A Porsche test driver says the brand apparently has no interest in fake shifters (like the Hyundai Ioniq 5 N’s) in EVs, but his reasoning seems completely off for a sports car driver. Canada is matching the U.S.’s 100% tariff on Chinese-built EVs; here’s how that is going to adversely affect Tesla. We’ll talk about how some Rivians got a bit melty, and plenty more news on today’s installment of “The Morning Dump.”
Hi, it’s David Tracy writing the intro to The Morning Dump, as Thomas had to run and return a Subaru test car right in the middle of writing this TMD. Nonetheless, I think he did a fine job given he had to cut his writing short; anyway, let’s get into this whole “fake shifting” topic.
Porsche Says No To Fake Shifters In EVs
The same wave of electrification that’s boosting refinement of the average family car is dulling engagement in performance cars (aside from pedal response, which is now better than ever), and some automakers seem more open to ways around it than others. Australian outlet Drive reports that, according to a test driver, Porsche doesn’t care much for simulating an ICE experience in a performance EV, and that mindset may run the risk of missing the bigger picture.
Speaking to Australian media, Porsche development driver Lars Kern said the German brand is monitoring competitors in the sporty electric vehicle (EV) space, but did not see the need to adopt a fake shifter akin to the Hyundai Ioniq 5 N.
“Obviously, we look into what the competition does, but our perspective on this is always why should we make something worse?” he said.
“I mean because, in like just how it translates power or how power is applied? The electric engine is better than an ICE [internal combustion engine], so we figured there’s no reason to simulate what has been in the past.
Sometimes objectively worse things are more fun than objectively better things, and Porsche should’ve learned this from the whole 911 R debacle. Basically, the trackday-grade 911 GT3 killed its manual transmission option for the 991.1 generation, because a dual-clutch is just faster around a track, end of story.
However, in 2016, Porsche rolled out the limited edition 911 R, which paired the GT3 RS engine with a six-speed manual gearbox (a “worse” option if you go by performance), and collectors went nuts. Suddenly, a nearly-new 911 was worth almost a million dollars on the secondhand market because people were willing to pay for the engagement of a manual gearbox. As a result, Porsche brought back the manual on the 991.2 GT3, and has kept it ever since.
Is simulated shifting the same as a manual gearbox? Absolutely not, but I could see it providing helpful auditory cues on track and boosting engagement on the street, where the envelope of a modern performance EV can’t really be pushed. Rogue engineers, specifically those on the 718 EV project, do your thing.
Canada Will Match America’s Chinese EV Tariffs
We all should’ve seen this coming, right? After the Biden administration announced new tariffs on Chinese EVs, major trade partner Canada is following suit with a matching 100 percent tariff on electric vehicles imported from China. Bloomberg broke the news broke the news ahead of the official announcement this morning, writing:
The government plans to announce a 100 percent levy on electric cars and 25 percent on steel and aluminum, according to people familiar with the matter, speaking on condition they not be identified because the matter is still private. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to unveil the policy in Halifax, Nova Scotia, where he’s gathered with the rest of his cabinet for a series of meetings about the economy and foreign relations.
Indeed, on Monday, CBC News confirmed this announcement, noting that “The tariff will apply to electric and certain hybrid passenger automobiles, trucks, buses and delivery vans.”
So, what impact would this new levy have as it goes into effect on Oct. 1? Well, we already know that Polestar and Lotus face exposure, but the 100 percent tariff on China-sourced EVs will have much wider effects than just curtailing sales at a handful of niche brands.
As it stands, the Canadian Domestic Market Model Y and Model 3 are both built in Shanghai, and a 100 percent tariff on those products would make them no longer economical to import from that plant. Out of the 179,712 zero-emission vehicles sold in Canada last year, the Model 3 and Model Y made up 32.6 percent of the market with 58,704 units sold, so resourcing supply from Texas, California, and potentially even Germany will be critical to maintaining volume. In addition, Volvo might be in a bit of a tight spot given that Chinese-built EX30 electric crossovers are already hitting dealer lots in Canada.
While matching America’s tariffs on Chinese EVs may benefit many Western manufacturers, it could hurt a small selection of them, and perhaps more importantly, may hurt consumers through potentially higher pricing and reduced choice. If we’re collectively making the decision to effectively kick cheap Chinese EVs out of Canada and the United States, we need affordable homegrown EVs ASAP.
Well, That Ain’t Good
If you’ve been waiting for your brand new Rivian electric SUV or pickup truck to ship from a factory holding lot, you might want to hold your breath because more than 50 of the brand’s EVs got a bit melty. Over the weekend, Reuters reported that a fire broke out in a parking lot at the plant on Saturday, damaging a group of electric vehicles.
