What car is right for me?

FWIW, my brother has a Bolt. (In California.) He likes it a lot, but he's clearly having an inferiority complex about it, since he keeps telling me how much better it is than my Model 3 that doesn't exist yet.

Or he’s just being accurate. :) Motor Trend and other pro reviewers who’ve been reviewing vehicles decades longer than Tesla has existed, have direct quotes like “Musk should be worried.” in articles all over the place when reviewing the Bolt. Same people who’ve had early access to everything Tesla has done and have more miles in Teslas than all but the earliest Model S owners.

Please explain this nonsense to me. Why do you hate GM and what company would you give your dollars to... if you were ever to actually buy a new car?

GM should have died. Manipulation of politics to completely break the rules of business (and screw their bond holders who KNEW the company had negotiated terms that literally meant their death, so they invested in the inevitable sell off) is detestable and I won’t support it in any way. Chrysler’s plan to avoid a similar fate by running to Daimler was at least honest business. Ford was the best behaved of all of them. (Of course ignoring the Japanese and Korean companies who wouldn’t and haven’t ever behaved like the Big Three... and generally build longer lasting and higher quality products still.)

Same problem with AIG, and various other banks. It’s nearly impossible to avoid AIG in aviation insurance nowadays when they should have gone all the way under and been liquidated. Wells Fargo also should have been gone, not a massively rewarded business by the decisions made during the bail outs.

The proof is in the pudding on WF. They only consciously screwed how many millions of people when their bad management caught up with them again finally? REWARDING employees for defrauding customers? This is built into WFs DNA.

Just mentioning the banks because it’s the same reason. I vote with dollars and won’t give GM, WF, or AIG a penny if I can avoid it.

Others can ignore their behavior and apply whatever morals they like. I can’t.

I also don’t apply it to used vehicles. Buying a used vehicle isn’t helping their quarterly earnings THIS year and they’re not benefitting from it in any way. (I haven’t taken a vehicle to a dealer for maintenance since the nightmare VW, and that was only to be SURE to maintain the scary cheap third extended warranty that paid out over $13,500 in repairs on that POS. There was never any question that car was maintained to VW standards as it continued to fall apart at the seams.)
 

Because they will lose money on them and they can't afford that with Elon's grand expansion plans and current cash burn. The announcement of the "$35,000 Tesla" was mostly bravado and hype. Elon put it out there to generate great interest and headlines and then hoped that in the ensuing years that battery expenses would drop significantly and that the robotic assembly of the Model 3 would make it happen. So far it's not realistic. Likely they will build a few, make a big deal out of it and then either cancel the option due to "lack of interest", or just raise the price of the base.
 
It still floors me we are even talking about $35,000 vehicles anyway. My first car was $900.

Watched a very interesting review and discussion about the tech in cars the other day.

Many of the dashboards are using touch screen and software now to act as controls for things in the cabin like heat/air, etc.

Most of the software running in that dash, even the OS it’s running on, is outdated and insecure within a year of release.

Crackers/Hackers (both good and bad ones) are going to start finding vehicles much more fruitful to attack than some other things. And they’re really insecure.

But more interestingly are the proprietary bus protocols. So your pretty 12” touchscreen barfs and the vehicle is already nearly fully depreciated seven years after you bought it. You going to pay $5000 so the heater will turn on again?

Heater is fine. Expensive control panel with a bunch of yesteryear’s software in it you don’t even use anymore is dead, which doesn’t matter at all on this old car, but it took the temperature and fan controls with it.

Will someone have hacked together a little microcontroller and cracked the manufacturer’s proprietary bus protocol (illegal since they copyrighted and protected it in various ways) so you can wire up a $4 quad-pushbuttons to control hot/cold and fan speed?

If not, do you junk the entire car when the touchscreen stops working since it’s worth more than the car is?
 
7b09348d12f5701f1ff99d131d6684d1.jpg

images


Nauga,
who carfed
 
Or he’s just being accurate. :)

He has zero experience with the Model 3... So no.

It may also be that he was going to buy a Model S, but his wife didn't like it (the regen was too strong for her taste) so he ended up with the Bolt (where the regen is on paddles or somesuch).

Motor Trend and other pro reviewers who’ve been reviewing vehicles decades longer than Tesla has existed, have direct quotes like “Musk should be worried.”

