No politics... but seriously How long do you think we have left with these cars?

[73chgrSE]

Remember that Rush song Red Barchetta?  Feels like we are getting close to the "motor law". All the big 3 have pretty much said electrics are on the way soon. Planning to do a Tesla engine swap anyone??? LOL. I say within 10 years only millionaires will own classic cars in their private museums and probably wont be able to drive them on public roads.

[70 sublime]

I say at least another 50 years
Might not even be electric by then either is the power of choice

I am a farmer and can not see a battery powered tractor ever replacing what I have now to get the job done

After 50 years I will be 106 years old so will not really care by then 

[Mike DC]

            

Follow the money.  

What industry stands to get richer by kicking classic cars off the road?  I don't see one.  Classics don't cut into modern car sales much.  Detroit caters to its classic fan base rather than fighting it.    

Environmental groups?  Car guys are terrified of them but they don't have much real power.  (Look at any pipeline or drilling or logging issue.)  If they were capable of getting our cars off the road I think they would have done it already.  They were lobbying against us and setting Humvee dealerships on fire 20 years ago.  

     
I'm more worried about safety regulations and govt monitoring doing it.  Even then, I suspect the "ban" will be economic rather than legal.  You will be able to drive a classic on the road as long as you pay a crazy-high insurance rate.  If you get in a wreck then you may be guilty by default.  Your car isn't packed full of electronic driving aids and there's no onboard data recorder to prove your side of the story.      

---------------------------------


I wish the truck guys would quit doing this shit on public roads.  
It's begging for a legal crackdown on principle.  This is why we can't have nice things.      

[RallyeMike]

Follow the money. 

What industry stands to get richer by kicking classic cars off the road?  I don't see one.  Classics don't cut into modern car sales much.  Detroit caters to its classic fan base rather than fighting it.   

Environmental groups?  Car guys are terrified of them but they don't have much real power.  (Look at any pipeline or drilling or logging issue.)  If they were capable of getting our cars off the road I think they would have done it already.  They were lobbying against us and setting Humvee dealerships on fire 20 years ago. 

     

I'm more worried about safety regulations and govt monitoring doing it.  Even then, I suspect the "ban" will be economic rather than legal.  You will be able to drive a classic on the road as long as you pay a crazy-high insurance rate.  If you get in a wreck then you may be guilty by default.  Your car isn't packed full of electronic driving aids and there's no onboard data recorder to prove your side of the story. 

I think you are close to spot-on. The coming revolution will be community computerized drive control where all the cars are functioning together. We will become like the steam car or Model T where technology makes operating our cars difficult with the other cars on the road. You'll be able to drive your classic on side roads or around the neighborhood but probably not the highway.... at least in urban areas.

Everyone says we are going electric, but reaching 100% is going to take a long time....if it even happens. GM's recent announcement to switch to 100% electric passenger cars and SUVs by 2035 is extremely optimistic. It won't happen, and if they do it they'll be missing out on a lot of fossil fuel car sales. Gas is plentiful and relatively inexpensive and so it will remain part of our transportation system for a long time to come yet. 

[hemi-hampton]

I hate those Trucks blowing all that Black Smoke in your Face. What I want to know is how are they going to dispose of all those Dead Junk 6 foot long 3 feet wide 500 pound Toxic Batteries? Just dig a big hole & Bury them? Like they do with Radioactive Chemicals? That will be a huge Enviromental Danger.

[Lennard]

I agree on the stupidity of rolling coal.  Sometimes you can't even see the cars in front of you anymore because they dissappear in the black smoke.  Dangerous and stupid.

[Mopar Nut]

Here's a eDart.

https://chargedevs.com/features/the-edart-my-1974-dodge-dart-swinger-electric-conversion/

[ACUDANUT]

 As long as you live, or decide to sell.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

A short video worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqppRC37OgI

[Mike DC]

A short video worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqppRC37OgI

That video guy doesn't mention that EV batteries have a fair amount of potential for recycling.  And in the broad discussion he entirely forgot about nuclear power, geothermal, hydro, tidal.  Those are whole massive industries left out of the discussion.  He also forgot about the non-battery methods of storing electricity (hydro, hydrogen, thermal, kinetic, flow batteries, etc).  Is this some kind of selective amnesia?  

