Just wait until the author learns about CVTs.

  • SmokeyDokeyArtichoke@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The only logical argument I can see within the scope of this is that I seriously don’t think your average dogshit driver should own a 6000 pound electric vehicle that can go from 0-60 faster than a lamborghini

    I really do think we should have auto manufacturers place limitations on these cars that could be removed at the shop if an owner so chooses

    there is absolutely no reason someone’s grocery getter should be that fast in a world where dumbasses can’t even control a 200hp car

  • Unlucky-Carpenter-69@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s the exact same argument. “Why would anyone need a 30-round magazine?” There isn’t a reason for someone to have one outside of hog hunting, but that shouldn’t stop people from being able to have them. Just because I don’t need something doesn’t mean I shouldn’t be able to have it

  • Urgeasaurus@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Written by the same d-bag that wrote some crap article about Martin Short being a hack. Dan Kois. Doesn’t understand comedy and sure as hell doesn’t understand cars. Slate sucks.

  • proscriptus@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tell me you don’t know anything about cars without telling me you don’t know anything about cars.

  • fretit@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Here is something to mull over: this guy is getting paid to write articles that a high school teacher would rip apart and throw in the face of the student who turns it in.

  • Nukedogger86@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    *thinks about my car having an 8 speed. **also laughs because 180hp is clearly alot to this Muppet.

    Lower powered cars have a higher benefit to the higher number of gear choices compared to high hp/tq cars. This Muppet doesn’t understand basic car knowledge, and the fact we have 8-10 speed and cvts for maximizing performance and efficiency.

    Case on point, my 180 hp car is every bit as quick as my previous '19 Fusion which had an advantage of 50-65 hp depending on octane, and 80 ft-lb, with a 350 pound weight and 2 gear penalty.

    • Unlucky-Carpenter-69@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      NASCAR Cup Series cars were at 900 horsepower with a 4 speed for a couple years. Even now, they’re at 670 with a 5 speed. Number of gears ≠ power

    • terraphantm@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ironically it’s powerful cars that can probably get away with fewer speeds without having as much of an efficiency hit.

  • EngineerinLisbon@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    While were all laughing at these people, we must take them seriously. Ignorance spreads very fast. Especially when amplified by rags like Slate. People who think theyre smart will begin asking this question rhetorically.

    • fretit@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Once you read a “journalists’/writer’s” articles about something you know a little about, through say a hobby, you realize how ignorant and off the mark they often are. Now make the topic of the article about something you really know about and you might get depressed about the stupid things they say.

    • dsac@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ignorance spreads very fast

      almost like it’s got an 8 speed transmission

    • caterham09@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s the same thing as the people who know very little about firearms, deciding the laws around them. It’s funny, but the influence a lot of people have is really concerning

  • vexedsinik@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    So this person complains about fast cars being made to make money in an article turning the death of two into anti-car statements meant to get clicks to… make money? This is while also admiring the carnage and not placing any true blame on the driver, who isn’t the victim (as theyd like to infer) but rather the irresponsible individual who suffered the consequences of being irresponsible.

    Im not conservative, but fuck this nanny state advocacy.

    • FrankReynoldsCPA@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      TBH, nanny state doesn’t really fall on one side or the other so no worries there. Various people on all sides of the spectrum advocate for their own version of a nanny state.

    • felis_scipio@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      German cars can’t be imported with rear spoilers or alloy wheels, those performance parts are just too dangerous, but once they’re imported BMW can pay a shop to add them on before being sold and that’s perfectly ok.

      Italian cars can’t be imported directly and must sit in a musty English garage for 20 years before being allowed in.

      2 door roadsters are sporty so to keep people safe we won’t allow them to have over 200 hp, but for whatever reason we won’t consider a 5 door hatch a sports car and they can have whatever engine you feel like.

      Automatic transmission shift gears too fast so they can’t have wheel widths larger than 8”, hand brake levers, aftermarket gauges, be painted the color red, or have rear parachutes because we all know how much people just love to put parachutes on their cars. Manual transmission cars can do whatever they want.

      • inaccurateTempedesc@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Banning silencers is on the same tier as banning car mufflers. It’s literally just safety equipment, but legislators watch too many movies.

        • bozoconnors@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          RIP Hearing Protection Act(s), in all their varied forms and merits - that one time(s) a bill title actually coincided with what it set out to accomplish.

          There’s always hope though. Randomly checked legality of switchblades in my state a few years back only to learn they’d recently been legalized again! (as a fully legal ‘flipper’ currently in my pocket could probably be opened faster, & was never outlawed)

          Still don’t have one myself, but it’s a good example of dumbass legislation.

          • Me_Air@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            my state legalized switchblades but not gravity knives, which are definitely slower except on maybe jupiter

          • Mjolnir12@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            A lot of states allow switchblades but only if they are comically short.

            At least arizona overturned their law banning nunchucks (not a joke).

    • Jedi_Ewok@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Car enthusiasts: “they don’t know anything about what they’re trying to ban!”

      Gun owners: “First time?”

      • aaronkz@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Another thing they have in common: the regulation never actually shows up, the fear if anything just stokes the market.