Last month, a group of Rivian RDV electric vans at an Amazon fulfillment center in Houston, Texas were filmed having a thermal event. Rivian told us that a high-voltage battery pack wasn’t the instigator in that event, so hold your horses on speculating on this latest thermal event because it’s possible this didn’t start in a battery pack either. On the minus side, this isn’t great for optics, but on the plus side, the fire happened outside the plant and not inside of it.
Financial Times Takes A Critical Look At Ford
Yesterday the Financial Times published a piece titled “Ford shares have stalled: can CEO Jim Farley steer out of its rut?” In it, the author, Claire Bushey, takes a critical look at Ford’s performance, calling out shareholder concerns and Ford’s promises for the future.
The piece begins with a quote in which CEO Jim Farley and CFO John Lawler acknowledge the problem and take accountability.
Ford executives have laid out big plans in recent years to improve its profitability, but they have long known they face a sceptical audience. “Ford has been stuck in a box with thin margins, weak growth and low valuations . . . and it’s now time to break out,” chief executive Jim Farley told investors last year. Even then, though, chief financial officer John Lawler said: “We’ve told you this before . . . and we haven’t delivered.”
The piece goes on, noting that last month the company continued to struggle with high warranty costs, and that its earnings fell short of expectations, leading to a drop in share price.
Plus, with Ford reducing its EV plans and building more ICEs instead, shareholders are feeling a bit uneasy, with the Financial Times writing:.
Farley has been trying to implement a plan introduced in 2021 to cut costs, improve quality, increase revenue from digital subscription services and hit a 10 per cent adjusted operating margin by 2026. But he acknowledged last month that remaking Ford involved “growing pains”.
When it scrapped plans for an electric three-row SUV last week, Ford explained that the model had failed to meet its target of profitability within one year. It also said it would cut the share of capital spending it dedicated to EVs from 40 per cent to 30 per cent, while moving some battery production from Poland to Michigan to take advantage of US tax credits.
The biggest concern is quality and warranty costs, and the Financial Times spends pretty much the rest of the article talking about that. Though Ford’s JD Power “Initial Quality” ranking has improved, issues with quality remain, and they’re not necessarily a result of poorly built new cars:
The latest problems behind a warranty challenge that Barclays analyst Dan Levy called “frustrating for investors” stem from models launched as long ago as 2016. “It’s clear that we had a period of time where the robustness wasn’t what it needed to be,” Lawler said.
Read the rest of the piece here, as there’s lots more to talk about regarding Ford’s journey towards improved quality and overall stock market performance.
[This section of TMD written by David Tracy]
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
I know there aren’t many songs out there about go-karting, but out of every track in that genre, “Hey, It’s Your Funeral Mama” by Alexisonfire has to be my favorite. From the riffage to the chorus, it just makes you want to emulate a much lower-stakes version of Alonso’s overtake on Schumacher around the outside of 130R.
The Big Question
You can easily argue that a manual transmission is objectively “worse” than an automatic, and yet there’s still something desirable about a stickshift. With an EV, such a stickshift would be “simulating” gear changes that don’t actually happen, whereas on an ICE you’re actually physically changing gears. To the operator, how much does that distinction matter? And would one have to have experience with a manual ICE car to find this fun?
Would cars have ever caught on if they insisted on dropping poop every 3 miles to simulate a horse?
EVs need to stand on their own four wheels. They provide a different and in many ways superior driving experience (one pedal can be very efficient, relaxing, and smooth). Don’t use fake sounds and clunky gimmick shifters-to-nowhere to simulate what was. Find ways to amplify the benefits of the new.
Horsey Horseless
It would be fun to fill up your gas tank by pouring fuel into the horse’s mouth.
Did you see the picture in Mike Harrell’s comment below of the car that looks like it’s being driven by a horse?
I did. They were very concerned about these noisy, smoky, fast(ish), monsters being set loose amongst the skittish horses.
Included in Time Magazine’s 2007 list of “The 50 Worst Cars of All Time”.
“…the assembly plant was unaffected, the Normal Fire Department said in a statement to Reuters”.
I believe the Abnormal Fire Department should also be permitted to comment.
They were contacted for comment but kept going off on tangents.
It’s not as if they didn’t give us a sine they were going to vector off topic.
It is always good to get their angle, even if they always think they are right.
I was going to say that an EV with a superfluous stickshift is about as appealing as a car that’s designed to simulate the experience of riding a horse until I remembered that I actually do want one of those:
https://live.staticflickr.com/2849/11922989394_ebe3ee7382_o.jpg
I must therefore conclude that an EV with a fake clutch is okay as long as the car itself is also horse-shaped.
The Germans don’t understand fun. News at 11.
