Accountants versus Engineers

2006 Chrysler 300C

 The reason for a private company to exist is to create value/wealth for its owners. Those owners might be a mom and pop owning a small store or a huge company with millions of shareholders/owners. 

Car companies are no exception. They want to make as much money as possible to increase shareholder value. They have to do that by making cars people want to buy. But they have to make the cars cheaply enough to make a profit. And there's all sorts of regulations requiring more expense which is passed on to the buyer. 

So the company wants to make the car as cheaply as possible. With cars you get what you pay for. The cheaper the car the less amenities it will have.

I had a 2006 Chrysler 300C. It had the 5.7 liter HEMI V8 making 340 horsepower and 390 pound-feet of torque (looked a lot like the one pictured). It was also a big, heavy car. With that engine I could get going fast very quickly for a car its size. I really enjoyed that car. Except one thing. I think the accountants won over the engineers who designed it on the matter of brakes. For a big, heavy car you need really good brakes and the 300C had barely adequate brakes. Scared myself sometimes trying to stop that car. 

At the time, Chrysler was owned by Mercedes. The 300 was built with some Mercedes components but I doubt even Mercedes engineers would have put such bad brakes on that car. 

Other examples of accountants winning include the latest Corvette. While mechanically it is apparently brilliant, I've read complaints about a "Malibu interior" on a car that can cost close to $200,000 for the top models (base models are still about $70,000). Also, I've seen videos of people showing the dash bubbling on relatively new Corvettes. Not good!

Do you know of any instances where the accountants won over the engineers? It doesn't have to be in cars. Let me know in the comments below.

Yellow Headlights

A while back I saw a car in the U.S. with yellow headlights. I thought "that's weird." Probably some after-market addition. I wondered if they were legal. I see a lot of illegal after-market changes to cars, mostly LED lights that show red or blue at the front of the car.

In one country in Europe, yellow headlights were not only legal, but required.

Have you ever noticed maybe in old movies set in Europe or maybe you've traveled to Europe and seen it: some older cars in Europe have yellow headlights.

If you do see that, you immediately should know the car is from France. 

In 1937, France mandated yellow headlights to, "filter out violet, blue, and indigo light, which cause glare and dazzle for oncoming motorists" according to Google AI. Also, during World War II, it helped distinguish civilian cars from those of the Germans.

The French required yellow headlights on civilian cars until 1993, when European Union laws superseded French law. And EU law does not allow yellow headlights. If you're French and you want to put yellow headlights on your car, it has to predate 1993. Otherwise, it's illegal.

It would be interesting to see if the yellow headlights achieved their goal of making the road safer in France. Did anyone do a study on that? I don't know. 

I frankly think the yellow headlights are ugly. But that's just me.

What do you think of yellow headlights. Let me know in the comments below.

I Like Cars with Actual Names

1959 Cadillac Coupe deVille

The other day I was at a stoplight behind an Acura ADX A-Spec. That's a mouthful. Not sure what that "A-Spec" means. It doesn't seem to mean more horsepower or anything sporty according the the Acura website. (There is a Type S ADX that has more horsepower.)

But I was struck by the designation of the car: "ADX." When I was a kid most cars had names. Yes some still do, but a lot of car companies have just gone to alphanumerics. Acura is one of the worst offenders, as are Cadillac (except for the Escalade and their electric vehicles) and Infiniti. The Ford F-150 (pickup truck) has been called that since 1984, but Ford and Lincoln still name their other vehicles such as the Mustang, the Explorer, and the Navigator.

BMW, Audi, and Mercedes Benz have, as far as I know, always used alphanumerics. They used to mean something. For example a BMW 540i was a 5-series with a 4.0 liter V-8 engine. The "i" meant that is was a fuel-injected gas vehicle.

Car names used to evoke emotions such as Camaro (a made-up word) or Bonneville. Ford sullied the Mustang name by attaching it to an SUV EV. I've read that Chevrolet is planning a Corvette line of vehicles, including an SUV. I hope not.

It got me thinking: which letters are cool on cars and which are not? There's only 26 letters in the alphabet and some haven't been used, as far as I know. Such as K or U. Even B found a home in the Toyota bz4x EV.

"GT" has been used a lot on cars, especially the Mustang. "GT" stands for "grand tourer" or "gran tourer" (or in Italian, "Gran Turismo"), Ferrari also used "GT" on some of its cars such as the  250 GT California Spyder. (I talk about what "Spyder" means here.)

