What’s Your Automotive Hot Take? Autopian Asks

Aa Opinion
ADVERTISEMENT

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.

2025 Nissan Kicks 33b

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.

20200414 175521

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

About the Author

View All My Posts

513 thoughts on “What’s Your Automotive Hot Take? Autopian Asks”

  1. Subarus are only considered reliable because of its advertising-influenced quirky brand image. Subaru owners who fill out Consumer Reports surveys overlook the same issues that would have them ranting if they owned other makes.

    2. Yeah. Subaru showed their ass. They try to advertise themselves as “eco-friendly” for the National Parks/granola sort, but then they side with the Trump Administrstion to fight against emissions rules

  3. If automatics all came with decent paddle shifters, people would lament less about manual transmissions.
    Brown cars are not attractive.
    All crossovers are station wagons.
    Teslas are the new Camry.
    Current car style trends are worse than the early 90s.
    Anything without a volume knob is for old people.
    Anyone under 21 should be required to retake the driver exam every year.
    Anyone over 70 should be required to retake the driver exam every year.
    Car theft should be a mandatory life sentence.
    Porsches have become the most soulless cars.

    1. Gonna argue against your 90’s vs. now opinion. To quote Douglas Adams, 90’s cars “looked more like they had been congealed than constructed”

  5. I don’t have any especially hot takes. I like what I like, and I encourage everyone else to do the same. And my primary rule when it comes to driving or just about anything else is don’t ruin someone else’s day, and I likewise encourage everyone else to do the same.

    They’re just cars. Not worth getting all worked up over.

  6. Crossovers are okay. The buying public voted with their money to have a vehicle with more space, less mileage, easier to get in and out of and possibly AWD. In the midwest, they are much better for the general public than a sedan.

    1. Honestly, I’ve gotten over my crossover hate. Cars these days are just so efficient that you really don’t lose much over the equivalent sedan for the increase in practicality.

  8. If you get your three kids and two strollers out of a vehicle, it doesn’t matter what it is. Everyone thinks soccer mom as soon as you are two parking spaces from your vehicle.

  9. Obscure hot take: The Lucas GEMS engine control system was actually quite reliable and reasonable to work on.

    I used to have a Land Rover Disco 1 with the last version of the GEMS controller. It had a self-diagnostic LED display tucked under the seat. Easier than counting flashes from a typical OBD1 system. Wiring and sensors were straightforward, rational, and generally didn’t cost an arm and a leg to fix if anything went wrong. So much simpler and cheaper to deal with than Disco IIs and their Bosch controls. (“Three Amigos”, anyone?)

  10. Automatics +1 FTW..

    I have bad knees, have had since I was young. So, automatics became what I drive. I *suffer* the comments from people, but I don’t mind.

    Heck, even back in the 90s, some autos were shifting faster than manuals. It’s now 30 years later, and they are just better.*

    *I wish that shifter paddles (connected to the steering column) would actually shift… quickly… and not have that 1/2 a second delay, or however long it is, before it shifts. Until that time, I just leave my car in Auto (Sport setting for the trans).