Then he cheerfully presents hydrocarbons without mentioning what it's doing to the arctic, or the people living in fracking regions, or the long-term prospects for the current fossil fuel resources of all kinds.  And it's cute how he brings up electrical resources being in hostile foreign regions, but he never even mentions that little issue with fossil fuel resources (middle eastern oil).  

The omissions make more sense when you realize that PragerU's primary funding comes from two Texas billionaires in the natural gas fracking business.  

[NHCharger]

Gas powered vehicles have been around for over 100 years. To think that everyone will be willing to switch to electric in just 15 years.......
The US power grid does not have the capacity the handle the increase in demand and there is no way to improve it that quickly given todays highly regulated and complex energy laws.
This goal will get pushed back once they realize that the US taxpayers won't be happy with all energy costs doubling, or worse.

Right now I'm more concerned about being taxed out of using my antique cars. Lawmakers are considering a VMT tax (vehicle miles traveled). Vehicles without current modern electronics can't be monitored so they might just assess an annual flat rate to any vehicle that they can't track.

[chargered]

You can't really answer the question without politics.  The amount of time left really depends on which side has control.

[Mike DC]

Right now I'm more concerned about being taxed out of using my antique cars. Lawmakers are considering a VMT tax (vehicle miles traveled). Vehicles without current modern electronics can't be monitored so they might just assess an annual flat rate to any vehicle that they can't track.

The miles-driven tax is coming because EVs don't pay gasoline taxes.  

Gasoline taxes have been the ideal way to tax miles driven up to now.  It works, it's easy/practical to do, and it targets heavier vehicles that do more road damage.

[John_Kunkel]

A short video worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqppRC37OgI

Worth watching if you agree with their bias.

"PragerU, short for Prager University, is an American 501(c)(3) non-profit media company that creates videos on various political, economic, and philosophical topics from an American conservative perspective. The organization was co-founded by Allen Estrin and talk show host and writer Dennis Prager in 2009."

As previously stated, it's hard to discuss this without politics entering the fray.

[AKcharger]

I think we'll feel a hit in the wallet for fuel long before they're banned. Furl cost go up in 2 years banned...2100

[Fitz73Chrgr]

I don't think ICE vehicles will be banned in the more conservative states, but fuel will become harder to find and more expensive.  So, I agree with AK that many people will be priced out before being legally required to sell.  Classic ICE vehicles will likely, IMO, be outlawed in left-wing states in my lifetime.  California is already pushing for no new ICE vehicle sales in 15 years.

We will also see more and more EV retrofit kits for our cars in the future.  In maybe 50 years, I can envision most classic cars on the road being EV conversions.

[Mike DC]

  
Guys like us, we find a 318 car and we wanna put a 440 in it.  We find the 440 and we wanna stroke it to 512 inches.  

Gas prices are a thing for daily drivers.  They don't have much power over weekend toys or preserved classics.  It would take some big number like $20/gallon to wipe out our hobby and that would be impractical for other reasons.   When the average American is driving an electric car to work there will still be lots of other demand for gasoline on this continent.  


There's another big factor in this - when most of the country has switched to EVs, that doesn't increase all the pressures to get our cars off the road.  It reduces them.  EVs will drop the demand for gasoline, and that REDUCES the market price of gas. Lawmakers will be raising taxes on gasoline just to keep our pump prices from dropping.  And when gasoline burners become rarer on the roads, that will reduce the urgent feelings (in the public, greenies, lawmakers, etc) to get rid of them.  

[MoparMike68]

A short video worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqppRC37OgI

That video guy doesn't mention that EV batteries have a fair amount of potential for recycling.  And in the broad discussion he entirely forgot about nuclear power, geothermal, hydro, tidal.  Those are whole massive industries left out of the discussion.  He also forgot about the non-battery methods of storing electricity (hydro, hydrogen, thermal, kinetic, flow batteries, etc).  Is this some kind of selective amnesia?  

