You know you’re contributing to global death by posting in this thread on a piece of unnecessary pointless bullshit, right?

This article is merely a continuation of partisan communication. I have yet to see EV or anti oil advocates address impending lithium and cobalt shortages, the associated environmental effects or the infrastructure issues surrounding light rail.

Another truck loses a manual. 

Yes, you can get the TRD Off Road and TRD Sport trims with the 6MT.

I was going to buy a leftover 2017 back in January of 18, but the dealer decided to play games and I walked.  I had been keeping an eye out for the refreshed Frontier, but without a manual option, it's no longer on my radar.

So it’s only really competing with the Colorado. If you don’t have a manual option, you are simply not competing with the Tacoma.

Look, math is hard. If he had math skills, he would never have started Uber, Lyft.

Trick question: Kinja itself is unnecessary.

First - it was JFK, not JFK Jr. that told Americans we were sending men to the moon. Learn your grade school history.

Yes. Star for you.

~2 million EVs were built last year, worldwide.

Yes! A nuanced discussion about what needs to happen to achieve the 2035 goal, and what it would take to achieve it more quickly.

All great questions. This article should be a thought exercise along the lines of “what would happen if the ban went into effect tomorrow?”

Instead, we have from-the-hip word vomit with absolutely zero critical thought put into it. Like most things Raph and Erik spit out, this take seems to be nothing more than being…

Doing what they’re doing is a far more complicated policy decision than you’re identifying - with plenty of complications and problems that make 2035 an aggressive deadline. Just a few of them:

I am totally fine with the new Z being an incremental improvement on the 370Z. In fact, to me, it just means the car will be easier to maintain and modify. If it keeps the stick, I’m going to be pretty tempted by this.

calm down rambo

You just described the Porsche 911.

Never understood the problem with evolutionary design changes. take what works, and fix the rest, seems like a sound methodology when heavily reworking a chassis. I imagine at some point you reach a point of no further refinement or a major change in drive-train occurs, but keeping a good thing and improving it is not…

1. Why not just call the “Z” as in “Nissan Z” and that’s it? The engine displacement/horsepower/number of doors/designer’s middle name isn’t necessary, it’s not like there will be more than 1. It’s not the “Nissan GTR 380,” is it?

We’re open to feedback for those that feel otherwise.