  11. I have so many hot takes and a propensity for writing long comments for the sake of writing. So here we go!

    • You’re not allowed to say young people aren’t into cars these days when prices are the way they are, both in the new and collector car market (and the housing market plays into this too). When good classic cars are generally $20k+ and there are no cheap fun new cars on the market, you can’t blame people for not buying cars. Projects can be intimidating for someone getting into the hobby, especially if you have limited space and need all your cars to be usable to justify owning them. Additionally, I think a lot of people with that mindset simply fail to realize a lot of younger car enthusiasts have started chasing more overlooked cars which to others appear “mundane.” It’s still car enthusiasm, just not what mainstream car enthusiasts are used to.
    • Vintage cars (as in 1930s or older) are just as much fun as any modern sports car, and don’t have to break the speed limit to provide said fun. Yes they’re crude and ride poorly and you have to fiddle with them frequently if you want some semblance of reliability. But that’s also part of what makes them fun! They have a ton of character, you’ll get intimately familiar with the car and know how to take care of it, and they feel way faster than they are. Vintage cars are the ultimate expression of “slow car fast.” You can be going five under the speed limit and feel like you’re speeding, it’s amazing. I’ve been hoping that with things like electroswing and Lackadaisy getting popular, more people will be interested in 1920s-30s stuff in general and thus think about buying vintage cars. They’re a lot more fun than people assume they are.
    • Most collector cars aren’t worth their price, and I say this as a diehard classic car enthusiast. Unless you’re a rich boomer with rose tinted glasses, the experience of driving something like a COPO Camaro can only be disappointing compared to spending the same amount on building a restomodded Chevy Nova or whatever. The collector car market has turned too many once-affordable fun cars into fashion accessories and status symbols and I hate it. If you want something like a classic muscle car for the driving experience now, you’re better off finding whatever regular car it shares its bones with and dropping a crate engine and some better tires, brakes, and suspension in that.
    • Everyone who says classic cars are unreliable crap hasn’t daily driven one. I have daily driven one. They are meant to be daily driven, and if you do so, they are absolutely fine. Probably more reliable now even than when they were new, thanks to better quality fuels (just avoid ethanol if you can) and much better quality oil. And if you think they’re too unrefined, you’re a sissy :p jk, but seriously though, you get used to the noisiness and quirks of driving a classic in no time, and once you do most modern cars feel artificial and lifeless by comparison.
    • All cars should be built to last a lifetime, and/or be indefinitely repairable. I don’t care how unrealistic you think this sounds. Consumer culture and the waste it produces is the biggest thing killing our planet. TBH, in an ideal world, all cars would be coachbuilt by local tradespeople reusing and refurbishing parts from any damaged cars, building cars to the exact needs and wants of the customer, and intending said car to be a family heirloom – the higher cost is worth paying if multiple generations get to use it. I can’t stand planned obsolescence and wastefulness, or the mentality that you don’t need to care what happens to your car after you sell it. Steward your freaking resources, at the end of your lifetime they aren’t yours to keep.
    • Dieselgate is the the least of VW’s crimes. I take much more issue with their general lack of longevity for all the reasons stated in the above hot take. They are among the worst offenders when it comes to irresponsible planned obsolescence.
    • We should be focusing more on biofuels than electrification. Diesel engines can easily run on many different blends of carbon-neutral organic fuel, which can be created using waste products of the food industry and other things we aren’t using. Plus they’re reliable, efficient, and make great torque. Mercedes has even proved they can rev as high as a car engine and make plenty of power if you’re smart about the design. This is another reason I think Dieselgate is the least of VW’s crimes, if you run their cars on biofuel then the emissions cheating isn’t a big deal.
    • Good/diverse public transportation is how you save car culture. Most people don’t have a lot of expendable income, at least not if they’re avoiding debt. Make it so that they don’t need a car, but could use one if they wanted to, then they’ll buy something fun that makes them happy and not worry about its gas mileage or everyday practicality. Basically, cars should be more like motorcycles. You can commute on a motorcycle every day if you want to, but you don’t have to. So motorcycles get to be fun and silly and super mechanically diverse and interesting, with relatively few regulations to contend with. Motorcycles don’t even have to make sense, half the time they’re mechanically weird for the sake of being interesting above all else. I wish that kind of experimentation for experimentation’s sake existed in the car world. But I digress, if you want automotive nirvana, you need public transportation that people want to use.

    End of hot takes for now, need to get on with the day 🙂

    1. Good/diverse public transportation is how you save car culture. Most people don’t have a lot of expendable income, at least not if they’re avoiding debt. Make it so that they don’t need a car, but could use one if they wanted to, then they’ll buy something fun that makes them happy and not worry about its gas mileage or everyday practicality.

      This one is huge and (I think) a common belief here. The best way to enjoy cars is to not be reliant upon them all the time.

