I had a Subaru, so I just made sure that any legitimate shop would plug in and see that, yep, the catalyst monitor passed!  Ignore the conspicuous lack of a cat in the exhaust, it uh....  it was in the heads.

Well. You did buy a WRX. The budget for that should really include both headgasket replacement and transmission replacement funds.

No, it was definitely a snoozemobile, just an unoffensive one.

Wait, the Matrix or this...  thing?  I was talking exclusively on the Matrix.  This is like a cartoonized version of what a bugatti would look like on the Simpsons.

Everybody’s complaining “this will be so boring, no errors, human unpredictability” etc. From what I understand, the teams get to “tune” their vehicles to how they want to perform. Trust me on this, when a human tunes a piece of software, they all do it differently. Plus, this isn’t a time trial, this is…

Eh, I do see a lot of Pininfarina in the Matrix.  The rear window being shorter than the rest, the very contemporary front end, it all fits for that era of Pininfarina.  Overall it’s not a terrible design, though you’re spot on that the proportions are a little off.  It’s too.... tall.

I’ve been maintaining a fleet of older vehicles for daily use, but my day job has me driving new vehicles- I’ve gotten spoiled. As much as I love my I5 Audi S4 to pieces, it just can’t compare to modern NVH and ride (and I’m not going to tear it apart and add MORE weight with dynamat). I had a Subaru years ago, and…

...truly you are a daring man.

TBH, I doubt the heat riser was necessary. I have it permanently wired open on my Hudson, with no issues. It really only mattered for continuous cold weather cruising, something I sincerely doubt this jeep was ever substantially capable of.

Ironically that’s the only one that’s NOT shortened to M3!  I don’t think it matters for the vast majority of people.  Plus it seems to me like the modern M3s have sort of lost their halo-ness.  I don’t hear them discussed like the E92s were, nor am as interested when I see one.

M3: BMW

Which was fine until Ford forced Tesla to take the “3" moniker.  Now an M and a 3 together could be too many things...

Hmm, is that mostly common in European cars?  I’ve driven a fair number of modern American ACC-equipped cars that don’t give a whit.

Hydrostatic drives are terrible for road speeds.  They specialize in low-speed, high torque.  Sure, you could add a gearbox, but that’s a lot of extra complication and frictional losses, between gears and mechanical>pressure>mechanical conversions.  It’s not like these vehicles are going to be lacking in normal force…

Ahhhhh, now trains, there’s an idea. I so rarely use them I forgot about that option. Indeed, that makes much more sense. The only flaw I can see there is, still assuming this alternate universe uses our existing culture, the lack of personal transport at the other end. As Torch said, I doubt many would want to trot…

...powered rollerskates? Elongated frame?  Quadricycles?

The FWD part makes sense, best for packaging a flat floor.

Hmm, that brings up an interesting question of long-distance travel. Obviously a dirt interstate would be hell to maintain (and can you imagine plowing it in the winter?). Seems more likely to me there would be mixes of road surfaces.

Oh, the non DCCD 6.  I vaguely remember that.