The world is full of takes. You probably read at least one take each day on this website and during the weekend, our David pulls an opinion out of his heart and mind. Some of you are still reeling over the revelation that David Tracy thinks timing belt engines are a form of unreliable. If you keep abreast of global news, you may even be reading takes and not even know it. With that in mind, do you have an automotive hot take? Do you have a car opinion so spicy it would ruin a family dinner?
I have two automotive takes that some might call hot. Maybe they aren’t as spicy as David’s timing belt take, but I still stand by them. Are you ready? Here we go!
My first take is a conclusion I recently came to: Nissans are ok! Hold on, before you fire up that keyboard, hear me out. Yes, I’m fully aware that a number of Nissan’s models don’t bring much, if any, excitement to the table. The Sentra isn’t raising your heartbeat and the Rogue doesn’t really live up to its name. Yet, it’s hard to deny that Nissans come reasonably well-equipped for the price and as of very recently, they don’t make you feel like you’re being punished for a crime you didn’t commit.
I know that’s a very low bar, but it wasn’t that long ago when buying the base model of a car meant crank windows, optional air-conditioning, and optional radios. Seriously, there were cars sold in America a decade ago that didn’t even have a radio. A Nissan may not thrill you and the brand doesn’t have the best track record for reliability, but I see why people buy them. They’re cheap new cars with decent styling and decent features, perhaps bought by people who don’t care about cars one bit. And that’s fine! Some people just want a transportation appliance that won’t piss off the HOA and will last the length of the warranty. A Nissan should do that just fine.
Now that I have you all hot and bothered, I’ll lay down my second take: Automatic transmissions are fine!
Look, I love a manual transmission. I spent five years looking for a manual version of a diesel wagon that was sold in America only with a terrible automatic transmission. If a car I want has a manual version, I’ll buy it, and that includes my daily driver Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen TDI, my BMW X5, both of my Japanese imports, and my Saturn Sky Red Line. If my Nova Bus RTS-06 was available with a stick I would have bought one that way, too.
I mean, I even made a fun flight stick shift knob for a Mercedes-Benz 240D. I need to make another one of those.
Yet, I have seen some disappointing developments in car culture. Some people covet the manual transmission to the point of being toxic about it. I’ve seen it right here in our own comments and I find myself baffled. It’s just a transmission, it isn’t that big of a deal. Nowadays there are reliable automatics that shift faster than any human can while returning good fuel economy.
There are people who either do not want to shift a manual or just physically can’t. There’s no shame in driving or liking an automatic. Is the death of the manual transmission a travesty? Of course! But direct your scorn toward the automaker, not the automatic transmission or the person who buys an auto. I will always champion your choice to drive whatever you want, because car enthusiasts aren’t just people who drive brown manual diesel wagons.
Whew, that felt good to get off of my chest. What are your automotive hot takes?
Topshot: Bring A Trailer; stock.adobe.com/cyrano
Minimum and mandatory liability coverage: $1M bodily injury; $100K property (umbrellas accepted.)
Combined with maximum sentencing for uninsured driving
The only k-car or adjacent vehicle worth a crap was the minivan.
Ah, I assumed this was accepted as fact by now.
This isn’t a hot take as much as an acknowledgement of reality. I have said this before but I’ll say it again.
POP UP HEADLIGHTS SUCK. WE ALL KNOW IT AND WILLFULLY REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT. (this statement may qualify as a hot take, I guess)
We know pop up headlights aren’t good at their stated job. They don’t provide as much illumination as fixed lights. They cause weird glares severely limiting forward visibility in certain weather conditions. They are failure prone and often don’t pop up.
We also know, but refuse to acknowledge, they are hideously ugly. If pop up headlights look good, why are they designed to be retracted at all times lights are unnecessary??? Who designs a car and thinks “I’m going to have the best design element concealed 97% of the time!!!”?
That is not to say pop up headlights don’t have their merits. Pop up headlights existed as a workaround to allow nice-looking cars to be compliant with laws. That alone is a worthy reason to respect (but not like) pop up headlights.
