If you’re looking for bad automotive ideas, there are degrees of bad. Sketchy engine swaps are one thing, impossibly rare project cars are another, but if you really want to scare yourself, you have to dip into the world of fiberglass-bodied kit cars. And that’s exactly what we’re going to do today.
Yesterday’s battle of the rarities ended up in a closer finish than I expected. I thought the Studebaker wagon was going to run away with it. But that REO resonated with a lot of you, and the old Speed Wagon managed to just squeak out a win. If that’s the way you want it, baby.
I’m of two minds about this one. My dad loved Studebakers, so I’d certainly be interested in fixing one up in his honor. But I think I’d prefer either a Hawk or a Lark; I just like the styling better. That Speed Wagon is from one of my favorite eras of design (which I mislabeled as art deco yesterday; actually it’s streamline moderne), and I have an affinity for old rusty flatbed trucks. I don’t know what I’d do with it, but if I had to haul one of these home, it would be the REO.
The whole kit car phenomenon has always fascinated me. I’m not sure I have it in me to ever build one, but the desire is there. There’s just something about the idea of taking apart an ordinary car and bolting its bits onto a fiberglass body to create something totally different that really appeals to me. But the thought of buying a kit car that someone else built gives me the willies. I’ve seen how other people take care of their cars; the idea of half-assed deferred maintenance on something built from components is terrifying.
Nevertheless, we’re going to look at two of them today. One is the classic VW-based kit car, but with a twist, and the other is a more recent build designed to mimic an old hot rod. Let’s check them out.
1965 Invader GT Electric – $5,750
Motor/drivetrain: 34-horsepower DC motor, unknown transmission, RWD
Location: San Jose, CA
Odometer reading: 15,000 miles
Operational status: Not drivable; batteries are shot
When you start looking into the history of kit cars, you find a lot of dreamers, crackpots, and could-have-beens. For every Bruce Meyers success story, you find a dozen or more failed attempts. This car, the Invader GT from Autokit Industries, was a minor success, but it has a wild origin story. Originally designed by a guy named David Loring, its design was stolen and modified by Autokit’s founder, Bruce Weeks. Weeks sold “thousands” (best number I could find) of Invader kits in the late 1960s and early ’70s before selling the tooling to an eccentric inventor named Roy Kaylor. Kaylor made electric conversions for VW Beetles, and apparently wanted to sell complete electric Invaders, but never got around to it. Kaylor ended up on the TV show Hoarders, because of piles of junk strewn across more than 150 acres of California redwood forest, including the Invader GT molds. The last information I could find says that Kaylor lost his battle with Santa Cruz County and had to start cleaning up his property, which means the molds are probably gone now. But the good news is the forest is being restored.
I suspect, but have no way of knowing for sure, that this car was converted using a Kaylor kit, possibly by Roy Kaylor himself. It’s powered by a NetGain Warp 9 electric motor and a bunch of old-school 12 volt batteries, which once upon a time gave it a top speed of 50 miles an hour. The batteries are toast now, so it isn’t going anywhere under its own power right now. The seller suggests using Nissan Leaf components to bring it back to life, and boost the performance, which sounds like a good plan. We can do a hell of a lot better than deep-cycle lead-acid batteries these days.
There are no photos of the interior, but I’ve seen enough kit cars from this era that I can pretty much tell you what to expect: a flat dashboard with some Sunpro gauges stuck in it, a Grant steering wheel, and some vinyl bucket seats, either dune-buggy style or some seats out of an old Vega or something. I’m sure it’s in better condition than we’re afraid it is, but nowhere near as nice as we’d want.
The seller describes this as a “Ferrari replica,” and I guess it does look a little like a Dino 246 GT – if you have cataracts. The gullwing doors and rear window louvers absolutely scream “kit car,” though, and are those Ford Maverick taillights? There’s a little fiberglass damage on the rear, according to the seller, but it must be minor, because I don’t see it.