I miss cars having names. the Cadillac CT5 isn't as evocative as "Coupe deVille." 

What do you think? Do you prefer cars to have names or just alphanumerics. And which letters aren't cool on cars? Let me know in the comments below.

Sting Ray Robb

IndyCar

This year, Fox Sports is showing IndyCar racing, which is fun to watch. I like IndyCar because it's not boring like NASCAR, not confusing like IMSA, and not quite as precise as Formula 1. Plus the same people/teams don't win the races all the time like in F1. Although Alex Palou won over half this year's IndyCar races and won the championship with two races left in the season. He might be moving to F1.

There's an 23-year-old IndyCar driver named Sting Ray Robb (yes, that's his real name; his parents were Chevrolet fans and named him after the Corvette Sting Ray) and when they introduce him, he says he's from Payette, Idaho. That amazed me because Payette is a small town (about 8,000 souls) near the Oregon border northwest of Boise. It's not too far north of Interstate 84.

And I wondered how someone from such a small town could end up being an IndyCar driver. Payette is about the same size as the small town in Idaho where I mostly grew up. So I googled him. Wikipedia said he started kart racing at age 5. Which means when I decided I wanted to be a race car driver at age 8, I was already too late. 

But where did Robb race karts. Boise is the nearest town of any size and about an hour drive away for Payette. And, yes, there's a kart racing facility in Eagle, ID which is a suburb of Boise. So, probably on weekends his parents would drive the hour plus to get to the kart racing facility where he could learn racing. 

I grew up on the other side of the state, about 250 miles from Boise. Plus, when I was five (or eight), I doubt that kart racing facility was there. So I didn't have the opportunities Robb did. (Plus, I had no idea how to become a race car driver.) This makes me extremely envious of him. 

According to Wikipedia, "Robb started running nationally at age eight, entering Cadet division events from 2010 to 2013. During his first season in the Junior ranks, he finished second in America and raced in Valencia, Spain. Robb won a national championship in Rotax Junior Max karting in 2015." So he had some success in karting.

Robb is not one of the usual winners of IndyCar races. He starts somewhere back in the pack and ends up there. At the end of the season he was in 25th place. But still, to be an IndyCar driver must be a dream come true for him. It would be for me.

Driving by Feel

Maybe this isn't true where you live, but it seems to me that a lot of drivers around here in Washington State pick their speed by feel.

Let me explain.

There's a road here that's two lanes (one in each direction) but with occasional passing lanes. It needs to be a four lane road but that's another subject.

People will drive less than the speed limit on the two-lane parts and then, when another lane opens up such as a passing lane, they'll speed up making it harder for you to pass them. My only thought is, now they feel more comfortable with an extra lane. When the road goes back to only two lanes, they slow down again. Apparently they don't know how to use cruise control, either.

Or, even during the best weather, the Washington State DOT lowers the speed limit on Snoqualmie Pass

by 5 mph (65 versus 70). (There's "variable speed limits" on Snoqualmie Pass. The lowest I've seen is 35 mph on a very snowy night.) So, when the speed limit is 65, I'll slow down by 5 mph (from 75 to 70). And people I passed going 75 mph will start passing me at 70 mph. Because they aren't paying attention to the speed limit. They are driving by feel.

(I used to think they lowered the speed limit on Snoqualmie Pass because the road was narrow and windy. But they widened and straightened a long section and the speed limit is still 65 on that part.)

Now I follow the speed limit (at least) if conditions permit. This means I have to be aware of the speed limit. But I think a lot of drivers (at least around here) drive by feel. They'll be perfectly happy doing 45 mph in a 50 mph zone blissfully unaware of the line of cars behind them.

And this is in a way dangerous because it may cause someone to pass unsafely. I know it makes me see red mist. I always try to pass legally and safely. But not everyone does. I wrote about how driving too slow is dangerous here.

Driving by feel might be a common occurrence in the U.S. The Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology (part of the Federal Highway Administration) did a study and found that, despite the speed limit, people drive as fast or slow as they want to.

Do you have people who drive by feel where you live? Do they annoy you as much as they annoy me? Let me know in the comments below.

Horsepower

 I like cars and I like fast cars.

The first fast car I owned was a 1985 Ford Mustang GT. That car had a 5.0 V8 engine that made (wait for it) 210 horsepower. It's 0-60 time was 6.4 seconds. It's the first car I went over 100 mph in.

