such hard hitting.

Focii*

Bottom.

Wow, that went right over my head.

That shit was fun, way, way better than a sheet of ice.

We don't have Marinas and Dacias, but we have plenty of Metros.

Shit, half may be understating it!

Bingo.

I'm going to stand up for Dallas, here: we don't get snow, we get ice (and lots of it), and they're entirely different things. I doubt that most winter-savvy cities would be prepared for the giant sheet of ice (read: not snow) that blanketed the metroplex about a month ago. They would have gotten things moving…

See, this is why Americans shouldn't take shit from Europeans about anything.

Ability ≠ desire, unfortunately (fortunately?)

I'm not sure though, everything happened so fast. The V8 gets plenty of power, and while the seventh gear on a manual is just one too many, it's nice to know that by using the cylinder deactivation cruising in seventh gear, the Corvette can return decent fuel economy on a longer trip. Smart.

Both questions that I had. I think they managed to just chock the wooden frame in front of the wheels of the car which makes me wonder how they were able to do that.

SO MUCH PUBLIC DANGER, THO.

Impressively simple and effective.

In keeping with the caption on the photo in the lede:

Methinks that most of the V8s/large motors aren't particularly powerful, but are lingering somewhere around malaise-era output figures.

I don't have a problem with the concept, I guess, but it seems a very ambiguous and ameoba-like figure to be determining and setting. Obviously, you're not trying to name that number, but if you carry that out and start trying to set that number, you come up with CAFE, which, if we're having this conversation about…

Well, that's not really up for debate. But what's this optimum level of fuel efficiency, how do we determine it, and how do we know it's right?

Well, if it's relatively easy to figure out, I'd love to see that figure, because it's an incredibly abstract and ambiguous concept.