Then he cheerfully presents hydrocarbons without mentioning what it's doing to the arctic, or the people living in fracking regions, or the long-term prospects for the current fossil fuel resources of all kinds.  And it's cute how he brings up electrical resources being in hostile foreign regions, but he never even mentions that little issue with fossil fuel resources (middle eastern oil).  

The omissions make more sense when you realize that PragerU's primary funding comes from two Texas billionaires in the natural gas fracking business.  

What's a fair amount of potential? Potential means we're not there yet and also means it's all being trashed at this moment.
Hydro, tidal and geothermal are weak energy sources and still require fossil fuels to manufacture and produce.
Nuclear, the process for mining/refining uranium ore and making reactor fuel all require huge amounts of energy
and we're continuing to perfect this energy source and have been for a long time which is fine but we're still not there.
We can easily become energy independent in America with fossil fuels and will no longer need middle eastern oil.
I understand this energy source won't last forever but shutting it down now will have extreme consequence on national security
without a better alternative in place and as of now there isn't one.

The Arctic, wasn't that supposed to disappear decades ago?  Since 2005 the polar bear population has
risen more then 30% that's the highest in 50 years. Every ten years we have 10 years left unless we address the "climate
crisis" and yet the cleanest air in the world is in the Antarctica.
Make no mistake I'm not against clean energy but every time it's bought up current energy prices skyrocket
because they require Government subsidies to sustain them. Just look at the prices rising at the pumps already, Here we go again!

Solar Energy companies come to your house, they've been to mine several times, and offer their product for close
to nothing because the Government will pick up the tab, but guess what? The Government don't make money they
spend yours. The solar companies like any other competitor assures you how great their product is until you
purchase it and the cost starts to rise and now it's as much if not more then your traditional electric and when
you cancel they'll charge to remove all that junk they put on your roof. Hopefully an electric trash truck will come
and haul it off to the landfill.

[Mike DC]

 
Is energy policy a team sport?  Renewables vs fossil fuel?  

We can easily become energy independent in America with fossil fuels and will no longer need middle eastern oil.

It's nowhere near that simple.  Having a ton of "producible" oil "in the ground" is not the same thing as being able to produce it quickly & affordably & consistently, over the long term.  You might have a billion dollars in the bank but it won't make you very rich if your withdrawals are limited to $1000/year.    

The Arctic, wasn't that supposed to disappear decades ago?  Since 2005 the polar bear population has
risen more then 30% that's the highest in 50 years. Every ten years we have 10 years left unless we address the "climate
crisis" and yet the cleanest air in the world is in the Antarctica.

Polar bears - IIRC that's a myth. There is no reliable data on their populations decades ago.  Canada/Alaska also started giving them more protections from hunting/trapping a few decades ago too, which would logically help their numbers grow.    

Antarctic air is clear because it's a desert.  Everyone knows the place is butt-cold, but it's also butt-dry.  The snow & ice took thousands of years to accumulate.  It's also the farthest place on earth from modern human/industrial activity.  

As for the 'every 10 years' thing, IMO neither side has a great record of predictions.  The climate deniers' record is certainly no better than the scientists'.  In past years/decades the deniers were mocking the idea that temps would rise and the arctic would be melting at all.  

Make no mistake I'm not against clean energy but every time it's bought up current energy prices skyrocket
because they require Government subsidies to sustain them. Just look at the prices rising at the pumps already, Here we go again!

Solar Energy companies come to your house, they've been to mine several times, and offer their product for close
to nothing because the Government will pick up the tab, but guess what? The Government don't make money they
spend yours. The solar companies like any other competitor assures you how great their product is until you
purchase it and the cost starts to rise and now it's as much if not more then your traditional electric and when
you cancel they'll charge to remove all that junk they put on your roof. Hopefully an electric trash truck will come
and haul it off to the landfill.

We subsidize the living shit out of fossil fuels.  Look at the indirect expenditures.  It's the whole reason why we have ever cared about the middle east (and why they ever cared about us).  The wars, the occupations, all of it. 