By comparison, the 2025 Honda Odyssey minivan has 280 horsepower and goes 0-60 in the same 6.4 seconds. It's a lot heavier than my Mustang was.

I've always wanted more horsepower in my cars. But what is too much horsepower?

I am still browsing cars on the internet, looking at ones with manual transmissions. I was very much tempted by this car, except I thought the price was outrageous (and the dealership only came down $1,000 off that price). So I kept looking. Then I came across this car and I thought the price was really high for a used 2019 Mustang GT. But I looked at the further and it turns out it's a Roush stage 3 aftermarket upgrade of a Mustang GT and has 710 horsepower and 610 pound-feet of torque. And that actually scares me. 

My Corvette had 505 horsepower and that car scared me. I never floored the gas except when I was pointed straight and had nothing in front of me. I did get it up to 155 mph on the racetrack consistently because the track had a half-mile-long front straight and I would floor the gas. 

A Mustang with 710 hp just scares me. I think I would put it in the ditch. Or run into something. You'd never floor the gas. And I mean never.

Do you like high-horsepower cars? How much horsepower do you think is too much? Let me know in the comments below.

Car Opinions

I like cars. I read about them and, on this blog, I write about them.

I have some opinions about cars. Some of this is based on feelings, some based on facts. I'll leave it up to you to decide.

1) Top Tier gasoline is better. AAA did a study on this and it shows that Top Tier gas is better for your car engine. Top Tier gas tends to cost more. 

2) Unless your car requires it, there is no need to use premium gasoline. Regular Top Tier gas is good enough for most cars. Premium is more expensive; sometimes a lot more. You can do more for your car by using Top Tier regular then off-brand premium.

3) The best Top Tier gas is Shell. I base this on that Car and Driver used to exclusively use it for their testing. Plus there's a sticker on the gas cap of my car saying it recommends Shell V-Power which is its premium gas. The next best Top Tier gas is Chevron. I have no basis for this other than their claims.

4) Car and Driver is the best car magazine ever. Although the quality of the writing has diminished a bit in recent years, it's still worth reading. The magazine was amazing when Csaba Csere was the Editor-in-Chief.

5) Michelin Tires are the best. Goodyear are the worst. Two of my cars came with Goodyear OEM (original equipment) tires. They lost air quickly and wore out very fast. I got 11,000 miles on a sedan and 5,000 miles on my Corvette. When I replaced them with Michelin tires, I got more miles and they didn't lose air as fast. The Corvette had more grip in the corners, too. There's lots of tire brands I haven't tried, yet. I used to put Continentals on a sedan I owned and they worked fine. I have no opinion on Firestone, Hankook, and lots of other tire brands.

UPDATE: The Michelin tires on my sedan have exceeded their tread-life warranty. 

6) German cars are better engineered than American cars. And Audis are better than BMWs. I have no experience with Porsche or Mercedes. Although my wife's VW GTI had some weird engineering.

7) The best place to buy tires and wheels is Tire Rack. They are often cheaper than your local tire shop and they have a vast selection. If you buy wheels and tires combination, they will mount and balance them for free. The only issue I've ever had with Tire Rack is when I wanted to look up the details of wheels I bought from them ten years after, they no longer had the order information.

8) Blizzaks are the best winter/snow tires in my experience. According to Car and Driver, the Nokian Hakkapelitta is the best winter/snow tire but good luck finding them in your size. And, yes, if you live where it snows, put on winter tires.

9) Studded tires are evil. They damage roads and give no better traction in most situations and worse traction in dry or wet conditions. 

10) Electric cars aren't quite ready for prime time. They need to develop batteries that aren't affected by cold or hot. And hold more energy. And recharge faster. 

11) And of course: more horsepower is better.

Do you have any car opinions or disagree with mine? Let me know in the comments below.

The Curse

Mario Andretti

This last Memorial Day weekend I watched the Indianapolis 500 race. This has been my favorite car race since I was a kid. I try to watch it every year (although some years, something-usually family-interferes). 

In 1969 when I was 8years old I heard that Mario Andretti had won the Indy 500. I'm pretty sure I didn't watch it because, according to Wikipedia, it was only shown as highlights on ABC Wide World of Sports (the show that gave us the phrase "the agony of defeat"). I decided to go with a winner and decided that Mario Andretti was my favorite Indy 500 driver. Spoiler alert: Mario never won another Indy 500.