2017 “Ford” T-Bucket – $9,000
Engine/drivetrain: 350 cubic inch OHV V8, three-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Dallas, TX
Odometer reading: unknown
Operational status: Runs and drives well
I have even less specific information to offer you about this car, but I can tell you more about it generally. More than fifteen million Model Ts rolled out of Ford factories over the years, which made them popular subjects for hot rodders in the early days. But often, only the body of the T remained in the finished hot rods, and not even all of that. The resulting car was known as a “T-bucket,” due to the shape of the cut-down Model T body. Real metal Model T bodies are hard to come by these days, but plenty of fiberglass replicas are available, and they’re surprisingly cheap. Combine it with a commercially-available hot rod frame and a junkyard drivetrain of your choice, and you have a fast, cool-looking, scary hot rod for cheap – sometimes really cheap.
If you don’t have the skill or gumption to build one yourself, though, you can find them for sale complete if you look around. This one was built in 2017, according to the seller, and is titled as such, probably under an “Assembled Vehicle” title. It has the classic (and somewhat overdone) combination of a Chevy 350 V8 and TH350 automatic transmission, once available for peanuts in any junkyard, and still not that hard to come by. It runs and drives well, the seller says.
There isn’t much to the interior of a T-bucket, but then, there’s not much room inside. A couple of seats, a steering wheel, and some gauges is about all you get. There’s no HVAC system at all, of course, and most don’t even have a radio, including this one. A lot of them don’t have seatbelts either, and I don’t see any here, but you’d be insane not to install some.
Model Ts came in a variety of bodystyles, and they were all turned into hot rods at one time or another, so the aftermarket makers offer a bunch of different styles. This is a later 1926-27 roadster-style body, and apparently there is some dispute over whether or not you can really call this a proper T-bucket. But I’ve never been much for semantics and pedantry like that. The seller calls it a T-bucket, so I will, too. I take greater offense to the flat-black paint job; I’ve never been a fan of that aesthetic. And I’d rather see an upright Model T radiator than that ’32-style surround laid back at a funny angle. But cars like this never stay the same when they change hands; it’s almost expected that you’ll remake it into your own vision.
You have to be the right kind of person to want either of these, and I’m willing to bet that the vast majority of you are not that kind. I’m probably not either, as much fun as it is to think about. But you know the rules: you gotta choose one. So what will it be?
The t-bucket is horribly overpriced,but that other thing would probably need just as much in batteries just to get it running. I reluctantly vote for the t-bucket,mainly for the engine.
How is the T-Bucket even road legal? Aren’t there supposed to be fenders that cover or extend out past the outer edge of the tires and make them less of a hazard to bicyclists and pedestrians? But Texas…
There were maybe 20 days a year I would tolerate driving that thing in the part of Texas in which I lived (Beaumont). But I can’t think of any other part of Texas, or the USA, where that would be a wise choice.
I voted for the one that doesn’t even move (but might, someday) out of being a responsible motorist. 34 HP? That seems like a poor components decision, but the Leaf transplant seems like a decent idea. And there are plenty of other options, I imagine.
Reading SBSD daily makes me happy that I really don’t have to make a real choice because I have a fully functional car that will probably outlive me. But it’s still usually a fun read. I voted for the Speed Wagon yesterday and not just for the name.
I don’t know if it’s still true, but years ago California would let you fly w/out fenders if the vehicle weighed less than some threshold, like 1,500#.
I’m 68 and I don’t know whether that was ever a thing in CA, but maybe it was? Not a great idea though. And even a VW-based Manx was probably not < 1500 #
I just know that going back and forth from Del Mar and UCSD on a bicycle had its moments.
And before that, our farm and back and forth to HS in Davis, CA. I’m happy to still be alive.
Apparently, still true:
27600No person shall operate any motor vehicle having three or more wheels, any trailer, or semitrailer unless equipped with fenders, covers, or devices, including flaps or splash aprons, or unless the body of the vehicle or attachments thereto afford adequate protection to effectively minimize the spray or splash of water or mud to the rear of the vehicle and all such equipment or such body or attachments thereto shall be at least as wide as the tire tread. This section does not apply to those vehicles exempt from registration, trailers and semitrailers having an unladen weight of under 1,500 pounds, or any vehicles manufactured and first registered prior to January 1, 1971, having an unladen weight of under 1,500 pounds.