Have you ever seen porn? lol
I stand by my statement.
Oktoberfest (clean-ish fun) would dissent. 😉
Even a blind squirrel, or in this case a blindly drunk German, finds a nut every now and then.
Typical perspective of many in the German auto industry it seems, something is only good if it is faster.
I don’t think Porsche is gonna have any problems selling EVs because a Hyundai simulates gears.
Having recently sold a manual car for an EV, there’s no way I’d want fake shifting on the EV. The EV is engaging in its own way with one pedal driving. Unless the electric motor is underpowered and needs the gear reduction to go. Which could be entertaining as long as the components were made to have a continuous 100% duty cycle.
EVs don’t need fake shifting, they need lighter weight, actual feel through the brake and steering (which means they’re actually mechanically f’n connected), and manual controls of commonly used features instead of having them on touchscreens (maybe even—gasp—fully mechanical switches), which are all things that enhance engagement that aren’t artifice trying to poorly emulate old tech that doesn’t apply. If anything, the fake shifting is more of the problem disguised as a solution and shows just how clueless or intentionally obtuse they are.
I wouldn’t want the brakes to be mechanically connected to the pedal in an EV. The car should only apply the mechanical brakes once regen has been exhausted (braking harder than regen can apply, and/or battery is above 90% or so).
My Prius has a really smooth handoff between the regen and mechanical brakes. I can’t tell them apart in normal use.
But I do agree, lighter vehicles and more buttons (at least relating to non-infotainment functions) would be nice.
This is a really good point. I still don’t like BBW (hm, something about that doesn’t look right) if we’re talking about driving engagement in isolation (or as a system I personally trust), but as a practical matter, I don’t know how mechanical braking would be integrated to work with regen for a seamless transition and to do so consistently and maybe whether it’s even necessary where regen would be used most of the time. I totally overlooked that.
Hear hear!
Old != backwards != worse, so for me that argument sort of misses the point, which then leads to further arguments missing the point (e.g., a six-speed 911 R selling like magic beans doesn’t prove that fake shifting is the way forward; it shows that drivers want to be engaged).
Old is fine, there are plenty of things I like to still do for myself even if there is a faster more improved way. This is Porsche not agreeing to take something, break it, and then give it to you because you used to have it that way.
I refused to light a marshmallow on fire because you aren’t patient and like your s’more that way. Enjoy a roasted marshmallow, the difference is almost criminal.
While EVs won’t necessarily be as engaging, it doesn’t mean they can’t be engaging at all and maybe in different ways. The OEMs seem determined to not only refuse to explore new ways of engagement, but to remove any way possible for satisfying interaction and to substitute bad tech in exchange that wouldn’t satisfy anyone but a fleshlight enthusiast. I think the idea is to use these dumb fake things for long enough for people to forget the difference and stop complaining about the loss, then they can remove them.
To me, it makes all the difference.
A large portion of the manual appeal is the mechanical engagement, the physical feeling of the synchros through the stick and the clutch bite point, on top of the challenge of hustling the car to the best of my abilities. Most importantly, the car doesn’t have its own shifting ability, it’s all me. That part of the car will always be precisely as fast as I am, largely because of the physical limitation that is a manual transmission.
Pick a cliche: slow car fast, self-improvement, challenge=reward, mechanical interface, feedback, precise control, accountability, it can all be applied with some degree of not-entirely-bullshit.
With a simulated shift, it’s a car that doesn’t have those limitations pretending it does so you can feel like you’ve done something. As you improve your skills with the simulated gearbox, the car only gets faster in its slow mode. That very car will always have the ability to go faster by leaving you behind. It’s holding back, like your parents playing tag with you, carefully keeping up a facade of actually trying.
It’s a tired parent, trying to make sure you have fun by limiting itself to simulate the friend you wish you had. I’m sure it can be fun, but not nearly as much as a million other, more genuine things you can do to an EV.
Fake engine noise and fake shifting was cool when I was a kid on a big wheel.
Seems a tad pathetic as an adult in an expensive car though.
*takes For Sale sign off cardboard box with speedo and tach drawn inside*
There are a lot of Chinese cars in Mexico, capturing a significant portion of the market. Even MG is ahead of Hyundai. I don’t think the Mexican government will do what the US and Canada are doing, as not many people can afford cars over $40K USD.
BYD is selling a small electric hatchback for $18K USD. My brother is about to get one since he mentioned his monthly payments will be equivalent to what he currently spends on gas for his VW Vento (the sedan version of the Polo). The batteries are LFP, so my only concern is the long-term reliability and availability of parts.
I understand that the government is protecting jobs and ensuring fair competition, but they don’t push big OEMs to build reliable and affordable vehicles. It’s interesting that Toyota and Hyundai are the ones doing it, not Ford, GM, or Stellantis.