The race wasn't shown as its own program until 1971 according to Wikipedia and even then it was tape delayed to be shown in prime time and was edited to fit the time slot. They also would put in little featurettes about drivers or cars or whatever. It got worse every year. I just wanted to see the race.

In 1986, the Indy 500 was first shown live "flag to flag" (green to checkered) and it's been that way ever since which I liked a whole lot better than the edited, tape-delayed shows.

So, here I was rooting for Mario Andretti to win the Indianapolis 500 every year he raced. And he never won another Indy 500. His son, Michael, never won an Indy 500 (he's been more successful as a team owner), and his grandson Marco who is still driving has yet to win an Indy 500. This last race he crashed very early, I believe on the third lap!

But every year Mario raced, it seemed something would go wrong. Usually that meant someone would run into him or spin out in front of him or something would break on the car. It became known as the "Andretti Curse." There's even a Wikipedia page about it. My wife and I would sit down to watch the race and say "Who's going to spin out in front of Mario this year?"

Don't get me wrong, Mario was a great driver. He won Grand Prix and IndyCar championships. He retired in 1994. He even got to drive an Indy 500 with his son, Michael. 

But he seemed cursed and also seems to have passed the curse down to his progeny. 

These days I'm rooting for Pato O'Ward, a Mexican with an Irish name. But I still, in my heart, hope an Andretti can win at Indy.

The "Doctor Killer"

1978 Porsche 911 Turbo

Speaking of cars with turbos. 

There was one car in the 1970s that got a reputation as the "doctor killer" because doctors (who could afford them) would buy the car and then wreak them. 

It was 1974 and Porsche brought to market the 911 Turbo. 

The 911 was an old design even in 1974. The engine was in the back behind the rear wheels. It has an air-cooled flat (also called boxer) 6-cylinder engine with a turbocharger added. That gave it 261 horsepower which for 1974 was impressive (the Corvette had 210 hp). But it has a flaw. As Car and Driver put it:

[T]urbo lag as long as a coffee break. Mash the throttle at 3000 rpm, and the boost gauge plays dead until the tach reaches 4000. Then you enjoy a chiropractic neck adjustment until the wham peters out at 6000 rpm.

So why did it kill doctors? First of all, it cost $34,150 MSRP. That's $171,260 in today's dollars. So it wasn't exactly available to the average car driver. You needed the income of, say, a doctor.

The unskilled or unexperienced driver would go into a corner slow and upon exit mash the gas pedal. And here comes that turbo lag (the time it takes the turbo to spool up and start adding boost). Then, with the front wheels still steering through the corner (or pointing any direction other than straight), the engine would hit 4,000 rpm, the turbo boost would kick in causing the rear tires to break loose and, with the engine hanging out the back like a pendulum, make the car oversteer harshly. The driver would lose control and slide, often into a tree or rock or barrier or some other solid object. It's a small car, no airbags in those days (people didn't tend to wear seatbelts, either) and so it would kill its driver.

Now days, the Porsche 911 Turbo (which costs $200,000 plus), makes 572 horsepower (or, if you pay more, 640) has all wheel drive and electronic nannies to keep you on the road. It doesn't even have a manual transmission option.

But for a while there, the 911 Turbo had a bad reputation for killing its well-off drivers. 

 

The First U.S. Production Car with a Turbo

Google has started putting suggested stories below the search bar. I generally ignore them as click-bait, but one caught my eye. It was about the first American production car with a turbocharger. (For a short description of what a turbocharger is and how it works, scroll to the end of this.)

I thought maybe a Buick Grand National or the Ford Mustang SVO. Both of those cars were from the 1980s.

But no, it was a lot earlier than either of those vehicles. According to this article, it was an Oldsmobile made in 1962. Called the "Jetfire Turbo Rocket V8," it had a 215 cubic inch (3.5 liter) V8, which is small by today's standards. Unfortunately, it required a "Turbo Rocket Fluid," which was a mix of water and methanol, injected into the pistons to keep the gasoline from detonating early under turbo pressures. This can cause engine knocking which can damage your engine.

Despite all this, it only made 215 horsepower and 300 ft-pound of torque. Perhaps because the V8 was so small. These days, strapping a turbo onto a V8 should get you 400 horsepower, at least.

I'm wondering what the second production car to have a turbocharger was. A quick Google search indicates that it might be the Porsche 911 Turbo introduced in 1974, twelve years after the Jetfire.

Does this surprise you like it did me? I had no idea the first turbocharger was that long ago. Let me know in the comments below.