Anyone who thinks Musk should be worried is an idiot. The Bolt is a compliance car, and they're producing only 25,000 per year. Even Tesla, with the problems they've had ramping up Model 3 production, is making more Model 3s than Chevy is making Bolts. GM, like most other traditional car manufacturers, doesn't really want to be selling electric cars - They're forced into it by CARB rules. Word is that they lose between $8K-$10K for every Bolt sold, but they more than make up for it with the bigger vehicles that allows them to sell in CARB states.

Same people who’ve had early access to everything Tesla has done and have more miles in Teslas than all but the earliest Model S owners.

Puh-leeze. No reviewer has "more miles in Teslas" than any but the newest of owners unless they are an owner.

GM should have died.

Absolutely. But, privatize the profits, socialize the losses, take your golden parachute and run - It's the American way!

Because they will lose money on them and they can't afford that with Elon's grand expansion plans and current cash burn. The announcement of the "$35,000 Tesla" was mostly bravado and hype. Elon put it out there to generate great interest and headlines and then hoped that in the ensuing years that battery expenses would drop significantly and that the robotic assembly of the Model 3 would make it happen. So far it's not realistic. Likely they will build a few, make a big deal out of it and then either cancel the option due to "lack of interest", or just raise the price of the base.

Highly doubtful. Can you imagine what THAT would do to their stock price? And Musk's compensation package is 100% dependent on their long-term growth.

Now, I don't know that they'll sell a lot of them. To me, the longer range is the most important option, though I must admit the price difference has me thinking twice. (Well, that and all the other options I want.) But in reality, in our family, we have one family hauler and one commuter, and the commuter role is currently served by a 114-mile-range BMW i3. I've even taken it to my client near the edges of its cold-weather range several times, and either parked at a place around the corner with L2 chargers or stopped at a fast charger while I eat dinner on the way home, so I could probably get along just fine with the base Model 3 as the commuter.

I also think that most people's primary worry with EVs is range, so I expect that a lot of people, like me, will spring for it even if they really don't need it. But I do NOT think that Tesla will remove the option of getting the cheaper, shorter-range version.
 
GM should have died. Manipulation of politics to completely break the rules of business (and screw their bond holders who KNEW the company had negotiated terms that literally meant their death, so they invested in the inevitable sell off) is detestable and I won’t support it in any way. Chrysler’s plan to avoid a similar fate by running to Daimler was at least honest business. Ford was the best behaved of all of them. (Of course ignoring the Japanese and Korean companies who wouldn’t and haven’t ever behaved like the Big Three... and generally build longer lasting and higher quality products still.)

The first rule of business is there are no rules of business. There is just what you can get away with. The bigger you are, the more you can get away with. Ford was best behaved because they plain and simple got lucky and found buyers for some of their lame assets. Your well regarded Japanese and Korean car companies also break the "rules of business". They do so with their government sponsored unfair trade practices and protected ownership rules. I guarantee that Toyota, or Honda, or Hyundai will never go bankrupt and disappear because their governments will damn sure bail them out and keep them afloat. Same goes for the German brands as well.
 
Anyone who thinks Musk should be worried is an idiot. The Bolt is a compliance car, and they're producing only 25,000 per year. Even Tesla, with the problems they've had ramping up Model 3 production, is making more Model 3s than Chevy is making Bolts. GM, like most other traditional car manufacturers, doesn't really want to be selling electric cars - They're forced into it by CARB rules. Word is that they lose between $8K-$10K for every Bolt sold, but they more than make up for it with the bigger vehicles that allows them to sell in CARB states.

.

So you’ve just proved your brother’s point? Motor Trend Car of the Year for an $8-$10K discount paid for by some SUV owner? Seems like that’s a lot smarter than waiting around to see what Musk is going to charge you on what the pro reviewers say is now a weaker product. Doesn’t sound like he’s wrong, to me.
 
The first rule of business is there are no rules of business. There is just what you can get away with. The bigger you are, the more you can get away with. Ford was best behaved because they plain and simple got lucky and found buyers for some of their lame assets. Your well regarded Japanese and Korean car companies also break the "rules of business". They do so with their government sponsored unfair trade practices and protected ownership rules. I guarantee that Toyota, or Honda, or Hyundai will never go bankrupt and disappear because their governments will damn sure bail them out and keep them afloat. Same goes for the German brands as well.

Perhaps that’s what we’re down to now, with the current state of lack of personal morals. Call it good because there are no rules. Why not?

I see the Disney shareholders finally said no to a CEO compensation package — perhaps people finally realize how much they’re being ripped off to pay for these dip****’s lifestyles?
 