My contention is that we all know pop up headlights are bad but perpetuate the myth to separate car enthusiasts from people who merely drive cars. Phrases like “pop up headlights are awesome!” are inherently absurd, and that is the point. A feigned enthusiasm for pop up headlights allows us to identify other car enthusiasts in the wild. It is like a secret handshake.
This may be controversial since people frequently profess their love for pop up headlights in this comment section. With a little introspection, though, you will all realize I am right.
Fantastic comment.
I agree with you. I’m very lightly looking at Miatas for sale and I’m not strongly considering an NA model.
I always driving with headlights on; am I just gonna have to deal with worse aerodynamics in perpetuity [even if the loss is perhaps more theoretical than actually noticeable]? And yeah, they look goofy.
As long as you don’t consider the 65 Riviera as “pop up” headlights I completely agree.
That is a tough one. The ’63 through ’65 Rivieras are some of my favorite cars. At least with the Riviera the headlights don’t change position, so you eliminate the problem of glare during certain weather conditions. Also, don’t the headlights stay in position and only the covers move?
I still prefer cars with 100% fixed headlights and no covers, but I think the Riviera technically does NOT have pop up headlights.
yes, it’s just the covers that move. So technically no “pop up”. But, some people would lump all non-fixed headlights/covers into the “pop up” category. I just wanted to make it clear that I agree with pop-ups but not the clamshell. If you include the clamshell then I am outraged.
I have a c4 and I could do without the pop-up lights.
As for Rivs I would take a boattail too.
I and my popup headlights (which make me smile every time I use them) shake our collective fists at you, sir!
Which means you understood the assignment. 🙂
I will never approve of pop-up headlights… but I will always approve of someone enjoying their car.
I hope your headlights continue popping up for years to come.
Most times I’ve heard that pop-ups were awesome it was usually meant somewhat sarcastically.
I have 2 pop up headlight cars – C4 Corvettes. I think they are an interesting solution to the lighting limitations of the day but, yeah, they aren’t actually “good.”
Any car designed with pop-ups after composite lights were legal or projectors were on the market is docked cool points.
Pedestrian safety called. Besides, it wasn’t just about safety, hidden headlights were a novelty for decades. There really wasn’t any reason to hide the headlights on so many 60’s and 70’s cars, but designers did.
Also, there’s a reason why so many drifters used to rock “sleepy eyes” on their cars. Because people actually liked the way pop-ups looked.
I know this is supposed to be about hot takes, but at least have a better reason for your hot take.
I stand by my rationale. You have not convinced me in the slightest.
Ignoring the novelty trend set by hidden headlights and the laws surrounding them disqualifies your rationale, but you do you. Pop-ups weren’t a design choice, it was a way to skirt regulations.
If you don’t like pop-ups, that’s fine, a lot of people don’t. Just say that instead of making excuses that don’t even make sense.
To quote myself:
“Pop up headlights existed as a workaround to allow nice-looking cars to be compliant with laws.”
Isn’t that making a similar argument as this:
“Pop-ups weren’t a design choice, it was a way to skirt regulations.”
My point is that pop up headlights were not intended to be a design element per se. They were not designed to allow a car to look nice when headlights were not in use rather than when headlights were in use.
Therefore, I maintain that people do not actually like pop up headlights. However, many people like the styling that pop up headlights made possible. Those are two different things!
You still haven’t swayed my opinion in the slightest.
You keep saying this like it’s my goal. I don’t really care about changing your mind.
I just think your complaints don’t really jive with the purpose of the lights. You’re complaining that “they don’t look good” while simultaneously acknowledging their purpose (while also asking “why”…). It’s a little like getting your cake and eating it too.
“You’re complaining that “they don’t look good” while simultaneously acknowledging their purpose”
I fail to see how this is relevant. Acknowledging something’s purpose does not automatically make it desirable. I acknowledge the purpose of dentists but that doesn’t mean a root canal is desirable. Pop up headlights are a root canal equivalent.