Manual Transmissions are Going Away

There are times I miss having a manual transmission in one of my cars. I'm at the age where I don't want a stick shift in my daily driver, but it would be fun to have a sporty car with a manual transmission for weekends. I haven't had that since I sold my Corvette years ago. 

When you're rowing your own gears, you're more involved in the vehicle. And it's more challenging to pick the right gear for coming out of a corner, for example. It's fun.

A while back I wrote about the disappearance of manual transmissions. But it's worse than I thought.

On a recent weekend I browsed the internet for used cars. My criteria were they be sporty and have a manual transmission. And I learned something: manual transmissions are rare. Almost every car I looked at has an automatic transmission. I was looking at used Mustangs, Camaros, and C7 Corvettes mostly. I did find one Bullitt Mustang with a manual but they wanted a lot for it (not that I was going to buy it). And some old BMWs (they didn't even have cup holders). I did happen across a 2016 Camaro SS with a manual transmission. I seriously thought about buying it. It being 70 miles away helped me not purchase it. But that was a unique car, it seems.

So I did a little research. According to this article, only 2.4% of new cars are sold with a manual transmission as of 2020. Even high-end sports cars such as Lamborghini and Ferrari don't have manuals even as an option. And the latest iteration of the Corvette, the C8, isn't available with a manual.

According to this article, only 18% of Americans can drive a stick shift. That amazes me.

Of course, with electric cars, there's no transmission at all. Toyota has made an EV with a fake manual. But that's more of a novelty than a real manual transmission.

Maybe I'd better buy a car with a manual transmission while I still can.

Cup Holders in Cars

Did you know that cup holders in cars was at one time controversial?

When I was a kid, the only "cup holder" in a car was the lid of the glove compartment that had two shallow, circular indentations on the inside of the door. I always assumed they were for putting drinks there when the car wasn't in motion.

But cup holders, at least in American cars, didn't really start until the 1980s when Chrysler introduced the minivan and put cup holders in it. Suddenly, everyone wanted cupholders.

But the European manufactures held back. They said their cars were for driving, not drinking. But Americans A) had much slower speed limits than the Europeans (especially the Germans) because of the National Maximum Speed Limit of 55/65 mph and B) wanted the convenience. 

Also, Americans drive for longer times and farther distances than Europeans. Still, the European manufactures resisted. I recently saw a 2001 BMW Z3 for sale. Judging by the pictures in the ad, it didn't have cupholders.

I can't remember which was the first car I owned with cupholders designed in the interior. It was probably in the early '90s. Every car I've owned since then, including my Corvette, had cupholders. And two of those cars were German. So, at least for the American market, Europeans relented and designed in cupholders. 

However, one company held off putting in cupholders: Bugatti. Now Bugattis aren't daily drivers. They cost over $1 million and are capable of speeds over 200 mph.

But now Bugatti has decided to put a cupholder in at least one of its cars. It's in the door, not the center console, but it's there as an option. 

Me, I use my cupholders all the time. I would have second thoughts about buying a car without them (unless it was one of my dream cars).

What do you think? Do you need cupholders in your car or are you happy without them? Let me know in the comments below.

Public-Owned Cars

Think about your car(s). It's probably your biggest expense after your house. Or if you don't have a house, your biggest expense. With car payments, maintenance, insurance (which has gone up a lot lately), gas (don't get me started), it's expensive to keep a car.

But what does your car do most of the day? It sits. You drive it to work in the morning, it sits until you go home. You get home, and it sits until you drive to work the next day. Oh, sure, you might take it somewhere like to the grocery store or to visit someone, but still it sits a lot.

I was writing this novel (that has been overtaken by events) where AI pretty much runs everything, at least in the U.S., and there are robots that help humans do a lot of things. It was a benevolent AI, at least it appeared to be so.

One of the concepts I had in the novel was that very few people owned cars. And those that did were the rich. Everyone else used public cars that were very cheap. Cheaper than owning a car. (Public transportation such as buses and light rail were free.) The cars were 100% electric and autonomous. Like Uber, you used as app on your phone to hail one, or the AI could learn your habits and have one waiting for you when you leave for work and when you go home.

(Not too long ago I heard Neil deGrasse Tyson talk about this very idea but that was after I started writing the novel.)

After a day, the cars would be washed inside and out. If someone tried to vandalize one (or used it for a bathroom), it would take them to the police station for the robots cops to deal with (there were still a few human police officers).