      2. Yeah, it breaks my heart when I see the clash between city-loving types and car enthusiasts who think they’re enemies because public transportation or riding a bicycle means fewer people driving. I love cars, always have, but honestly riding a bike or taking a train from time to time friggin’ rules. It’s awesome not having to take your car everywhere! Bikes are super maneuverable and can go places motor vehicles can’t, which is super convenient and even relaxing at times. Trains are great for long distances that would be uncomfortable in my Miata… Heck even good bus networks are better than having to drive yourself everywhere.

        I don’t want a normal commuter car, what makes a good commuter car is generally the antithesis of a fun car. I love my fun cars, but I don’t want to commute in them, at least not long distances. I want everyone to enjoy driving, but not have to drive everywhere. And worst case scenario, if someone decides they want nothing to do with cars, they have more expendable income to spend on whatever does make them happy.

        1. My favorite thing about biking is being able to park it right by the entrance almost anywhere I go.

          My least favorite part is my concern it won’t be there when I come out.

    2. The only take I disagree on is the diesel take. Yeah, diesels are efficient and reliable, but they put out far more harmful chemicals (like NOx) and particulate matter than a gasoline powered engine. Alternative fuels may be carbon neutral, but using them in a diesel application has more serious and immediate concerns for public health. That’s the real reason Dieselgate was such a big deal. NOx is REAL bad news.

      1. I was going to say the same thing. Biofuels do nothing to mitigate the NOx and the ethical feedstock sourcing is still an issue. You’re either driving up food prices which leads to famine in poorer countries, or you’re relying on incredibly expensive technology that can never seem to get out of the pilot phase. Nobody is willing to pay $15 a gallon for carbon neutral fuel.

          1. I’m with you, but I expect ICE to be mostly kept to track use or at prices so high only enthusiasts willing to pay. That’s fine in my book.

        2. There are already biofuels made using waste products from the food industry. In other words, stuff that was being thrown away previously. It doesn’t need to compete with the food industry at all.

        3. There’s no reason ethanol should drive up food prices. The post fermentation mash/silage makes for better animal feed than the pre fermentation corn and such would have been anyway. Its not bad for humans either (e.g. Vegemite, Marmite). Fermentation takes out the sugars but adds vitamins and leaves the other nutrients and fiber intact. If anything perhaps we should all be eating more mash.

          Dunno about biodiesel but I don’t see why the waste from that can’t be animal feed either. If its waste oil its garbage anyway.

          1. I don’t disagree, it’s just that at the scales we’re talking feedstocks are either Corn (or sugar cane) for Ethanol and palm oil for biodiesel. Anything else can’t really scale to appreciable levels to make a dent.

    3. “We should be focusing more on biofuels than electrification. Diesel engines can easily run on many different blends of carbon-neutral organic fuel, which can be created using waste products of the food industry and other things we aren’t using. Plus they’re reliable, efficient, and make great torque. Mercedes has even proved they can rev as high as a car engine and make plenty of power if you’re smart about the design. This is another reason I think Dieselgate is the least of VW’s crimes, if you run their cars on biofuel then the emissions cheating isn’t a big deal.”

      No, we shouldn’t. Ethanol requires more energy to produce than it contains. It’s stupid inefficient and the whole program was a handout to Big Agribusiness. There is nowhere near enough biofuel manufacturing to support transitioning the entire transportation sector to biodiesel.
      And CO2 is not the only harmful emission.
      We can’t do half-measures.

      1. There’s more than one way to make a biofuel. Corn ethanol is a bad idea yes, but some places are already starting to use waste products from the food industry to make biofuel, in which case you’re getting multiple products out of the same field which don’t compete with each other.

        It’s worth pursuing regardless. The energy density of diesel alone makes it worth continuing to research.

        And the fact that there’s nowhere near enough production of biofuel to support transitioning the entire transportation sector is WHY my hot take is that we should be focusing more on it! It’s a good idea we need to increase the scale of so that it gets more cost effective.

      2. “Ethanol requires more energy to produce than it contains”

        That argument is based on antiquated data and hasn’t been true for decades:

        “A new analysis by the Renewable Fuels Association found corn ethanol now provides nearly three times the energy used to produce it.