Also, you referenced preexisting designs using hidden headlights. Hidden headlights and pop up headlights are different things entirely. To quote you:
Hidden headlights had no purpose beyond aesthetics, where as pop up headlights were a way to comply with regulations. Your statements are an acknowledgement that pop up headlights and hidden headlights are not equivalent. Any arguments referencing hidden headlights are rendered moot.
I don’t think I am doing a great job of elucidating my point. I will try again without ranting. My contentions are:
You made one statement that is relevant.
“Also, there’s a reason why so many drifters used to rock “sleepy eyes” on their cars.”
Your have misinterpreted this trend. If anything, “sleepy eyes” cars are an argument AGAINST pop up headlights. If these drivers like the look of popped up headlights, why did they modify their headlights to make them closer to flush with the hood? The “sleepy eyes” modification creates an appearance similar to that of a car with fixed headlights. That is hardly high praise of pop up headlight aesthetics.
“You keep saying this like it’s my goal. I don’t really care about changing your mind.”
Then what is your goal?
Whenever I argue anything it is with the goal of changing minds. In this case, I’m not terribly concerned about achieving that outcome since this is mostly an argument for entertainment purposes, but I am still trying to change minds.
I will continue the fight against feigned pop up headlight enthusiasm until it is eradicated.
Left lane hogging offenses should be strictly enforced. Mandatory driving course taught by a German for first offence. High fines after that…
Forget higher fines. Criminal justice dispensed by Germans work better.
They tried that a while back and it didn’t go so well.
Oh how I’d love to be deputized just so I can ticket left lane campers.
My hot take is that there hasn’t really been a car worth buying since like 2003. I also don’t like any American car ever, I’m strictly a Euro car guy, with the only exception being a handful of Japanese cars like the NSX.
Try the 86 twins if you like simplicity of the old times. Just expect some NVH along the way.
This is probably lukewarm at best, especially compared to some of these other comments, but the asymmetry of the back of the Nissan Cube makes it the ugliest production vehicle.
I will gladly take your Juke, Multipla, etc. before I’m caught behind a Cube. (Inside, they’re fine).
The S2000 takes everything the Miata does, and does it slightly worse. It’s like somebody said “How can we make a Miata heavier, more expensive, less torquey, and less ergonomic” and then put it in to production.
B-b-b-b-but high revs!!
(Note: I do not have a dog in this race, nor personal experience with either vehicle. Just citing the one difference I’m pretty sure I’ve heard of.)
The high revs are fun in theory, but in practice a let down. It basically amounted to 1-5k you feel nothing, 6-9k you get a short spurt of something and then you have to shift. I was actually sad after driving one.
That’s both tragic and hilarious. (Thanks for the insight.)
Sure thing. I heard one person hilariously describe it as “all the lag of a big turbo but without that pesky torque”
Is it a hot take to say that having driven all 3, a base 986 Boxster is more fun to drive on twisty roads than either the Miata or S2000?
I haven’t driven a Boxster so I can’t debate that
I have a lot of hot takes, but the hottest one is that an f150 is not a truck, and never was. Not even my single cab 8′ bed f150.
….can you elaborate? Even beyond it fitting Torch’s definition of a truck, I feel like they’re suited for doing some truck things.
So, I already extensively defended this stance in Torch’s post, but…..
My f150, under the skin, is almost entirely identical to a body on frame sedan like an LTD. This is reflected in its really quite good ride quality and suitability for daily driving. Most parts of its design are in service of making a smooth, comfortable ride for the people in it, and so it is a good match for the definition of a car: “a vehicle which, through every part of its design, is for carrying people and people’s stuff.”
It is not a good match for the definition of truck: “a vehicle which, through every part of its design, is for carrying cargo.”
Basically, it’s a pickup bodystyle, but a car chassis, and so my f150 is a pickup car, not a pickup truck. It is a good vehicle for doing the daily driving and the cargo carrying that I need to do, and I like it.
Medium and heavy duty trucks are very different under the skin, and they are resultingly good at carrying cargo and awful for daily driving.
How far back are you going for F150s? Because that’s a pretty good estimation of the 1997+ tenth generation and later.