All that being said, I’d prefer fenders for vehicles driven in the rain. In fact, I like the Euro regulations for trucks that have fringe or other anti-spray add-ons for eliminating the spray to the side of the vehicle.
Regulations exist for a reason. Something bad happened and we don’t want it to happen again.
I like the Invader for the electric aspect, but that is a face only a mother could love. It looks like a pelican trying to swallow an oversize fish. Hence, Ford.
My son and I are both electrical engineers, and the Invader would make a super cool project for us.
Hey this is definitely a both day for me. But since that option was not provided I chose to spend a bucket load of money as opposed to the cool golf cart. 50mph who is kidding who?
T-casket for me. I’d fix the grill, manual swap it (Muncie Rock Crusher maybe?), heck with the belts, I’ll go out doing my imitation of the Jean-Pierre Sarti dummy in “Grand Prix”.
VW conversion is no paragon of safety with your legs as the crumple zone. Maybe if it’s got the spare driving the wiper washer up there that would help. Though you’re going under anything on the road around here.
I’m vooming into the future in that Invader GT, not burbling into the past in that T-bucket.
Even as a kid I hated T-buckets. I hate them so much that I even picked a non-running Beetle-based EV kit car with hundreds of pounds of batteries I need to dispose of over it before I even saw its ridiculous price.
That Invader looks like something from a Hanna Barbera cartoon… which is why I chose it!
It does kind of look like a hardtop Compact Pussycat, now that you mention it.
Invader for me. Then I would arrange a meetup with Robert from Aging Wheels and see if he’d be interested in helping me get it working again.
OR… since the car is already in California, maybe take it to EVWest and see what they can do for me.
Nothing like an old sketchy kit car especially and old sketchy electric kit car made by hoarders.
The yellow one probably has more parts I’d want to use for other projects, and it’s cheaper for buying a pile of parts, so I’ll go with that one.
The T isn’t too bad. Need the right grille some skinny front wheels and tires and maybe a rollbar so you don’t die.
I voted for the T-bucket before I saw the price. Yikes! I’d pay about $4000.
yeah that’s CP, the sum is not worth more than the total of the parts
one appears to have fixed windows and no ventilation, the other has nothing but ventilation. I’m gonna go with the former because I always wanted something that looked like a Durango 95.
Exactly why I picked it.
khorosho
I voted for the devil I know. And he ain’t yellow.
I could have that Invader GT working within hours if the battery is the only thing that is wrong with it.
The Netgain 9″ motor is good for 170V. I don’t know what kind of controller is in it, but if it’s some low-end 72V golf cart controller, which its claimed 50 mph top speed suggests it is, I could swap in a Cafe Electric Zilla or similar(the Zilla goes up to 400V). A salvaged Nissan Leaf pack is 360V, and swapped in with the controller set to limit the motor voltage to 170, you could have this car hitting 120+ mph on flat ground. Even a stock Leaf pack, with the controller set to make only 60 kW and the current limited to 1,000A, could have this car doing 0-60 mph in under 7 seconds.
I don’t know how good the aerodynamics are for this kit car, but it is probably better than a Nissan Leaf as well given the small frontal area. I wouldn’t be surprised if it needed under 0.20 kWh/mile from the battery.
If the battery pack is the only thing wrong with this car in terms of making it run, for a total of under $10k including purchase price of the car, you could have a 120+ mile range @ 70 mph EV that has a manual transmission, is lightweight(~2,200 lbs), and is fun/engaging to drive.
You are assuming that the brakes on that car is up to safely stopping you at 120 MPH here.
Nah, I never even considered that.
Depending upon what kind of performance the car gets, they may or may not be due for an upgrade. If they are the standard VW Beetle fare, then they should be good enough for highway speeds, but not for hooning.
Yes! Z1K-HV for the win! Or a 2K if you have little concern for your life. The cost of the controller, batteries, and a new charger (even if using a donor vehicle)
mightWILL be higher than buying a better vehicle (I know this from experience, having converted a vehicle myself back in the dark days before lithium), but that should be expected going into this.You can find those parts used for relatively cheap. Sucks that the evtradinpost is no longer operational.
My man makes a highly interesting argument here
Yeah, I’m not powering that thing up until I’ve gone over every inch of wiring and checked the motor windings. Mice have a sense of humor.