        The average energy balance ratio for corn ethanol in 2021 is estimated to be 2.8 to 3, compared to the 2.1 to 2.3 found in the 2016 U.S. Department of Agriculture report. The ratio for the top-performing quartile of biorefineries is 3.7 to 4, according to the RFA analysis.”

        https://www.agrinews-pubs.com/business/2022/05/09/study-finds-improved-ethanol-energy-balance/

        Even if you don’t believe the quoted numbers the positive energy balance has been true for a long time.

    4. “Everyone who says classic cars are unreliable crap hasn’t daily driven one”

      I have. It was unreliable until I retromodded the gaskets from paper and cork to silicone and the points to an electronic module. Then it was just a smelly, dirty, leaky, dangerous maintainence hog.

      1. When I was learning to drive, my dad told me to assume everyone was an idiot and was going to do something you don’t expect. Probably some of the best advice I’ve ever received.

  13. Old man yells at cloud: We’re well past the point of diminishing returns on tech in cars. Most of what’s being added these days is either not a meaningful improvement on what we had before, or actively worse (looking at you, touchscreen climate controls).

    1. Screens instead of physical gauges, non-owner upgradeable center screens/infotainment systems, complex moving LED lights, all add THOUSANDS of dollars to repair costs of cars, and significantly limit their potential lifespans. My sister-in-law crashed my 2018 Mazda 6, and just ONE of the headlights was $2000 to replace.

  14. Battlecars and off road modified regular cars are stupid.

    They represent everything enthusiasts claim to hate about crossovers – regular cars lifted up with some off road tarting up to make it look rugged, without any real off road chops. It’s vehicular cosplay in the most try-hard way. It’s fun when it’s a true Gambler car purchased for hundreds of dollars with one foot in the grave, but I’ve never seen one done with a decent condition car and thought it to be anything other than a ploy for social media clout.

    Let cars be good at what they’re meant for.

    1. Eh, I generally see them as budget rally cars. Rally cars don’t have to be rock crawlers, just capable of going fast on bumpy dirt roads without getting ripped apart. Big tires and a few inches of lift enable that, while still having a lower center of gravity than a crossover.

      But I definitely see how it wouldn’t be everyone’s taste. Often times I feel like big tires on lifted Miatas are just ruining perfectly serviceable Miatas. When it’s something like a Honda Accord, it wasn’t that exciting prior to being off-roadified. Miatas meanwhile were made to handle well, as doing so is their purpose, and putting big tires on them makes them worse sports cars in such a way that they can’t be put back to stock afterwards.

  15. 1-Driver aids like smart cruise and lane departure protections are actually less safe and encourage people not to drive actively or be aware of their surroundings. Conveniences are one thing, but when a vehicle has the authority to question me for changing lanes without a signal, I cannot fathom being supportive of that.
    2- so many car enthusiasts today seem to hate cars. We shouldn’t be celebrating the dilution of what makes cars fun, we should be at most apathetic about it.
    3- Subaru wagon drivers cause traffic. This isn’t really a hot take though, it’s not an arguable statement that they’re horrible drivers.
    4- BMW hasn’t made a good car since the E46
    5- the new American Market Land Cruiser – is NOT- a Land Cruiser.

  17. Here’s a really really hot one: Airbags are dumb and stupid, and they absolutely should not be required. Trying to save the driver by setting off explosives in front of their face seems like a terrible idea, and the test of time has told us that……. Yeah, it’s a terrible idea.

    Over one in six drivers airbags EVER sold in the US has been recalled *just in the Takata recalls* because the bomb in front of the driver was too likely to kill the driver.

    Also, they’re just not necessary. Airbags were meant to replace seatbelts, and they will save your life if you’re not wearing your seatbelt, but they provide minimal benefit for the intelligent among us who use safety features.

    Related: TPMS is dumb and stupid and useless and shouldn’t be required.

