http://detroit.craigslist.org/mcb/cto/3468952321.html
http://detroit.craigslist.org/mcb/cto/3468952321.html
I almost bought one of those once for fun...it was much cheaper.
That would be neat with a longer range.
I have a friend who is restoring ine of those, it is crude to say the least.
What's crappier than a Le Car? ...an electric Le Car.
JohnyHachi6 wrote: What's crappier than a Le Car? ...an electric Le Car.
Man, I kinda had the same thought.
I'd love to have that for my short city commute, though. I was going to build an electric at one point, but realized I had absolutely no need of another project.
I definitely have a soft sport for electric cars in general, and I like quirky old cars too, but to stuff hundreds of pounds of lead acid batteries into a car that started off with dubious initial quality 30 years ago just sounds like a terrible idea.
JohnyHachi6 wrote: What's crappier than a Le Car? ...an electric Le Car.
Not all LeCars are crappy:
Just saying... 
In reply to SVreX:
Fast and crappy is still crappy.
Crappy I would love to own and drive, but still crappy all the same.
I actually started looking to see if there was an R5 body kit you could put on the Lectric Leopard. That would be awesome. Redefine "all show no go".
Still want that thing, though. Damn. I bet at some point in time, somewhere, a car was manufactured that I don't want. But that's purely a theory at this point.
dculberson wrote: In reply to SVreX: Fast and crappy is still crappy. Crappy I would love to own and drive, but still crappy all the same.
You have a weird perspective.
As far as I'm concerned, there is no definition of "crappy" that could possibly include an R5 Turbo.
SVreX wrote:dculberson wrote: In reply to SVreX: Fast and crappy is still crappy. Crappy I would love to own and drive, but still crappy all the same.You have a weird perspective. As far as I'm concerned, there is no definition of "crappy" that could possibly include an R5 Turbo.
To be honest, I have never driven one. But I imagine the build quality and fit and finish and parts quality are no higher than contemporary Renaults - which is to say abysmal by even the lax standards of the time, and absolutely crap box level by today's standards.
My perspective is speed alone can make a car fun but doesn't make it "not crappy." Crappy is a quality thing, not a performance thing.
dculberson wrote: To be honest, I have never driven one. But I imagine the build quality and fit and finish and parts quality are no higher than contemporary Renaults - which is to say abysmal by even the lax standards of the time, and absolutely crap box level by today's standards. My perspective is speed alone can make a car fun but doesn't make it "not crappy." Crappy is a quality thing, not a performance thing.
Actually, the 5 Turbo had a bespoke interior unique to the model and each car was basically hand built in Dieppe. They don't share as much with the plain-jane 5 street car as you assume.
(The later 5 Turbo II replaced the lightweight body panels with steel and swapped the bespoke interior for the regular 5's Tupperware mess, which is indeed quite cheap - but average for the time.)
The funny thing is that you are wrong about the "fast" part. 158 horsepower!!! Wowee zowee! 
there's one of these in Lansing, MI at University Foreign Car. Owned by one of the employees. It's a basket case, and is sitting in their spare lot. He also owns numerous Citroens. So... yeah.
SlickDizzy wrote: The funny thing is that you are wrong about the "fast" part. 158 horsepower!!! Wowee zowee!
You sure?
IIFC, there were three different hp levels available for the R5. 160 hp, 185 hp, and 200 hp. There was also the R5 Maxi Turbo which hit something like 350 hp.
The 200 hp version was good for 6.6 seconds 0-60 with a top speed of 124. I'm pretty sure it won at Monte Carlo in 1981, as well as Tour de Corse and the Portugal Rally.
SlickDizzy wrote: The funny thing is that you are wrong about the "fast" part. 158 horsepower!!! Wowee zowee!
Fast is relative ... 158 horsepower is a rocket ship compared to the LeCar!
SVreX wrote:SlickDizzy wrote: The funny thing is that you are wrong about the "fast" part. 158 horsepower!!! Wowee zowee!You sure? IIFC, there were three different hp levels available for the R5. 160 hp, 185 hp, and 200 hp. There was also the R5 Maxi Turbo which hit something like 350 hp. The 200 hp version was good for 6.6 seconds 0-60 with a top speed of 124. I'm pretty sure it won at Monte Carlo in 1981, as well as Tour de Corse and the Portugal Rally.
If we are talking street cars, they never made more than 158HP, and I am positive on that. Naturally the actual race cars had more tweaking than the homologation models, much like how the Sport Quattro race cars put out 444HP while the homologation version only made 302. They were allowed to use some absurd race gas back then; I think paraffin was one of the main ingredients 
Just to clarify, there is no such car as a "Renault R5." It is a Renault 5.
Who in the world said we were talking street cars?
If I mentioned Monte Carlo, I kind of doubt I was referring to a street car. Since it was primarily designed for rallying, I think it could be argued that the street version was actually DE-TUNED.
The only thing I said was that not all LeCars are crappy.
SVreX wrote: Who in the world said we were talking street cars?
I knew YOU weren't, but dculberson mentioned not having ever driven one but that he was sure it was fast and crappy; which would imply a street car. My whole and only point is that, ironically, the street cars are not terribly fast but they are also not crappy since they were basically coachbuilt.
If you ever look at some of the places that tune these your eyes will water at how expensive it is to get more power. The Maxi in particular had a lot of rare parts including anti-lag and exotic alloy internals that are simply unfeasible on a street car. It seems like the upper power limit on a streetable 5 Turbo is around 250HP.
You'll need to log in to post.