The Bolt is a compliance car, and they're producing only 25,000 per year. Even Tesla, with the problems they've had ramping up Model 3 production, is making more Model 3s than Chevy is making Bolts. GM, like most other traditional car manufacturers, doesn't really want to be selling electric cars - They're forced into it by CARB rules. Word is that they lose between $8K-$10K for every Bolt sold, but they more than make up for it with the bigger vehicles that allows them to sell in CARB states.

Since you have inside insight to GM's strategies and plans, riddle me this- Why would GM spend so much money and resources on the Bolt if all they wanted was a CARB compliant vehicle? They already had the Spark EV and was fully compliant. They could have just kept building them. Just because GM hasn't announced plans to turn all their cars and trucks into BEVs, doesn't mean that GM doesn't want to sell EVs. They just don't have the luxury of losing money quarter after quarter like Tesla does.

Highly doubtful. Can you imagine what THAT would do to their stock price? And Musk's compensation package is 100% dependent on their long-term growth.

I can imagine what that would do to their stock price and that's why you can't get one. That's why they are delaying as long as they can. They hope to make enough profit on other products to eat it on the few base Model 3s they actually do sell. Musk's compensation package doesn't mean much. Musk is already wealthy and he is a risk taker, salesman and gamesman. I doubt he cares about the money. He just wants to win and if he loses, it's no big deal. He can always get more money with his golden tongue.

I also think that most people's primary worry with EVs is range, so I expect that a lot of people, like me, will spring for it even if they really don't need it. But I do NOT think that Tesla will remove the option of getting the cheaper, shorter-range version.

I think you are right about the proportion of short range vs. long range. Tesla buyers are wealthy people and what's an extra $9000? Why not get the range? Elon Musk and Tesla are not interested in serving median income people. They want to make slick, pretty and luxurious things, not budget things. Like I said, they will make a handful of the "$35,000" (Really $36,200 once you include the mandatory destination fees) just to save face and prove they are good on their word and then quietly discontinue it.
 
Perhaps that’s what we’re down to now, with the current state of lack of personal morals. Call it good because there are no rules. Why not?

I see the Disney shareholders finally said no to a CEO compensation package — perhaps people finally realize how much they’re being ripped off to pay for these dip****’s lifestyles?

I think if you examine history, there has never been a time of people with good personal morals running the world. The game has been rigged since the beginning of civilization. The rich have always gotten richer and poor have always gotten poorer. There was a brief time in America when it was thought that building a strong middle class was a good way to get rich and prosperous by making money off of them, but the tide has turned back to the older ways because it was taking too long to acquire and control nearly all the wealth in the world.
 
I think if you examine history, there has never been a time of people with good personal morals running the world. The game has been rigged since the beginning of civilization. The rich have always gotten richer and poor have always gotten poorer. There was a brief time in America when it was thought that building a strong middle class was a good way to get rich and prosperous by making money off of them, but the tide has turned back to the older ways because it was taking too long to acquire and control nearly all the wealth in the world.

Perhaps. This particular middle class guy isn’t giving GM any money though. :) They can find some other way to steal it.
 
As for "which car"...

If you like to tinker and own a good set of tools, an MG with mechanical injectors....
If you want a reliable car, and have loads of money in the event it might break: BMW
Zoom zoom: Mazda

and so forth...
 
So yeah, the Model 3 is really a 56K car. With several reviews showing ride and build quality issues. Just the touch screen alone would be a no go for me. I can just see me plowing into the back of a bus while trying to adjust the AC. It would be annoying looking right all the time for my speedometer too.

Musk keeps promising 5,000 a week and they’ve only made 8,000 for the first quarter. They haven’t even come close to production goals yet. Nice looking vehicle but the cost and hideous interior put me off.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/will-model-3-quality-concerns-hurt-teslas-reputation/
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-tesla-model-3-in-depth-review
 
Last edited:
So you’ve just proved your brother’s point? Motor Trend Car of the Year for an $8-$10K discount paid for by some SUV owner? Seems like that’s a lot smarter than waiting around to see what Musk is going to charge you on what the pro reviewers say is now a weaker product. Doesn’t sound like he’s wrong, to me.

GM advertises in Motor Trend, Tesla does not.