    1. Decades of data have shown that airbags with seatbelts are the safest.

      Front airbags reduce driver fatalities in frontal crashes by 29% and fatalities of front-seat passengers age 13 and older by 32%(Kahane, 2015).Side airbags that protect the head reduce a car driver’s risk of death in driver-side crashes by 37% and an SUV driver’s risk by 52% (McCartt & Kyrychenko, 2007).A study of crashes in Australia found that side airbags with head and torso protection reduce a car driver’s risk of death or injury in driver-side crashes by 41% (D’Elia et al., 2013).NHTSA estimates that as of 2017, 50,457 lives have been saved by frontal airbags (National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2020).Paying attention to a small number of preventable injuries from failed airbags does not give the right impression of the large number of people that have been saved by them.

      NHTSA estimates that during 1990-2008, more than 290 deaths were caused by frontal airbag inflation in low-speed crashes (National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2017). Nearly 90% of the deaths occurred in vehicles manufactured before 1998, and more than 80% of people killed were unbelted or improperly restrained.
      1 in 6 being recalled in no way means that 1 in 6 would be hurt by them. 1 in 6 had a very very small, preventable, chance of misfiring and causing an injury.
      The data shows that airbags, with seatbelts, are far safer than without either.

      50,457 >> 290

      EDIT: TPMS is dumb and stupid. I hate paying $80+ for a valve stem. People should just pay attention to their tires and check the pressure once in a while.

      1. “EDIT: TPMS is dumb and stupid. I hate paying $80+ for a valve stem. People should just pay attention to their tires and check the pressure once in a while.”

        Or pay $25 for an aftermarket solution that screws sensors onto your existing $2 valve stems and gives you individual pressure and temperature data.

    2. Over one in six drivers airbags EVER sold in the US has been recalled *just in the Takata recalls* because the bomb in front of the driver was too likely to kill the driver.

      That’s because Takata cheaped out and used the wrong TYPE of bomb. That’s not a good indicator of airbag quality/efficacy in general.

    2. I have a persistent and horrifying imagination of what happens in an accident when the airbag goes off, and Fluffy is caught between the driver and the airbag. Honestly, it’s terrible. And I can’t stop it anytime I see someone with a dog in their lap.

      “Don’t get me wrong, I don’t wish the (dog) harm, but his mother should suffer that horrific ordeal so she’ll learn how to manage her (dog)!”

    3. I can’t stand to see people letting animals run all around their cars. I worry enough about the safety of our cats when I transport them to the vet, and they stay in their carriers, in the rear passenger floorboard. Our dog is a terrible car passenger, and is always buckled in with a crash-tested device on the few occasions she has to go in the car. People wouldn’t let their kids crawl all over their cars unbelted, so why are they okay with letting their pets do it? It’s not just unsafe for the pet, it’s unsafe for everyone in the car and for everyone sharing the road. Have you ever had a cat try to get under the pedals of a car while going down the highway? I have, and since then I have never let any of my animals ride in the car unrestrained. (The cat in question was not harmed, and is living a very happy life having recently turned 12).

    2. there should be a law that any law concerning cars be reviewed by a panel of automotive enthusiasts to see if they vibe with it, and if they don’t, the law doesn’t get passed.

  20. Body roll doesn’t hurt steering precision at all; camber and toe change during suspension travel do. Eliminate those, and enjoy consistent sub-centimeter steering precision over bumps and around corners even with a famously soft suspension. Yes, soft constant camber suspension reduces ultimate cornering grip absent active anti-roll because the tires lean as much as the car, but maybe it’s worth it since one feels ride and steering more often.

  21. My hot takes:

    You should need endorsements for larger vehicles, trailers, high horsepower, etc. Motorcycles mostly put you at risk, not others, so I’m okay with eliminating that endorsement. These endorsements should require periodic retesting.

    Faux-offroad vehicles aren’t all that bad, since they put people who might buy an offroad vehicle for highway use into something with reasonable road handling.

    Insurance should be nationalized or state-owned (at least partially). It’s required for driving on public roadways (in most instances) and is for the public good. This would not only allow for better tracking of uninsured drivers (compare licensed drivers and/or registered vehicles with the insurance rolls), but it would also better inform NHTSA decisions. It would also likely help inform updates to minimum coverage requirements and such.

