The only way to completely get away from the collective approach is self-insurance, which none of us here have enough money to cover.

There’s a lot of cool ones, for me it’s the Alfa Romeo BAT cars and the Buick Y-Job. Not necessarily because they’re the coolest concept cars ever, but because they did their job as concepts then were actually driven and used as normal-ass cars for people for decades.

The thing is though, even the body on frame stragglers will probably eventually be forced into unibody construction either for crash standards or ev platforms, and at that point there will be no distinction.

He’s going to get a 2.0T Evoque convertible. And I can’t fault him for that, it’s exactly what he wants.

The Maserati trans was ok but only if you drove it like a sedan’s not meant to be driven all the time. You need to drive the hell out of it as evidenced by the guy with the Gransport that had articles written about him spending over $10k only to find out he was driving it too grandma-like.

It’s not that open and shut though. She was a pro. 20 years ago. Not anymore. Pros were allowed to play in the tournament but not take part in the hole in one competition, and the pros that played informed of their status because they are pros RIGHT NOW. They’re trying to either argue that the rules said that anyone…

I just hate the goddamn word and think it should go away. Car enthusiasts see them as inferior because on the one hand they can’t offroad like a Wrangler and on the other hand they can’t handle like a Miata, so the whole they’re not SUVs thing is a shitty form of gatekeeping. On the other hand it confuses a lot of the…

Crossover IMO is a marketing term only. If you exclude unibody construction from SUVs the 1984 Cherokee (one of the SUVs that really kicked off popularity of the segment) wouldn’t be an SUV. They’re all SUVs, you could certainly differentiate by saying off-roader or truck-based SUV, but I think we should get rid of…

Crossover is a term that was coined to convince car people that unibody SUVs didn’t drive like trucks. It was kept because people try to gatekeep the term SUV and exclude anything that’s unibody, or at least anything that’s not designed to go off road.

Ha I have one of these but missed the original question:

I know about hole in one insurance. But if it was found out by the insurer after they paid out that she was a pro at some point and would have tried to deny it (right or wrong, I’m on her side in this) they could lose their insurability.

To the cons:

Sell your current car to cover the taxes and have a probably much nicer or at least newer car you can drive with full warranty and sell/trade for $50-60k in a few years, or sell the Benz and still net $60k cash.

It sounds like they’re trying to end booting across the board. Not just private booting.

It’s very possible that giving up and giving the car could lose their insurability for future contests, or the insurer would defend the case.

There was one not too long ago that Steve Lehto covered that they didn’t follow through with getting the insurance policy and were forced to pony up for the car themselves, something about a cross in communication over who was getting the policy, the sponsoring dealer or the venue itself.

There’s a whole insurance industry for hole-in-one type contests. It’s rare enough that it would happen on that specific hole in that specific tournament that it’s insurable for much less than the cost of the car.

I would also assume she’s definitely doing alright or better, but yeah even if she’s clearing $250k/year a $90k car that you could either sell or sell your other car and have no payments, repair, or additional expenses for 4+ years is still huge. If you made $50k and won an $18k prize that they tried to take away from…

Why not just ban businesses booting cars themselves? Make them call the tow company to put the boot on, and only give businesses a key to take it off?

So let me get this straight.