And I don't think the Bolt is a bad car by any means. But, it's not a Tesla either. When it comes to EVs, the traditional automakers have some MAJOR disadvantages:

1) The dealers don't want to sell EVs. They don't really make money on new cars, they make money on maintenance and EVs are darn near maintenance free. Replace the tires and wiper blades every so often, and that's practically it. Tesla recommends you come in for a once-a-year checkup, but plenty of their owners have never done it at all and have been fine doing nothing but tires and wiper blades for 100K+ miles. No oil changes, and much rarer brake jobs thanks to regen, and many fewer moving parts is what allows that to happen. But, it means the dealers' profit would tank so they don't do it. It's not always purposeful, but they're certainly not investing in training on how to sell them except some rare cases.

2) Charging infrastructure. The Bolt is not a road-trip car unless you're on the coasts, and even then it's iffy. Tesla's Supercharger network is spread throughout the country quite evenly, while the third-party fast chargers that work with the Bolt are generally concentrated in cities. If I were to try to drive to the Twin Cities in a Bolt and started fully charged, I would have to drive the first 80ish miles, then charge all the way up to full (which would take 1-2 hours), then go the rest of the way... And that's only if the weather is good and I don't have to run the HVAC. In that case, it'd mean another several-hour stop at a slower charging station (which are few and far between already). Basically, an all-day ordeal to go around 300 miles. And then I'd have to figure out a way to charge it up for the return trip - 3 hours at a CCS charger, or a day or two on a 240V charger.

Nationwide SAE-CCS chargers:
Screen Shot 2018-05-11 at 3.37.02 PM.png

In the longer-range Model 3, I could charge fully at home and go the whole way. If it was cold and/or I needed HVAC, I could stop for 20-30 minutes in Madison, Mauston, or Eau Claire. I could use one of the Superchargers up there for 1/2 hour to "gas up" for the return trip and make another 20-30 minute stop halfway back. Done.

Nationwide Tesla Superchargers:
Screen Shot 2018-05-11 at 3.36.31 PM.png

3) Charging speed. The Superchargers are currently 120kW while most of the SAE-CCS chargers are theoretically 50kW but the most I usually see when I use them is about 35kW. That means that the Tesla can charge from zero to 80% in 1/2 hour and get on down the road, while the Bolt, which already has shorter range, will take a couple of hours.

4) Updates. The large touchscreens and always-connected nature of the Teslas allow them to continue delivering new features so the car gets even better over time. That's huge - Even the oldest Model S cars got new features recently.

But, bottom line, saying Tesla sucks gets you clicks, and clicks get you money. Plain and simple. What I'm hearing from real owners is that they are elated, and it's the best car they've ever had.

Since you have inside insight to GM's strategies and plans, riddle me this- Why would GM spend so much money and resources on the Bolt if all they wanted was a CARB compliant vehicle? They already had the Spark EV and was fully compliant. They could have just kept building them.

Because it doesn't get you an EV credit unless someone actually buys the thing. :rofl:

But there is more to it than that. Tesla is a threat to them all. For years they've been telling CARB that "Nobody wants these electric cars! We can't sell them! You can't require us to sell something that people won't buy!" and such. Then, Tesla comes along and makes an electric car that people really want, and proves them wrong. So, the more they can do to slow Tesla down, the better it is for them. "We're better at this than Tesla is, we were first to market, you should listen to us, Tesla is nothing but hype," yadda yadda yadda.

Just because GM hasn't announced plans to turn all their cars and trucks into BEVs, doesn't mean that GM doesn't want to sell EVs. They just don't have the luxury of losing money quarter after quarter like Tesla does.

Au contraire. GM can lose money on EVs all day long and not care about it, because they can make it up by selling big gas guzzlers. If Tesla loses money on EVs, Tesla loses money, period. And Tesla can't be in the red for too much longer - Nate is right about that. But it sounds like Elon is not going to try to raise funds at all, and is only going to reinvest the actual profits from Q3 and Q4 this year, to prove that they can make money.

I think you are right about the proportion of short range vs. long range. Tesla buyers are wealthy people and what's an extra $9000? Why not get the range?

Meh... That $9,000 is a large part of why I'm on the fence about actually converting my Model 3 reservation into a car. I think I'd prefer something that depreciates less, like solar panels on my house. I can get a used Model 3 later.

Elon Musk and Tesla are not interested in serving median income people. They want to make slick, pretty and luxurious things, not budget things.

Just like BMW, Mercedes, Audi, and the rest of their real competition. (And Apple.)

Like I said, they will make a handful of the "$35,000" (Really $36,200 once you include the mandatory destination fees) just to save face and prove they are good on their word and then quietly discontinue it.