But the earlier ones were definitely light trucks. When the ’97 came out, older F150s enjoyed a spike in resale value because there were plenty of buyers who didn’t want the new one that was marketed squarely at weekend box-store warriors.
I’m talking about my 1995 f150, and in fact everything from the 1948 F-1 to a 2024 f150.
There’s nothing that makes a 1997 f150 more truck than my 1995, they’re both basically a body on frame sedan chassis.
Hot take: AI may eventually (completely) drive our cars, but probably not in our lifetime.
And many Camry/Accord/Altima owners would welcome it!
I see this a lot here: If you’re going to assert some engine is bullet proof, you can’t immediately insert a caveat. “As long as you don’t get one with the melting plastic intake manifold.” “As long as you avoid the bad casting (David!)” “As long as you change the oil way more than is recommended.”
An NSU Ro-80 is rock-solid reliable as long as you don’t turn the key in the ignition. Very simple precaution, anyone can follow it.
I usually understand where they’re coming from when they say things like that but it’s still funny.
3 more:
The US Government should allow vehicles that pass EU crash test and emissions to be sold here without recertification.
The gas tax should be doubled and revenue earmarked for infrastructure.
Drivers licenses should be much more difficult to get and keep.
I’d go better. Scrap NHTSA standards and adopt Global NCAP, like most major auto markets already have.
Since you mentioned the gas tax, I’ll give my hot take here:
gas is too damn cheap in the USA
Cheap gas has allowed for all the worst automotive trends—the massification of SUVs, the dumbification of drivers, the elimination of practical small, inexpensive cars.
Everything leaning moving toward EV is cool and I’m genuinely excited to be at the beginning of a new era of transportation and propulsion. Yes ICE cars are cool and engine noises are awesome, but we’ve already done that. I am excited to see where electric cars take us.
Not hot take: the ev Charger with its fake exhaust is stupid and annoying.
Hot take: an ev with an optional driver immersion mode that plays v8 noises over the speakers and simulates shift points would be fun. Even better would be paddle shifters, to take the simulation further.
Yeah engine noise in sim racing makes it more fun so I don’t see why it wouldn’t apply to electric cars too.
Exactly! Many of us grew up on NFS and Forza, so it would work well for us. We know it is simulated, but we can embrace the immersion.
So what happens down the road when the legacy of ICE only cars are but rambling tales told by wistful grandparents?
I wonder how future generations will perceive today’s EVs with fake vroom vroom noises and no ICE reference of their own to draw from.
If it’s too quiet, just make driving noises. make vroom vroom sounds when you put the peddle down and screeching noises when you corner. Sure, the passengers might get a little nervous, but that’s part of the fun.
Lol. Now we are going old school. Pre school level old school.
Never grow old.
Automatic transmissions in PHEVs are awful and shouldn’t exist (not much of a hot take).
The “Worst Camaro” (3rd Gen Iron Duke) is actually good, with the manual transmission they were getting 40 MPG stock. So you got a RWD vehicle with a ton of aftermarket support that gets 40 MPG stock and can get even better MPG with mods.
FWD/4WD is the best (non-full-time) 4WD layout, it’s just that all the automobiles that have had it are little European unibody vehicles with independent suspension. A 2 Door Wrangler with solid axles front and rear would almost certainly be better with a FWD based 4WD system instead of the current RWD based one.
Power Steering is overrated, if you are able bodied and ‘need’ power steering in your DD you either need a bigger steering wheel or you need to put that overweight POS on a diet.
You know larger vehicles exist, right? I don’t have power steering in my Accord and it’s fine, but if I didn’t have power steering in my f150 it would not be fine.
And I guess you didn’t know that Subarus are FWD/4WD and that it’s not just Euro cars?
I genuinely forgot about the older Subarus. That being said I’m pretty sure they were all unibody with independent suspension as well.
With a big enough steering wheel you don’t need power steering. Also pretty sure up until the late 90s you could get an F-150 without power steering
Yeah Subarus are all unibody with independent suspension, I really do like the sound of a solid axle vehicle with FWD/4WD.