    Driving a manual transmission isn’t really a special skill. This is mostly a hot take on Facebook, where people love to call it a Millennial or Gen Z anti-theft device. I’d argue that anyone could be driving a manual with only a little bit of searching and a bit of trial-and-error (with an instructor, even simpler). It’s not that tricky to get going, and you’ll get better as you go.

    Safety and emissions inspections are necessary and helpful, and they should be in place and well-enforced.

    Loud pipes do not save lives.

    1. Driving manual isn’t a special skill, but it is an uncommon one. I have yet to encounter anybody who actually thinks it’s that difficult.

      2. For no reason other than *I* personally enjoy it, I’ve owned only manual cars since I started driving 15 years ago. No judgement on anyone for not wanting to own/drive/learn one from me, I know I’m in the minority for preferring a stick. Autos these days are generally great. But I do hear the “but it looks so hard and you always have to be thinking about it” a lot from friends. It’s the learning part that can be hard. But once it clicks, you don’t think much about it any more. I’d be willing to bet most anyone could get the hang of a stick if they had to live with one for a few weeks.

    2. I hate that loud pipes bullshit. You know where the sound from loud pipes goes? Literally everywhere except in front of you. It doesn’t do shit until you’re already past the entity you need to be aware of your existence. But the neighborhood you rode by and every sad sack within two miles of an interstate knows where you are.

  22. My hot take is that there really aren’t many cars made after 2003 that are worth owning. I also don’t like American cars in any way, shape, or form, regardless of era. I generally stick to Euro only, with a handful of exceptions for Japanese cars, like the first-gen NSX. I also have no desire to ever own or drive an EV, and will continue driving my gas-powered BMW until I’m in the ground.

  23. -All vehicles should have adjustable pedals with tilt/telescoping columns, and automatic headlights. I don’t care about the cost, the safety improvements from drivers being properly situated in their vehicles and being able to see and be seen is worth it.

    -All jurisdictions with taxpayer-funded roads should have mandatory safety inspections, and with stricter requirements than most have. They don’t need to be as involved as Germany’s TÜV, but vehicles should at least have most of the equivalent parts they left the factory with, not have super-tall or super-low suspensions, have tires with more tread than the wear bars showing, and limited mods that are meant solely “for off-road use only”.

    -I would happily have traded – and still would – Suzuki’s survival in the U.S. (and eventually Canada IIRC) at the expense of both Mitsubishi and Subaru. This is hot because – at the time – Subaru had a decent WRX STI, and Mitsubishi was still making the Lancer Evolution. Subaru and Mitsubishi also had/have a stronger lineup of larger vehicles and crossovers. But this way we’d have the Jimny, which I’d much rather have as an option than the crosstrek and Mirage.

    -Hondas aren’t that great, and haven’t been for a couple of decades or so. They’re better than many, but not the pinnacle of automotive prowess that folks falsely attribute to them based on relatively-ancient reputations.

    -Crossovers are fine (and are just tall hatchbacks and wagons). They’re the most closely-aligned class of vehicle to the original five or so decades of automobiles.

    -EVs are fine. They need to keep up with development, and petroleum companies should be investing more in electric utilities and companies to encourage folks to install decent home chargers.

    -We need distinct class-based skill-dependent licensing for all drivers, and restrict the purchase and driving of other classes to those who get the appropriate license. License renewal would also be dependent on driving history and retaking said tests more frequently than now. Most drivers would quality for basic cars as they do now (kinda like the Gran Turismo video game), but high-power muscle cars, large pickups, off-road focused SUVs and trucks, etc., would be restricted to those who qualified. This would keep the neighborhood Kyle/Karen from wandering around the road in their Canyonero while juggling phone, food, and selfie camera; the new owner of the Chevodge Charmastang would know how not to curb the vehicle at their local car show; and would mean that the construction worker driving their Ramrolet F-Teenthousand work truck with a skid steer on a trailer would know how to properly and safely drive it.