Annoying thing with DC setups is the narrower torque range and lack of regen, but one could enjoy it as-is and then bolt up a LEAF motor/controller.
Series DC motors have a torque per amp that is almost unrivalled for the size of the motor, and they get maximum torque at 0 rpm. Their efficiency sucks though, and they have poor continuous power per unit of mass. The 100 lb Prestolite MTC4001 in my Triumph GT6 probably doesn’t do more than 35-40 horsepower continuous at the voltage I am running it at, but if I set the current limit for the motor to 1,000A, it would probably make around 200 lb-ft at 0 rpm. I currently have it set at 680A, to prevent destruction of the transmission.
Give me the yellow one! It looks like more fun. I have ridden in two hot rods and I don’t get it, they feel out of control at 30mph, they aren’t fun to toodle around in like other classic cars. I would rather have a motorcycle.
I am sure the Invader is also terrible to drive, but maybe I could convert it back to VW air-cooled power on the cheap and I bet it would make people smile, or at least scratch their heads.
Neither one of these are my cup of tea, but I chose the yellow one because it matches my Maverick better. Also, my brother hates yellow cars, so it’s fun to mess with with him.
I hate hotrods with modern fat tyres, so it’s going to be the kit car one! I can always swap one of my old VW bug engines back in it, if the whole electric thing fails.
I took the open casket model
I’m left wondering whether you mean the one with a roof and seatbelts so that you can have an open-casket funeral, or the one that is an open casket, but will certainly result in a closed-casket funeral once they scrape you off the road.
Yes
I voted for the Fauxrd. It isn’t my thing, but at least no donor cars were harmed in the construction of this vehicle.
I don’t think the Invader is a nice looking vehicle. The photo with the gull wing doors open makes it look ridiculous – I can’t help but see the face of a dull-witted cartoon rabbit when I look at that photo. The electric powertrain also isn’t doing it any favors. It would take thousands of dollars and a dual degree in mechanical and electrical engineering to build this into something half as useful as a golf cart. Any sane person should pass on this vehicle.
“The photo with the gull wing doors open makes it look ridiculous”
Let’s be honest, both of these are ridiculous.
It would take $600 and a fuel tank to bolt a VW engine and fuel lines back into it.
As for the styling, yeah… Not many redeeming qualities.
I agree converting it back to ICE is the cheapest/best option. It is still going to cost a few thousand dollars, though (assuming it still has the rest of the original VW running gear, which isn’t guaranteed). Beetle engines are no longer cheap and easy to find.
If we’re trying to get a new or hot engine, I agree. A rebuilt turnkey goes for a few grand and a 1915 or 2332 for double or triple.
But we’re comparing this to a T-bucket with what’s probably a junkyard SBC, and I find “turns by hand” fully-dressed 1600’s on Marketplace for $3-600 all day, a new starter costs $110 and a throttle cable is $10. If we want it to run fairly well, throw in a carb rebuild kit for $20 and a distributor for $60, total $600 before fuel tank/lines and wiring.
To fully extrapolate, the tank is $150 new, so that makes it $750 before a spool of wire and fuel hose.
As for the $3250 difference between the two cars, the $750 conversion leaves us $2500. That can buy some overbore jugs, ported heads and a Weber IDF kit for a pretty tractable 1776cc engine. Using a cheaper carb and factory displacement would enable the use of a low-ratio transmission to enable relatively civilized highway driving in the right lane. That said, for this body I’d rather either to the bare minimum for a refurbished 1600 or blow up the budget and build a 2332.
“I find “turns by hand” fully-dressed 1600’s on Marketplace for $3-600 all day”
That surprises me. I am looking for an engine for my ’73 and I rarely see them for sale at all, much less for anywhere near $600. So far, the cheapest engine I have found that looks like it won’t need a rebuild is $1,500.
Wow, that’s pretty steep. There’s one near me running on the stand for $1250
And do those side windows open? Does’t look like it. No A/C either I’m sure. I’ll take the T-Bucket. Plenty of ventilation on that one.
YIPES! If ever there was a day for neither, today would be the day! I picked the T-bucket, but it’s way overpriced.