I wonder if it will run on trash?

But can it take me to 1955?

if i had the money I would be on this in a second

Ever wonder why no-one ever builds a new factory in Michigan? Or buys an old used one?

My guess? No one wants union-mentality Michigan workers.

say goodbye to those white lines in the road...

...Where we're going, we don't need roads...

I would be disappointed if they were to create this automobile and not update the mechanics of it in some way or another, or even update some of the body panels. To me, it would be unwise to release a product that was intended to attract buyers based off of novelty and nostalgia -- just poor business really. I would hope that engineers and designers can create something that is faithful but also contemporary. Plus, it would seem like it would cost MORE to recreate old parts than to use newer ones. Do they still even manufacture some of the fixtures that go into this thing?

I'm seriously considering this one.

Neat car, but I've heard that it's hard to get in and out of one when parked next to other cars in a parking lot. The doors tend to open a little too wide. ...not that this can't also be a problem with a standard coupe today.

@ibelli:
They're obviously going to replace the electronic in the cabin (e.g. integrated LockZilla), and let's hope they upgrade those rocker arms. Oy.

My question is: Are they going with the first series beveled hood? Or the second series flat hood? The picture has the beveled hood.

@newglactic:
The DMC gullwing doors need only 14" of clearance to open fully. Unlike other gullwings which need two feet or more.

@ibelli: Hybrid would be nice.

Now I can finally do something with that Flux Capacitor I bought on eBay! Under the Sea dance hear I come!

Why would you ruin the coolest 80's nostalgia car by making it a hybrid? Yeah, let's remake the 57' Chevy Bel Air but let's make it better by making it a hybrid!!!

@jos: I'm totally holding out for the trash-powered one I saw spy shots of in Car & Driver & Time Machine.

I live just a few miles from the "factory". I see DeLoreans next to me on the street pretty regularly. I may have to take some spy photos for you guys. The building (warehouse) has the sweet DMC logo on it.

meh. I'll get excited when the pegasus makes its comeback. Though it would be rad if DMC supplied a bolt on body kit to give those italian knockoffs some competition.

@BloggyMcBlogBlog: 1955? Hell, I'll settle with 1985.

1.21 gigawatt's!

hehe sorry had to do it

@giraffesack:
Very clever :)

John Delorean lived the American dream... make $2 mil and spend it all on blow

Stainless Steel Again?? I want a car I don't have to wash with Barkeeper's Friend :(

But, does it blend?

as someone who lives literally 200 metres away from the original production site (derriaghy, NI) i find this quite interesting.

Lets hope they keep to the true design of the originals

From what I understand, these are all being made with collector parts. Nothing new here.

@jos:
Mr Fusion powers the time circuits and the flux capacitor. But the internal combustion engine runs on ordinary gasoline, it always has. There's not going to be a gas station around here until sometime in the next century. Without gasoline, we can't get the DeLorean up to 88 miles per hour.

said this in the last post about this as well. but the PRV6 was a turd engine a quarter century ago... and it's absolutely ridiculous to use today.

there were newer variations of the same engine that were at least a *little* better. but the original used in the DMC-12 was and is lame.

keepin' it real in this instance seems like a waste of time and money for everyone involved. the same body and platform with some newer mechanicals would be much more worth the $57k... i mean... it's not like you can't buy a used DeLorean if you wanted an original so bad.

Reminds me to buy stock in Windex.

@StackyBotrus: Actually, I said the same thing, but Ray Wert at Jalopnik confirmed that its going to be 100% new.

Pretty much have to improve on the horsepower. Didn't they use AMC engines? Not easy to place an order for those. I don't think they even use them in Jeeps anymore.

@x23: "...but the PRV6 was a turd engine a quarter century ago... and it's absolutely ridiculous to use today."

That original engine was/is GM's 2.8L V6. Crappy characteristics for an engine, but it was reliable as heck with minimal maintenance.

The generally-accepted replacement that's been used since is a GM 3.4L V6. Basically, it's a bored-out 2.8L engine with lots of other supporting mods to bring it into the 'modern' era of engine design. However, the block casting is so similar that it'll drop into anything the old 2.8L originally fit into.

Of course, it'd be fun to shoe-horn a hi-po 4.3L into it - generally considered to be a V8 with a pair of cylinders lopped off.

Forget the hoverboards and the powerlaces....this is what I want now. – Ross Greenberg

That original engine was/is GM's 2.8L V6. Crappy characteristics for an engine, but it was reliable as heck with minimal maintenance.

i have no idea where you got that information from. the original engine was a PRV B28F V6 engine. jointly developed by Peugeot / Renault / Volvo in the late '70s. the only other car in North America that had it was the Volvo 280 (i think the 780 might have used it a bit too).

it has zero to do with the GM 2.8L V6 short of the displacement and similar power output.

yes. plenty of people do GM swaps into DeLoreans. that doesn't mean the original engines are in any way related. plenty of people do GM swaps into Jaguar XJs... doesn't mean the Jaguar I6 is actually a GM engine.

and the 4.3 isn't generally considered... it *is* a 350 missing some cylinders. a Northstar or Shortstar or 3.8 Turbo or even a 3800 S/C would all be higher on my list than a 4.3 though. if they would work that is.

Does it come with the flux capacitor? :) Damn, I love to have this car!