I don't think so - Even if they never build any, I bet it'll be there. They've sold plenty of 60kWh, 70kWh, and 75 kWh Model Ss and Xs. Just because I wouldn't buy one doesn't mean nobody would.
 
Just to note: part of the VW settlement required them to spend ~$1BN (IIRC) installing EV charging stations across the US. No doubt that they are the lower capacity SAE versions, but more are coming. They were hiring not long ago for folks to manage the project.
 
Just to note: part of the VW settlement required them to spend ~$1BN (IIRC) installing EV charging stations across the US. No doubt that they are the lower capacity SAE versions, but more are coming. They were hiring not long ago for folks to manage the project.

Yup... But nothing required them to spend it smartly. $1B is enough to buy about 30,000 units, but of course that's not the only cost. Unit plus installation plus running more power to it plus plus plus... Means it won't likely buy more than 10,000 plugs.

If they were to actually copy Tesla and spread them out, that would be excellent... But again, nobody seems to realize that's how you need to do it. They're all putting them in big cities where they think they'll get more customers.
 
You’ll have to catch me up on the charger thing @flyingcheesehead. Last I heard, the Model 3 was not welcome at the Model S infrastructure. Did Tesla decide to build some chargers for poor people? LOL.

As far as this “it’s the best car I ever had” silliness, all sorts of people say that about all sorts of things that aren’t measurably better than other things.

You didn’t address the craziness of paying Tesla more if GM is building in a $8000-$10000 loss on theirs.

Seems like with automotive prices already well into the “completely ridiculous” category because dealers aren’t really selling cars anymore, they’re selling lifetime debt, buying GMs EV, if one is an EV-a-holic who wants to own their stuff and not rent it forever, gives someone $10,000 more value for their buck. That’s just numbers. (Your numbers actually. I didn’t find any evidence of it.)

And the whole “Motor Trend is in GM’s back pocket” thing is a little weird. If that were the case wouldn’t they be pushing a profitable GM product, when you combine this $10,000 discount of yours and some GM influence over their Car of the Year award? Motor Trend usually isn’t too far off the mark on those.

They’re not exactly JD Power and Associates who’ll sell anyone an award with careful wording to make it truthy sounding.

Here’s a question that might be telling, and I don’t know the answer. Would Tesla refund your deposit 100%? If they would, they really trust their product. It’s not like they need the cash with a market cap higher than Ford and a tiny fraction of Ford’s sales to build and deliver with that capital.

To me it’s just a psychological game they’re playing. If you can get someone to plunk down cash for something that doesn’t exist and keep the hype machine cranked up to eleven, that person will be irrationally positive about the product. Even defend it for no reason at all.

If it’s that good, it doesn’t need a defense against a new competitor winning Car of the Year or a belief there’s a magazine/car maker in bed with each other conspiracy going on.

I think the Bolt earned that fair and square. They were very detailed about their reasoning for awarding it. And I don’t even want one. Mostly because I don’t think it’ll work for my use case and the bad roads, but I’m also not planning on spending $35,000 on a vehicle ever again.

Too many capable vehicles out there for half of that price that someone else took the initial two to three years of depreciation on. People doing six and seven year slavery contracts, ahem, car loans, are crazy.

We’ve purchased two top of the line vehicles with the top trim lines now for well under $20K so easily, and a 3500 dual rear wheel diesel truck for under $20K also, so I can’t stomach new car prices.

I just like cars and like talking about them. Analyzing what the industry is doing. Stuff like that. I won’t be buying anything they’re selling new these days. That’d be a great way to light $20K+ on fire and watch it disappear.

If it were a new diesel truck, $20K of value and light the other $50K on fire. Totally insane.
 
You’ll have to catch me up on the charger thing @flyingcheesehead. Last I heard, the Model 3 was not welcome at the Model S infrastructure. Did Tesla decide to build some chargers for poor people? LOL.

What, have you been reading USA Today exclusively or something?

That is not now, and never has been the case. On 3/31/2016 when they unveiled the Model 3 they said it was Supercharger capable.

Now, with a Model 3 you have to pay for it... But they've been rolling back free Supercharging for the S and X as well. Free lifetime supercharging for the life of the car ended for cars delivered after 1/15/2017. Since then, the deal has been that if you use a referral code you can get free supercharging for as long as you (the first owner) have the car. Everyone else (including Model 3 owners I believe) gets 400kWh per year for free, which is good for ~1,000 miles so will make for one cheap road trip a year.