    -In that same vein, manufacturers could/should offer license-based key lockouts, like they do with track/max-velocity and young/restricted-driver keys. That way an enthusiast could get their Chevodge Charmastang with restricted performance, and as the owners increases their skill and famoarity they get licensed to a higher level and earn the ability to have the key that unlocks higher performance thresholds.

    -Acceleration and top speed should be GPS-limited, especially for motorcycles. The top speed can be more than the local speed limits, but anything more than say 100-120mph should be restricted to a race track.

    -Neighborhood associations andnlocal governments cannot complain about the noises from preexisting racetrack. Much like moving near railroad tracks, residents should expect some noise and traffic from the use of such a facility. The tracks also shouldn’t be stigmatized, and local enthusiasts should be encouraged/rewarded (somehow) with using them to sate their needs for speed. I’d even be open to a taxpayer subsidy for such places to a point, as the funneling of enthusiasts to using the tracks off of public roads could/would/should lessen the needs for law enforcement and emergency response services. Especially if coupled with the aforementioned GPS restrictions and licensing tiers.

      1. Yeah talk about BIG government & regulation. Though on a flipside I would gladly subject myself to extensive driver testing for 1-2 exemption speeding tickets a year.

        1. Yeah I’m not a big fan of big government, nor government being finitely involved in relatively personal issues, but we’ve already established automotive and roads as using taxpayers’, road users’, and vehicle owners’ funding, so we may as well make the most of it, without getting too crazy.

          Driving is a privilege, but too many drivers and riders treat public roads like their personal playgrounds, and with little consequence until things go very wrong – and usually involving innocent folks that just happened to be in proximity to the problem.

          1. I agree driver training, expertise, and testing in the US is a joke. While all officials like to claim speeding is the main problem; WRONG, it’s idiot/bad drivers and poorly maintained vehicles.

            2 examples from yesterday; a SCHOOL bus blew through a red light and had to be close to 10mph over the speed limit through the intersection. Second, I was at a red left arrow light, a woman in a big SUV is in right turn lane opposite direction for close to 1 min not moving, I knew when I got my green it was going to be an issue. My green arrow pops and 2/3 my turn without looking left or straight she guns it to turn right, a normal person would of crashed into her. Oh she was on a cell phone…

      2. I agree that the racetrack one isn’t very spicy, but it’s something that needs to be in the common discourse, as more tracks are being shuttered as neighborhood developers continue to encroach into areas that were previously fairly rural.

        Just because you might disagree doesn’t make my takes bad.

          1. That’d be good, especially with the way the ‘ring is setup, maintained, and overseen. Plus the local areas get a tourism boost. Win-win.

  24. Despite their popularity, the Ford Tauruses of the late 90s/early 2000s are some of the ugliest, most depressing, dreary to drive cars ever built…at least in the past 30 years or so, since I’ve been alive. I’ve spent hours behind the wheel of more than one of those, and I don’t think I’ve driven anything worse. Bouncy, devoid of any driving dynamics, coarse sounding engine, dreadful automatic transmissions that failed all the time and that could never make the most of the engine’s power, and rear suspensions that collapsed after a few years, making the car look like it was taking a dump if you had a few bags of groceries in the trunk. Plus, they’re hideous. Even when they restyled a bit to get away from all the oval shaped everything. Every person I’ve known who owned one had some kind of expensive failure, from transmissions to engines to cooling systems. Maybe it’s irrational. Probably it is. I’m sure they were perfectly fine, dependable transportation for thousands of people, otherwise they wouldn’t have sold so many. But I can’t stand the damn things.

    1. I agree, Ford Tauruses have been absolutely awful cars, regardless of generation. I have a friend that’s obsessed with Ford Tauruses and I genuinely question whether he’s okay in the head.

    2. You need to get out more and experience more cars from that era and beyond.

      Yeah, the Taurus/Sable were a bit milquetoast, but they were less dreary and cheap-feeling than the malibu/century, cirrus/stratus/breeze, sonata, galant, etc. They were no Camry, accord, or 626, sure, but they were OK for what they were. Not enough owners followed the transmission service intervals (which admittedly could/should have been more frequent) and Ford did offer extended coverages for the transmissions, which was good, but also a bit of “closing the barn door after the horses escaped”, so to speak.