There would be no need for huge parking lots around stores as the cars would drop people off and then pick them up after shopping. Those parking lots could be turned into grassy areas or even parks.

There are, however, lots of privacy problems with this concept. And what if someone hacked into your public car and drove it off a bridge? Plus, I would hate this. I like driving and I like driving fast cars.

I kind of imagined them white inside and out and pod-like. If you wanted to spend more money, you could have a nicer one. And if you have enough money, you could own a nice car. I also had the very rich own "antiques" that were not autonomous and were limited to 80 km/h (~50 mph) on public roads.

Here's a short, funny video about this concept.

What do you think of my concept (or deGrasse Tyson's concept)? Would you be willing to give up your cars for a publicly owned pod? Let me know in the comments below.

Beautiful Cars

Lamborghini Countach

I was admiring a very expensive car and I called it, in my mind, "beautiful." 

And then I got to thinking. Why do I (and other people) call these mechanical devices "beautiful"?

We call paintings and books and sculptures and other man-made things beautiful. So why not cars? Just because they are also functional, doesn't lessen their beauty. If you Google "beautiful car" you get a lot of images, some that are more beautiful than others.

As. the saying goes "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." There are probably people who would never find a car beautiful. I remember a long time ago I was with my parents in Monterey, California, and there was a white Lamborghini Countach parked on the street. And my mother said, "What an ugly car." But I found it beautiful. But my opinion might have been swayed by knowing it had a V12 engine that sat behind the driver. 

And, in general, what is this penchant humans have for finding inanimate things beautiful: mountains, lakes, trees. Or animals. If someone pointed out a beautiful horse to me, I'd have to take their word for it. But a pretty cat, I'm all about that (since our family got a cat seven years ago). 

Why do you think humans call so many diverse things "beautiful"? Let me know in the comments below.

Red Mist and Marbles

In the past (not recently, however), I have driven on a race track. 

In racing circles (and perhaps other groups) there is a term called "red mist."

Red mist is when you get angry or frustrated and make bad decisions because of it.  This doesn't only happen on race tracks. It can happen in all sorts of situations. A lot of them involve driving. It's not road rage, just more frustration. 

For example, I was behind a guy at a stoplight. The light turned green. The car in front of him turned right. Interminable seconds later he put on his right turn signal and slowly turned the corner. And I got frustrated and nearly floored the gas in my car (I was trying to make the tires squeal but with all wheel drive that's nearly impossible) and went across the intersection. Red mist.

Another racing term is "marbles." Once you get off the racing line (the path around the track that is fastest), you get into an area where there are "marbles." Not literal marbles, but pieces of tire and maybe some gravel and you lose your grip on the track surface. That's why they are called "marbles."

Once on the track I got red mist (I don't remember why) and ended up in the marbles. I don't remember how. I just remember saying later "red mist and marbles don't mix." I didn't crash, but I did have to work to get my car back under control. It was a scary moment.

So, my friends, try to avoid red mist and anything that will make it worse, like the marbles on the track. Or ice on a road. Or anything that will make a lousy situation much worse.

Have you experienced red mist? Were you driving or doing something else. Let me know in the comments below.

Speeding

It's almost winter officially (Saturday or Sunday is the winter solstice depending on what time zone you're in). So I decided today is the time to discuss my philosophy on a sensitive subject: speeding.

To me, there are three types of speeding: accidental speeding, casual speeding, and blatant speeding.

Accidental speeding is when you're accidentally exceeding the posted speed limit probably because it's set too low. My last speeding ticket (years ago) was this. I realized I was going around 50 mph in a 35 mph zone. I had just lifted my foot off the gas to slow down when I saw the cop. Now 50 in a 35 might sound reckless to you, but it's a country road with no houses or farms. There's one intersection before you reach the end and after the intersection nothing but a couple of corners that are fun to take at about 50. In my opinion, the speed limit should be at least 40 or 45. But local jurisdictions around here like to set speed limits low. Probably to increase their fine revenue.

Casual speeding is probably most of the speeding I do. I set the cruise control 5 mph over the speed limit and go. I'm pretty sure I won't get a ticket only going that fast. This is probably, also, the way most people speed: just a bit over the limit. And again, speed limits are often set too low. A sure sign of this is one of those radar signs telling you how fast you're going.