Yeah, a big steering wheel and a really slow ratio box gets you a long way, but I already have a pretty big wheel and a pretty slow box. You can’t go much further before it becomes really inconvenient. I know power steering was standard on my 1995 f150, but I don’t know when they made it standard. I do know that almost every f150 has left the factory with power steering since the mid 70s because it’s so worth it.
As do I.
I think it’s a convenience thing and not a “need” the overwhelming majority of the time.
This is an excellent take, and something I’ve said for some time. I was tempted to buy an Equinox just because it runs in FWD until you need traction in the rear or hit the AWD button. I’m not sure why they don’t actually advertise that instead of just calling it AWD.
Disagree on the power steering. My 3000 lb compact car is a bear to turn at low speed when the power steering is out. I’ve done that enough on the road and in the garage to discover that making it change direction rapidly without PS needs a lot of arm strength. Modern suspension design does that.
Cars built without power steering generally have slower steering box ratios that give you more leverage over the wheels, so while you can compare two of the same car where one had optional power steering and the other did not, you can’t accurately compare a car with broken power steering to a car with no power steering from the factory.
Also if your car has hydraulic power steering and it fails you’re fighting the hydraulic fluid to steer making it even heavier than it would be provided there was no fluid in the system.
Not broken, just inoperative when the engine is off.
Designing for manual steering is one thing. Having PS go inoperative for whatever reason on a modern car meant to have PS is not fun.
The small block Chevy is not as great as everyone makes them out to be, I’m sure they’re fine but I’ve never had a good one.
Modified version — the small block Chevy’s sound is a bit harsh compared to other iconic V8s.
(I’ve had one, also a Ford 351W, and others.)
I love my 3V Ford motor but I also love my old 360LA in the Dodge I have and the 360FE I had in my old Ford F1 sounded epic.
1. Tesla cars are decently designed.
2. Their touchscreen isn’t the deathtrap that people make it out to be.
3. Smooth one pedal driving is as much a skill as smoothly driving a manual.
4. Musk is high on his own, ahh, “musk”.
First, I have no problem with Teslas as cars. if you like them, good for you. Enjoy it.
I’ve never been inside a Tesla, but I can say that I think from the outside they are ugly. They may be the best most awesome machines out there, but I can’t get past the looks.
The Cybertruck is ugly, all the others look like various colors of bars of soap. They were vaguely distinctive when they were new, now that they’re everywhere they’re just dull.
I completely agree. The Musky One is irritating, but the cars are great. Even the Cybertruck is growing on me.
I really like the styling of the Models 3 and S. While I am less of a fan of the X and Y (I prefer sedans to crossovers), the Y is probably the Tesla most people should buy. I also like the interiors. Minimalism looks nice.
As for the touchscreens, I don’t have to use it most drives. I suspect most people kvetching about Tesla touchscreens have never driven one. I don’t mind if people hate the cars I like, but I would prefer if they hated them for reality instead of imagined problems.
One pedal driving is great. I don’t know if it requires as much skill to drive smoothly as a manual, but one pedal driving is genuinely fun.
The context of time is important in judging older cars; sure, by 2024 standards a 1977 Firebird Trans Am is an inefficient disappointment, but in the late 70s it was exciting and looked and sounded gorgeous! Those C3 Corvettes that you all hate? They were cool as shit back in the day (some more than others).
Yeah, as you alluded to, a good proportion of C3 Corvettes were 130hp slow garbage when they were new……
“Those C3 Corvettes that you all hate? They were cool as shit back in the day (some more than others).”
Speaking as someone who remembers them from “back in the day”:
Maybe so if poor emissions, panel chasms, cheaply plated gold chains and toxic masculinity are your kind of thing.
I saw the call for hot takes and thought, “Finally, I can proclaim my love for automatic transmissions”–only to have Mercedes beat me before the article was over. I agree: drive what you want, but for some of us, our best driving is when we don’t have to worry about RPM and what to do with our right hand. Like, I have a machine that rolls down my windows and wipes my windshield–why can’t I have one that shifts my gears, too?