How much do we spend to patrol/secure the oil shipping lanes around the world?  Look at all the stupid-cheap deals that oil companies get for drilling on govt land.  Pipelines get built & protected.  Oil spills get cleaned up.  People's land gets screwed up from fracking and there is no legal recourse.  Etc.  This stuff is ALL fossil fuel subsidies.      

All that, the multiple wars, and we haven't even covered the biggest one:  Fossil fuels play at least some role in climate change.  Probably a major role.  If half of Florida goes underwater in the next century, what's the dollar cost of that?  What about all the damage worldwide?  It's too big to realistically calculate.


My original beef was that the PragerU video is propaganda piece.  I never tried to argue that renewables should replace all fossil fuels tomorrow morning (because they can't).  I'm in favor of whatever gets the job done with the least damage.  Right now that appears to be a combination of many different methods.    

[ACUDANUT]

  Can anybody agree on anything anymore ?

[73chgrSE]

I'm just trying to drive and enjoy mine as much as I can while I can. It sucks that covid has pretty much shut down most car related events though. I say by 2030 we are either priced out of it with gas prices, insurance and other regulations or they will just be outright banned in north america. Specifically cars over 25 years old. I wont even be 60 then and I really feel like I'm gonna miss out on a lot of potential wheel time. 

[LaOtto70Charger]

The cars can live on with gas or even different propulsion systems.  Not like there are no steam locomotives anymore. How and who uses them will change as the costs keep going up. Which will probably result in most being garaged before being outlawed.  

Model Ts are good example. Not many of those ever out due to a host of issues.  I personally stopped driving my Charger until I upgraded the brakes because everyone else stopped so much different in 2000s than in 1993.  

[Homerr]

  Can anybody agree on anything anymore ?

I agree with Mike DC.


I don't think gas is really ever going away to power our classic cars but in the coming decades it might become more expensive.  Instead of our cheap gas we still have maybe it will become the equivalent over time, in say 15 years, to $20/gallon in today's dollars.  So maybe over that time we drive the cars less, but it's not like they will be sent to the crusher.


During the pandemic my whole world has been turned upside-down.  I used to commute and drove about 15-18k miles a year.  Since March 2020 I've maybe done 400 miles, just local stuff to the grocery store mostly.  My office gave up their lease and we are all virtual, even post pandemic.  I've come from waiting for things to return to the old 'normal' to liking working from home, not sure I could be bothered to commute any more.  Not sure where my thinking will be in a year.  On my block 3 of my neighbors have bought Teslas in the last 8 months and I'm thinking 'why?'.  Their cars sit at home as much as mine do since they're not really driving much either.

I'm not really down on driving and cars as a hobby, really the opposite.  Now that I'm not dumping money in to gas/maintenance on my DD I'm spending it all on the toys.  I just spent around $5k on parts to restore my project cars.  The last year has been a reset for me where driving is a fun luxury instead of a daily stress.

The future isn't something to be fearful about.  We humans are very adaptable.

[MoparMike68]

Polar bears - IIRC that's a myth. There is no reliable data on their populations decades ago.  Canada/Alaska also started giving them more protections from hunting/trapping a few decades ago too, which would logically help their numbers grow.   
 
If there's no reliable data then why where protections put in place? Within the same sentence we went from no reliable data
decades ago, too protections decades ago.

Antarctic air is clear because it's a desert.  Everyone knows the place is butt-cold, but it's also butt-dry.  The snow & ice took thousands of years to accumulate.  It's also the farthest place on earth from modern human/industrial activity. 

I believe it's part of the "Globe" or we going by area now?

As for the 'every 10 years' thing, IMO neither side has a great record of predictions.  The climate deniers' record is certainly no better than the scientists'.  In past years/decades the deniers were mocking the idea that temps would rise and the arctic would be melting
at all.

As previously stated it's still there and it's not supposed to be according to the science, also if it's the furthest place on earth
from modern human/industrial activity that would make any activity a natural occurrence and not caused by man, no money in
that way of thinking.
Reasonably speaking it's becoming tiresome that the biggest advocates for climate are the biggest offenders, whether it's
3 or 4 mansions, private jets, etc. while pricing the average American out of the market trying to combat such.

[MoparMike68]

 Can anybody agree on anything anymore ?

Yes,
Chargers