The sales don’t lie: Prius Prime outsold both the Volt and the Bolt last year. Why? Because it’s way cheaper than a Volt. Sure, the tax credit is better on the Volt, but most buyers don’t like to get fussy—they see the bottom line.

The Santa Fe Sport is the one that must be tough to find, since 2018 was the last year for the old one. The long-wheelbase Santa Fe continues for 2019; the seven-seater replacement, the Palisade, arrives for 2020 I think.

Oh, it was definitely a supercar. But it’s sort of a odd special category, the retro-supercar. It was clearly an homage to the 300SLR, yet with an automatic transmission to appeal to the rich older white men who might want supercar cache without having to deal with finicky gear switching.

How so? The Volt is dead. GM’s plug-in program is dead. It’s possible even that plug-in hybrids themselves are dying out (although the Europeans seem to like them right now). As for the technology, it definitely lives on, either in GM or through its suppliers.

I agree, the Bolt is a far better car. It’s a little unfair to compare the first-gen Leaf, which predates the Bolt by almost an entire product cycle, to the newer, more expensive Bolt.

Hahaha, true.

With regard to practicality, I’m referring specifically to interior space. The Volt’s back seat is absurd, even in the second-gen car that has a middle seat. The cargo area is nicely-sized, but not any better than a Prius, which does a better job with useful cubbies and has a more spacious cabin in general.

Actually, I have. I wouldn’t want to buy one. The Volt and Bolt are both pretty decent to drive, especially the Bolt. And certainly they are much better than the Leaf, the latest of which I haven’t driven.

I credit GM’s investment in the technology, but I can fault the U.S. product strategy:

Agreed. The other problem with the French brands in the late 1980s was the amount of competition in their space in the U.S. Peugeot was considered upscale by American buyers, much like Volvo, Saab, and Audi. Then you had the onslaught of Acura, followed by Lexus and Infiniti. Heck, even Alfa Romeo was still thing then.

That would have been the short-lived emissions-strangled 1980 Ferraris that made do with a crummy fuel-injection system and low compression. The 308 was similarly slow. These cars were quickly improved and did mid-6s by 1983-84, and that would have been its performance circa 1987.

Perhaps because it’s far easier to land an M70 than an S38. BMW made over 20K 850s and 850Cis with the M70. The U.S. got only 1,500 S38-equipped M5s (the early 3.5 cars, not the later 3.8), and we never did get the later 3.8 340-hp E34 M5.

That’s a nice price, actually. I’m having trouble finding any really nice examples for much less than $20K, even with high miles. What’s weird is seeing full M roadsters in equivalent condition as this clown shoe selling for less money. Or even later-model M3s.

The further back you go, the more egregious the errors it seems. My father bought a new ‘73 Hornet hatchback. The car used a lot of oil straight from the dealer lot. But it didn’t seem to be emitting any blue smoke, and none of the seals were leaking. It was actually a hole straight through the block.

Yes, for sure. If only all of our driving was on trails...

Being from northern Maine I understand—the width is nice on trails. But, honestly, the XJ was much happier on the highway in crosswinds than the Monty.

It’s actually interesting to look at what was actually for sale in 1995. It was a bad time for sport compacts. A stick-shift Neon with a DOHC engine comes out looking pretty okay, even considering the iffy quality, bad plastics and paint, and horrible crash performance. By 1998 there were better options for sure.

The PT Cruiser did get the SRT-4 engine for a brief time, which was largely the same except for the intake manifold and intercooler setup.

I think Tracy’s post was mostly about the 1990s first-gen Neon. The second-gen Neon was not much fun to drive, except the heavily modded SRT-4. Believe it or not, there was an ACR version of the second-gen Neon, but that got the less fun SOHC motor, longer gearing, and the car was heavier and bigger than the original.

The XJ comparison is interesting. Part of the problem with these trucks is that they were so narrow. Despite being a lot taller and longer than an XJ, they were up to five inches narrower—an indication they were designed for the world market, not specifically for the U.S.