Honestly, a paddle shift auto is so much better for performance driving. Manuals are just better in the fun department. Automatics have been better for performance and fuel economy for quite a while. Even in towing, autos are better.
Oh here’s one that will get people mad:
Snow tires are not worth the hassle. “Snowflake” branded all-seasons provide 90% of the benefit without any loss of performance in warmer weather and without needing to store and change tires twice a year.
I literally live in a lake-effect snow belt and the only times I’ve noticed my snowflake tires being insufficient to get where I’m going, I shouldn’t be on the roads in the first place.
Oh, my! Get me to my fainting couch!
Actually 100% agree. Modern all-weather tires with that mountain and snowflake symbol are good enough.
I lived this with my old RWD van. Even on a day we were let out of work early due to a blizzard, I was creeping along in traffic generally okay, even as there were a few inches already on the roads.
I agree 80%, however I do own a set of snow tires for one car as I run summer tires that have the grip of a solid marble tire once the temp gets below 40. If I’m going to have two sets of tires and rims, might as well make the other ones winter tires.
And, contrary to what people say, snow tires and RWD is not better(all the time, anyways,) than 4WD and all seasons.
People who say that are deeply unserious or have never driven in deep snow.
Amen. I grew up in the upper midwest on all-seasons. They were fine in that climate.
I live in the mountains now. Snow tires are a requirement as a legal and practical matter where I live. Snow tires for the win where required.
All but one of my vehicles have two sets of wheels — summer and winter. Changing them out spring and fall is worth the hassle.
Not better, but perfectly adequate. It’s great that normal people are buying AWD because they don’t want to have to put down grit or carry chains or whatever, but it saddens me to see enthusiasts who wanted a RWD sports car get something else because the car they wanted is “unusable” in the Winter. Even more so with modern traction and stability control, even a novice can keep an M3 on the road with decent tires.
I fully agree that decent all weathers with the 3-peak rating work fine in most cases, I run Winters mainly because my car sits on 200TW Summers the rest of the year.
The myth of snow tires and RWD comes from a video where they’re compared to an AWD car on Summer tires, and a bunch of RWD fans gradually one-upped the story until we got what we have now.
+1
I’m pretty sure this is a hold out from days of yore when “all-seasons” were basically just crappy summer tires. The last decade or two has seen a massive improvement in all-season tire performance. Plus, the availability of tire reviews and testing is so much better it makes it easier to find a model to fit the driving needs.
Does your assessment include places where snow is packed in on gravel roads and side streets from Nov/Dec to March/April? Or just where it snows but plows and salt take it down to blacktop in a few days. Genuinely curious, I’ve always used snow tires and have not tried modern all-seasons like crossclimates
I don’t live where there are gravel roads, so I concede that for the uncommon person that deals with that situation regularly, my advice might be wrong.
The major point I’m arguing against here is the internet “wisdom” that all-season tires are worthless in the winter and you’re taking your life into your hands if you don’t have snow tires. For the vast majority of drivers, even in places that gets lots of snow, that isn’t true.
I feel like this is only true in flat areas. Everyone says us Seattleites are shit drivers in the snow, but we have hills everywhere and they become sheets of ice.
Here they mostly salt the roads to blacktop, but in the big cities they don’t bother to plow the side roads. I was still perfectly comfortable driving on my all-seasons because the biggest problem there is taking a bad line and dropping a wheel into a 2 foot deep rut, which no tires on Earth are going to help with. Packed snow is actually pretty grippy. It’s the ice and slush that cause most accidents.
There a lot of really nice malaise era cars, dammit!
I’ve been tempted to aquire a malaise t bird and drop a modern power train in it. I think it would make one heck of a cruiser
No need, you can just de-malaise the original drivetrain, keep the column shifter and all that but get modern high-flow cats, decent carbs and high-compression pistons (or rods, or heads, they’re all cheap for most American v8’s). You” be in for less and have a more interesting ride. They’re quite robust, just aggressively detuned.
