As a motorcycle commuter I change to another lane positioning myself to quickly change one further away quickly if needed. Also, if the driver is in front of me I like to speed up to the door or in front so I am more visible. It’s not just bad drivers either, you can be driving fine but if it looks like that 5 gallon…

That can’t be across the board. I went through that in ‘09 and I couldn’t care less about it. No stress at all, and 8/8 acceptances to boot.

Problem with this is our speed limits are too low too. You can’t really expect a police officer to pull someone over for going too slowly when they are traveling above the speed limit like your CR-V example. The resulting court date would be a joy though.

Fair enough. But only 1 or 2 of these fit that bill. Scissor doors, vents, the rest... Bugger off.

Counterpoint. If you like it, do it. Screw what others think. Unless they are making your payments, they can bugger off.

1. It is the same until you take into account time value of money between time of purchase and tax refunds, as well as the returns on using that money within that time. Also, it is literally giving you a check rather than lowering your bill.

This is seriously wrong. The California $2500 is a rebate, not a tax credit. Also the state doesn’t make money on these sales. They always lose money. What they gain is a car that contributes less to pollution.

Oh yes, I definitely think these rebates have a lot more sway in that section of the economic spectrum. That is why I like the new change. I think it is a smarter way to influence actual changes in purchasing decisions. Especially since people who where influenced by $2500 already have been paid. Now the people who…

I understand the theory there. But I’m not sure I believe it applies in this real world scenario at a reasonable rate. The expenditure by the state is only worth it if it actually changed a buyers mind. At these levels I imagine most people are like Mr. P85D in the comments here, “Just icing on the cake” meaning…

It’s always nice to get free money. But I’m curious if the rebate actually impacted your decision making. Or would you still have bought it at $2500 more to get that sweet, sweet, 0-60 time?

The tax break is to add incentive to buying these cars by making the purchase price cheaper. $2500 is not going to change the purchasing decision of somebody making $250k+. Thus, a lot of these incentives were wasted, the purchaser was going to buy it anyway. The thought behind skewing the incentives help median…

I’m going to take the unpopular stance here and say that aesthetic mods are completely fine. Yes eyelashes look terrible to 90% of people, and the reindeer antlers and noses look like a punishment. But even those mods are an expression of the driver through the medium of their car. As an enthusiast it’s hard to be…

Mighty car mods did a couple of videos on this with real dynos. The short of their findings were it is useless for Turbo cars, but gives small gains on NA cars.

Great article as always Steve. There seems to be a disconnect between your article and the comments. You point out that it isn’t legal. The commentators seem to always point that it should be done, or even legal, for legitimate purposes. Of course, you both can be right.

This, it has all the compromises he mentioned and all of the passion.

IMO, this just proves stickers add horsepower. The one I hate more is calling a Camry, the most sold car in America, “Bold”. Yep following a plurality of your peers is the definition of “Bold”. Definitely not the antonym. Yup. Sure...

For the record, I counter that you are the best shit on Jalopnik.

Doug,

I was wondering if RHD would get annoying after some time. I’m set on getting a Cefiro next year to replace my current baby hauler. We will see how long I enjoy having made that decision.

If the rear window is still smashed, I’m sold!