Blatant speeding is when you don't care what the speed limit is you're going to drive as fast as you want. In my opinion, it doesn't become blatant until you're at least 10 mph over the speed limit. I do this occasionally but I pick my spots: empty back roads mostly. Although the first time I went over 100 mph was on an interstate and the speed limit was 55 mph (back in the bad old days of the NMSL*). That was pretty risky.

I've never gotten a ticket blatantly speeding (except my first speeding ticket, doing 70 mph on a 55 mph interstate (stupid NMSL). Knock on wood I never do again. I'm pretty careful these days with where I blatantly speed (never on an interstate).

Oh, and that interstate where I got a ticket for doing 70 mph, now has an 80 mph speed limit.

Do you speed? Is it accidental, casual, or blatant? Let me know in the comments below.

*NMSL: National Maximum Speed Limit that imposed a 55 mph speed limit on the whole nation. It was passed in 1974 in an attempt to conserve oil. In 1987 it was raised to 65 mph on "rural interstates" and in 1995 it was repealed completely.

Dream Cars

1967 Shelby Cobra 500

If you read this blog regularly, you know I like cars. I really do. I'm not sure what the appeal is to me (and a lot of people) about cars. They are amazing engineered machines and some are fun to drive. Some of them even sound good.

Jay Leno is a car guy. He owns 181 cars (and 160 motorcycles). I'm envious of his ability to do that. There are so many great cars that have been made over the past century.

Like any piston head, I have cars I dream about owning. Here's some of mine:

2015 Ferrari 458 Italia. This was the last naturally aspirated (no turbos*) Ferrari sports car. And 2015 was the last year they were made. After that, Ferrari started putting turbos in their sports cars and shrinking engine sizes to meet EU and US carbon emissions regulations. In Ferrari red, please. Which is actually rosso corsa or "race red."

2024 Ferrari 812 Superfast. This is a "grand tourer," not a sports car. But it has a naturally aspirated V12 engine that makes 789 horsepower. I'd like this car in yellow, or "Giallo Modena" in Ferrari speak.

1967 Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra 500. Not only are these beautiful cars, but they have around 650 horsepower. A little scary with 1967 suspension technology. In blue, please, with a white stripe.

2025 Chevrolet Corvette Z06. An amazing sports car packing 670 horsepower out of its naturally aspirated V8 that sits behind the driver. With huge tires and an amazing suspension, it's designed for racetrack duty. In "Accelerate Yellow Metallic," please. Or maybe "Hysteria Purple Metallic" (which is a new color this year).

2024 Porsche 718 Cayman GT4 RS. This is the last year for the Cayman before it goes all electric. (Maybe. Porsche might be backing off of that.) This model sports 493 horsepower in its mid-engine design. A true old-fashioned sports car that is small with go-cart like handling and lots of power. Either "Guards Red" or "Racing Yellow" are my color choices. (Or, for $14,750 you expand the colors you want so maybe "Acid Green.") Used ones are selling for more than MSRP of new ones.

2024 Ram 1500 TRX. A pickup truck with a 702 horsepower supercharged* HEMI V8. That was the last year it was be offered with the HEMI. It's fast 0-60 (especially for a truck) but its top speed is limited by it's weight and tires. Made for off-road use, it would be fun to barrel through some muddy trails. In "Flame Red" and "Crystal Black" please (all come in two colors).

1967 Shelby Cobra. A tiny sports car from England (the AC Cobra) with a Ford V8. Built by Carroll Shelby, original models today sell for over $1 million. Replicas can, depending on the quality, go for six figures. A very scary car with old-fashioned suspension. But oh so pretty. Blue with a white stripe.

Honorable mention: 2024 Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing. A sports sedan with supercharged V8 engine and is available with a manual transmission. I'm not really picky about the color (believe it or not).

And now Ferrari has a new car, the 2025 12Cilindri two seater. It has a 12 cylinder engine and is beautiful. It is the replacement for the 812 Superfast. I think I still want the Superfast more. Ferrari has announced it will make V-12s until regulations make it impossible.

Do you have any cars you dream about owning? Let me know in the comments below.

*Turbos and superchargers pump air into the cylinder to give it more oxygen to burn, thus increasing horsepower. They work like a bellows in a blacksmith shop, making the fire burn hotter.  In a car engine's cylinder, that means more energy thus more horsepower.

Turbos use exhaust gasses to spin. Thus you often get "turbo lag" where the exhaust pressure has to build up. Somehow, automakers have found ways to minimize that. 