      There weren’t many truly great cars from that era (1997-2002, ish). The requirement of OBD II caused a bit of a hiccup through the whole industry. The Japanese offerings peaked earlier in the late ’90s as they were dealing with the aftermath of their recession; the Americans were continuing to coast on domestic goodwill; the Europeans were getting a bit too tech-focused at the expense of overall quality and refinement.

      1. I think my window for experiencing average cars from that era has closed, but you’re probably right. That said I have driven close to 100 different cars, mostly a product of doing pick ups/drop offs for a car detailing business I had. I imagine a lot of the cars you listed were just as unpleasant. I think part of it was because they made so many Tauruses, one single model, that I was more likely to experience/hear about experiences with them, just because more people had them. But I’ll still argue that they are among the ugliest cars built during that time period. I don’t know what specifically makes them so visually repugnant to me, but they are. I think your statement on American car companies coasting along on domestic goodwill is a good explanation for why there were so many dreary domestic cars at the time. Growing up in a city with two Ford plants, the “buy ‘murican” mentality was very prevalent.

        And, (trigger warning) while I’ve hated the Taurus since I was a kid and they were still building them, one of my best friends committed suicide in one when we were teenagers. Not to get all morbid on everyone, but that just cemented my dislike for the car, even though I know it’s not the car’s fault.

    3. Counterpoint: Some Tauri had a 3.0 liter V6 designed by Porsche, Yamaha, and Cosworth. Said engine is a fantastic tuning platform and has formed the basis of multiple boutique supercar engines with upwards of 500 hp.

      And the Taurus SHO had a 3.4 liter Yamaha V8 that sounds amazing with a proper exhaust!

      Also (and this may be a personal hot take) the blob Taurus actually looks pretty good on slammed suspension. Really makes the proportions a lot better. That may just be me though.

      1. Regarding slammed Tauruses, that might just be you lol but that’s the point of this thread, hot takes! It probably does look better though, and it certainly can’t look any worse than a stock one.

        I have heard good things about that V6 engine before, and to be fair it seems the engines seem to outlast the cars, or at least, the transmissions, in many cases. If I had to pick a “best feature” of my least favorite car it would be the engine. At least the things had enough power. I think it (and the V8 you mentioned) are cases of good engines stuck in uninspiring cars.

  25. My hot take: Wrenchers outside of the rustbelt are wrenchers in name only. Don’t get me wrong, though, it’s not their fault. They think they’re dedicated and hard working, they’ve never been truly challenged.

    The problem solving that comes with working on a rusted car challenges the mind and invokes creativity like nothing else. Rust belt wrenchers are connoisseurs of blow torches, extend their breaker bars with pipes, and know the pros and cons of every penetrating lubricant. The dedication it takes to spend 45 minutes removing a single axle nut is something inherent in the rust belt wrencher. While every one of those 45 minutes is pure misery, the sense of accomplishment when it’s over is enough to send oxytocin levels through the stratosphere. Afterward you can be certain the war story will be shared and appreciated.

    Being a rustbelt wrencher myself, I covet the cars whose nuts and bolts actually turn, but that simply isn’t my reality and I don’t know if I want it to be. I hate and love the creativity of problem solving and would be sad to see it taken away from my wrenching experience. Scope creep is a normal part of any repair in the rustbelt and sometimes the task changes from replacing a single part to replacing an entire assembly. If a bolt is good and truly stuck, sometimes the next bolt up the line becomes the target. The car must be fixed, so a way must be found.

    I appreciate and respect all wrenchers and think we need to stick together, but the dedication, creativity, and junkyard-smarts of those in the rustbelt are on another level.

    1. I’m okay with not being a *real* wrencher then, I specifically moved to Arizona to never see rust. As a generally lazy person, I enjoy wrenching on easy mode.

Leave a Reply