Gotcha. Makes more sense.
The Volt got killed off too early
I agree, the Volt, and the platform in general, is the exact type of EV that we need right now. If GM had kept at it they would be well positioned for success.
They should have tried it out on anything other than a compact sedan.
the fact that a competitor is using a similar way of producing propulsion on a pickup truck shows you they left money on the table
I almost wouldn’t call that a hot take. GM was dumb for never even attempting to put that technology in anything other than a compact sedan. Volt should have been the trim designation for PHEV of all Chevys. So much potential that they squandered
This was probably a hot take back when the Volt first came out. However considering how old it would have been today if they kept making it I bet it would be very damn cheap and cost was always the issue with the Volt and especially the ELR.
So make a Gen3+ Volt with even more BEV range and MPG to compete with the new PHEV Prius.
Honestly no. I would have had them keep producing the second gen with a focus on reducing costs, and making a ute variant.
The 2ng gen was/is high on my list as a used car. It’s still a contender but its got more competition now.. The Clarity PHEV notably.
not the least bit spicy
I propose a class-action lawsuit against automakers, the NHTSA and insurers for automakers not meeting existing NHTSA standards regarding bumpers on their products, NHTSA for not enforcing their own rules to automakers and modifiers, and insurers for not putting pressure on automakers, the NHTSA and modifiers so that costs of repairs (and therefore insurance rates) would be reduced.
My Hot Take: Toyotas aren’t any better than any other make, and in many ways they’re worse. They have fewer standard features. Years ago I bought a base Tacoma and it didn’t have interval wipers. Simply inexcusable. They cost more than comparable vehicles. They aren’t any more reliable than a middling GM product and they have the same hard plastic interiors.
I disagree about the reliability part, but they absolutely take advantage of their reputation to provide what is frequently a substandard product content-wise.
Here is one from the trucking world: Peterbilt 389 trucks are terrible trucks. They are cramped, rattle, lots of wind noise, and are antiquated. They are the Harleys of the trucking world. That being said, I love driving mine.
How about an oil-related hot take to get the people going?
Manufacturer-suggested oil change intervals are based on sales, marketing, and finance — not science.
They’re based a lot more on science than the old 3 month/3000 mile interval that Jiffy Lube still keeps pushing.
The 3000-5000 interval recommended by oil companies and every mechanic is based on science AND 50 years of practical experience.
https://media.tenor.com/Ix1n2gIDiHkAAAAM/suuuure-okay.gif
Sometimes. The OLM in my car is way too optimistic. Going by mileage verified with oil analysis has worked fine.
Manufacturer recommendations today have an environmental twist as well, oil disposal is apparently accounted for in a car’s impact calculation and extending the intervals means less oil goes into the equation.
My hot take: For the price of an oil analysis you could just DIY an extra oil and filter change.
Chicken and the egg: how would I know to do that extra oil change without an analysis saying it’s necessary?
Back when my car was new, early owners were reporting the OLM seemed optimistic. GM stating that a 10k mile interval on semi-synthetic oil in a 100hp/liter turbo engine was okay seemed suspicious. Some of us decided to find out through analysis. Sure enough, that oil was trashed by 5000 miles. Full synthetic could go 7000-9000 miles if the car was doing lots of highway miles. This was borne out a few years later by reports of oil eating turbos when following the OLM/semi-syn recommendation. GM fixed the OLM fairly quickly and changed the oil recommendation to full synthetic a few years later when the updated OLM didn’t stop the turbo getting thrashed. Meanwhile those of us in the Brotherhood of Oil Analyzers were doing what we could to spread the word about the early cars being optimistic and using full synthetic oil. You’re welcome, GM.
Full synthetic oil is maybe an extra buck or two. Why bother with semi synthetic at all?
For folks who don’t DIY, it’s an extra $20-30. Iffy Lube around me has semi-synthetic at $80 and full synthetic at $100 looking it up. Which is eye-wateringly expensive but not everyone can DIY.
Ugh, at those prices I think I’d take my chances getting run over changing my oil in the street.