Interestingly enough, since the Model 3 is achieving some astonishing efficiency (in the neighborhood of 4 miles/kWh), they charge faster than the S or X in terms of miles per hour, which is how the car reports the charge rate. A friend of mine posted a pic of his screen showing a 457 mph charge rate on his Model 3.

Here’s a question that might be telling, and I don’t know the answer. Would Tesla refund your deposit 100%? If they would, they really trust their product.

Yes, the $1,000 deposit is 100% refundable. The $2,500 that's due when you configure your car is not. I've only heard of one person canceling and asking for their deposit back, and Tesla did not hassle them and they got a check for the full amount in a timely manner.

If I don't get the car, I may roll it over into a deposit on solar, or I may just get it back. Haven't decided yet.
 
What, have you been reading USA Today exclusively or something?

That is not now, and never has been the case. On 3/31/2016 when they unveiled the Model 3 they said it was Supercharger capable.

Now, with a Model 3 you have to pay for it... But they've been rolling back free Supercharging for the S and X as well. Free lifetime supercharging for the life of the car ended for cars delivered after 1/15/2017. Since then, the deal has been that if you use a referral code you can get free supercharging for as long as you (the first owner) have the car. Everyone else (including Model 3 owners I believe) gets 400kWh per year for free, which is good for ~1,000 miles so will make for one cheap road trip a year.

Interestingly enough, since the Model 3 is achieving some astonishing efficiency (in the neighborhood of 4 miles/kWh), they charge faster than the S or X in terms of miles per hour, which is how the car reports the charge rate. A friend of mine posted a pic of his screen showing a 457 mph charge rate on his Model 3.



Yes, the $1,000 deposit is 100% refundable. The $2,500 that's due when you configure your car is not. I've only heard of one person canceling and asking for their deposit back, and Tesla did not hassle them and they got a check for the full amount in a timely manner.

If I don't get the car, I may roll it over into a deposit on solar, or I may just get it back. Haven't decided yet.

Interesting info. Thanks. No definitely no USA Today... those schmucks can’t even be called journalists. LOL. Mostly just don’t go out of my way to try to find anything on Tesla.

I figure if they need the genpop (like me in this case) to know something, we will... Musk can get anything said on TV pretty much that he wants. Haha. Well, other than in Motor Trend, I guess. Haha.
 
Well, after a significant amount of thread drift into why Tesla should or should not rule the world (or something, I kind of lost track), I bought a new (to me) car. IMG_3121.jpg

We are now an entirely Japanese car household again. It's a 2017 with 6 speed 370Z with less than 10,000 miles on it and I had to drive more than 150 miles to find one.
 
Well, after a significant amount of thread drift into why Tesla should or should not rule the world (or something, I kind of lost track), I bought a new (to me) car. View attachment 63746

We are now an entirely Japanese car household again. It's a 2017 with 6 speed 370Z with less than 10,000 miles on it and I had to drive more than 150 miles to find one.


Isnt that a Chevy HHR in the background?
 
Should be a solid car @jsstevens One of the best HP-to-weight ratios available in a sub $40K car. I'm a Z-car guy, and like the 370Zs. The 370Z is what the 350Z should have been to begin with, lol.
 
Isnt that a Chevy HHR in the background?
Yes. It is my DILs car which she hates. It will be leaving the fold as soon as she & my son can afford to replace it. His 350Z is in the background...

But by family, I was referring to my wife & I who with my youngest daughter are my atomic family.

John
 
Last edited:
And to fill is a few gaps in the story, I did test drive the newest Miata. I fit in the new soft top barely. It is a fun car and very toss able. But it is very tight for me.

Once I drove the 370, I knew that was it.

John
 
And to fill is a few gaps in the story, I did test drive the newest Miata. I fit in the new soft top barely. It is a fun car and very toss able. But it is very tight for me.

Once I drove the 370, I knew that was it.

John

I've owned an '88 300ZX and a '95 300ZX TT. Definitely good in the sport-touring category.
 
Well, after a significant amount of thread drift into why Tesla should or should not rule the world (or something, I kind of lost track), I bought a new (to me) car. View attachment 63746

We are now an entirely Japanese car household again. It's a 2017 with 6 speed 370Z with less than 10,000 miles on it and I had to drive more than 150 miles to find one.

Oh wait, I meant this one was sexy. ;) LOL.

Seriously though. Nice.
 
Back
Top