordid History of Auto Safety Glass
https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/the-sordid-history-of-auto-safety-glas...

Why Used Car Frame Inspections are Crucial
https://www.usedcarinspections.org/frame.html

Edmunds | Brakes: Drum vs. Disc
https://www.edmunds.com/car-technology/brakes-drum-vs-disc.html

Seatbelt versus seatbelt and airbag injuries in a single motor vehicle crash
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4366828/

Everything you wanted to know about tires, explained
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/news/a18296/anatomy...

dmastro | 24 maj 2019

@red: I think the point of my posts here went over your head.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 24 maj 2019

dmastro: Not likely. More likely your point was not adequately expressed to allow for adequate communication. Was mine?

dmastro | 24 maj 2019

@red: Since you didn't understand my post, allow me to simplify:

- Several people in this thread (and many others) have shown themselves to be hypocrites.

I wasn't intending to argue merits of different safety advances. I'm sure all the information in your dissertation is enlightening, but irrelevant to my statement.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 24 maj 2019

dmastro: I may have missed the hypocrisies you speak of. I tend to concentrate on the misinformation, lies, innuendo, and rhetoric employed by Tesla NaySayers instead, so as to expose the ineffectiveness and inaccuracy of the positions they champion. I tend to avoid the catfighting that revolves around the shifting positions of others around other issues. I have come across those that make false statements claiming Tesla Enthusiasts are not willing to 'face reality' or engage in 'open debate'. When someone makes such a false statement, I tend to call them out on it, asking that they provide examples. Not surprisingly, they never do. I'm unlikely to peruse every post in this thread sifting for some hypocrisy in what are pretty obviously statements of opinion. It is blatant statements of lies, misrepresented as fact, that concern me most. Carry on.