Superchargers are belt driven and don't have "turbo lag." You can hear them whine under the hood as they spin up. The faster the engine goes, the more pressure they put into the pistons.

I Did the Math Too Late

 

Happy Thanksgiving, USA!

I did the math and the math won.

Or, let me explain. I bought my wife a Toyota Prius Prime PHEV. I thought this would be great for her because she mostly just drives around town. Then if she wants to go on a longer trip, say to go see her sister, she has a gas engine to get her there. This is why I rejected an EV for her. She might want to take my car on the longer trip! Eeek! Plus the 2024 Prius actually looks like a nice car. We got one in red.

I live in a unique area where, due to state laws, gasoline is expensive compared to most other states (California and Hawaii are the only states where it's higher). But the area I live in has some of the cheapest electricity in the country due to being 100% hydropower. 

So, after I bought the car, I did the math. Here's what I learned:

She gets about 30 miles off of a full battery. I calculated that it takes $0.64 to charge the battery. So that's $0.021 per mile. Pretty dang cheap.

Assuming gas is $4 a gallon (which is about what regular runs in Washington State), and a Prius gets 52.3 miles per gallon (that's what a Google search came up with), that's $0.076 per mile. That's a savings of $0.0551 per mile. Yay!

But, the Prius Prime cost about $5,000 more than a Prius. So I divided $0.0551 into $5,000 and I get 90,744 miles (ignoring significant figures). So my wife has to drive about 91,000 miles on battery to pay back the extra expense of the PHEV. But it's a Toyota. She might do that. It'll just take years, though.

Now if gas goes up to $5 a gallon, its only 67,000 miles.

But if electricity goes up (and it will January 1st), the miles goes up.

Maybe I should have just bought her a Prius.

SUVs and Crossovers

I like to drive and I like cars. I've owned muscle cars, pony cars, sports cars, and sedans. I currently drive a sports sedan.

I define a "car" as a vehicle that is not a pickup, SUV, crossover, or minivan.

According to Car and Driver magazine, sedans don't sell well. In Fact, Ford stopped selling them (and all other cars except the popular Mustang). What people are buying now are SUVs and crossovers. Lots and lots of crossovers.

What's a crossover? It looks like an SUV but it's built on a car chassis so it handles something like a car and not a truck. You see them everywhere. The Ford Edge is a crossover although for marketing reasons, it's sold as an SUV. Look for a station wagon-like car that is puffed up like an SUV.

I've never personally owned an SUV or a crossover because I like cars. I like to accelerate, brake, and corner quickly. And SUVs and crossovers are not great at that. They might do one or two of those things, but rarely all three.

Even BMW is in the crossover game with their X series. Cadillac has a lot of crossovers.

SUVs are so popular, that Ferrari finally broke down and built one. And it probably accelerates, brakes, and corners very well (it is, after all, a Ferrari). 

Yes, sedans don't have the storage capacity of SUVs and crossovers. My sedan can comfortably hold four people. The truck space isn't cavernous. But I'd rather have the speed and cornering of my sedan than have more room for people and stuff. 

I think the reason people drive SUVs and crossovers is they care more about room and cargo space than handling and acceleration. And some tout the fact you sit high and can see better. Which I sometimes envy when trying to exit our Starbucks's parking lot.

What are your thoughts? Do you like cars or SUVs and crossovers. Let me know in the comments below.

Black Wheels

We talked about why tires are black. Now we'll discuss black wheels:

It seems to me that black wheels on cars are the current popular style. I see them a lot on newer vehicles and in car ads. I drove by a car dealership the other day and there were five or six vehicles on their lot all in a row and all with black wheels. Maybe the car manufactures are trying to push them on us. I don't know.

In fact, my new car (well, it's over a year old now) came with black wheels:

At first I was thinking "I could live with them" even though I prefer more... blingy wheels. Then I lived with them. They got dirty if you looked at them wrong and they were hard to clean. And, as I said, I just didn't like the look of them. 

So when it was time to take off my winter tires, I left them on the black wheels and installed a set of BBS wheels which are much more pretty and don't get dirty as easily and are easier to clean.

I like the look so much more than the black wheels. I kept the winter tires on the black wheels to use when keeping a car clean is less important.

I don't know why black wheels are so popular, at least with automakers. I remembered being baffled by the large wheel phenomenon (which, to an extent, is still happening), too. 

What do you think of black wheels? Do you care? Or are they just mostly ugly? Let me know in the comments below.