But I still have to pay for it. It's also another thing to break, which isn't a big deal, but hurts resale if I try to sell it with a broken camera. It's an added complexity that is forced upon people that don't want it with no real good reason.

What is the point of the added cost and complexity of the camera then... since that's what I do in the first place. The only time the camera comes in handy is when backing up to a trailer without a buddy guiding you.

More so for police and such, but also great for regular people too.

Use that shifter to brace your leg in corners!

Why don't car companies do this now? Just stop developing specific models for less developed nations? At the easiest stand point, why would car companies offer things like leather seats and cloth seats, since they'd save money by using just leather. Hell, even things like electric windows are still an added expense…

Never seen a vehicle towing a trailer? Notice how hard it is to see that vehicle's rear plate?

So you agree, the interior is quite terrible.

Then why don't all vehicles have 10 wheels? Or why don't all vehicles come with sunroofs? /s

Do you drive around backing up towards something that might want to see your plate? Sometimes (quite often actually) you can see the front plate, but not the back.

The interior is quite terrible for a car that was released last year. Show me a $35,000 vehicle that has relatively recently (within ~4 years) that has an interior as cheesy as the STI.

Have you driven down a dirt road or in the winter? (Yes this person should have their rear defroster on and rear wiper). Boom, rear camera covered. Does the same thing with salt on the road, driving down a dirt driveway.

You've never driven down a dirt road or anywhere with salt, have you? A 2-min trip down the road covers the lens bad enough that the camera is unusable. And when the road still has snow on it, you can't even see light through it.

I'm a manufacturing engineer. I understand the principle. You have simply stated that they cut down on engine types, transmissions, and radios. Yes, that reduced the variability and lowered production costs.

My '73 Saab as a 4-speed on the tree. It's basically a standard H-pattern with reverse being up next to 1st. To get into reverse you have to pull the shifter outwards (along the longitudinal axis of the lever). Also, the key will not come out unless you are in reverse.

French transmissions! 1 speed for forwards and 4 speeds for reverse!

In this thread: People that don't know the difference of a transmission and a shifter.

Still just a pretty standard automatic transmission. The shifter is a bit funky, but the transmission ain't.

But you are still making it more expensive. Adding more parts rarely, if ever, reduces costs. No matter how many more you make. Especially considering how bare bones vehicles in places like Brazil, and India and attempting to make them meet current westernized crash regulations.

I'm with you Doug! Ugly? Yes. Useful? You bet your ass.

Is there really going to be that many suggestions for this? If we truly keep this to transmissions and leave things like shifters, clutches (or lack of them), the list ain't gonna be very long.