Fake shitting is a fart. Fake shifting is the same as fake shitting, so it’s a fart.
Please don’t fart around me
Fake shifting and fake engine noises are just plain stupid. I respect Porsche for trying to build an engaging EV instead of trying to emulate an ICE vehicle. A well-designed EV sports car may be different from a traditional ICE sports car, but that doesn’t mean it will have to be worse.
It will be interesting to see if the Model 3 and Model Y prices go up in Canada (assuming they will change to US production). I’m sure there is a difference in cost, but I wonder how much. Any price increase won’t necessarily reflect actual costs. I think the Model 3 in China is about $7,000 less than in the US.
Today difference is around 4K USD for the Model Y RWD before any tax credit (Cheaper in Canada). I dont think it will be a problem to switch locations, maybe just the logistics portion but I guarantee Tesla has enough capacity in the US to accommodate the Canadian market.
Just give them a gearbox if you want to make shifting EVs a thing, you’re already harming their performance in the name of it so you may as well go all the way.
The Tacan does have a 2-speed gearbox (at least in some configurations) but it’s all automatic.
So, let me get this straight…
-The Indo-Asians build a great product.
-There is global demand for said product, which is selling in droves.
-The West decides everyone must have it.
-The West makes it illogical to attain it.
Cool timeline to live in. Run by dopes.
If the general population of China could have a fair vote for who their leader was, I would totally agree with you. Until then, tariff the shit out of them as far as I’m concerned.
That makes no sense. Like most people in the comments here, you must have travelled. A fully free and fair voice for ALL citizens does not exist anywhere on the planet. Not when money is involved.
It’s all fine and dandy to desire fair trade, but this isn’t that,
What the west is basically doing is giving their puppy the best tennis ball ever invented, and telling them to go get it. It’s theirs. “Go get it!”
Except, the sliding glass door to the lanai is closed. On purpose. Out of spite.
Hmmm not an untrue metaphor but I think the convo focuses on the wrong thing. Their economy churns out cheaper stuff because their society has vastly different ground rules and priorities. It’s apples to hammers being compared here.
We will write for months and may never agree but facts are that if you let cheap Chinese goods into your hyper capitalist economy you would have shot yourself in the foot. This has already happened with all sorts of industries so it’s super easy to extrapolate what will happen to car companies. Is it fair? No. Is it necessary under this type of society built here? Sadly, yes.
I’m not picking on you, but how is it “not fair”.
Practically everything you own was built in Vietnam, Honduras, China, Indonesia, etc.
As you say, other countries have other priorities. If we can’t make the best products without inadvertently paying for them through taxes and such, maybe…just maybe, we are the ones doing it wrong.
All this talk about slave labor and unfair practices, but at what cost? Self-righteousness only gets one so far.
We are losing the game, and smiling from the bench, drinking their Gatorade.
Maybe I didn’t understood your argument.
I was saying tariffs are unfair because the workers that put up with the shortcomings of a hyper charged export economy have both ends of a short stick: crappy societal controls and no way to benefit fully from their cheap labor. This is because of things such as tariffs, which by nature are subjective and political. We may be saying the same thing?
We are basically in agreement. 🙂
The only difference is in the performative way in which the West pats itself on the back for being this way. Other countries aren’t trying to fool their citizenship into some fallacy of humanitarianism.
Some folks here ate the bait…
If they had a capitalist economy, their goods wouldn’t be so cheap, and we wouldn’t be having this
argumentdiscussion.China does have a capitalist economy now – albeit heavily subsidized by the government using funds from taxes.
Kinda like how the US subsidizes certain industries – such as Big Oil.
The US is absolutely not perfect. Yes, I have been to China a few times, and I have spoken directly to my fellow colleagues about politics, but stopped very short before I said anything that would have gotten me thrown in jail, which isn’t very far.
We had a CEO visit our factory in China. He had a salesman working for us that was upset with some change in company policy. The CEO ended up disappearing at the airport for 3 days for no reason at all. When he got back, he vowed never to return, and hasn’t since.
I wouldn’t suggest we are doing it right, I’m only suggesting that they are doing it vastly more wrong.
Let’s not forget the issues of slave and prisoner labor here as well.
It’s not the form of government, though that does directly relate to the real issue: labor protections, safety regulations, subsidies, and dumping. Why is it that these Chinese vehicles are so much cheaper? I’ll grant that some of it has to do with the inherent costs in traditional automakers, but a lot of it comes down to an unfair playing field. If BYD competed with say Ford in labor costs government subsidies, I don’t think you’d see anything like their current MSRPs.
It is 100% the form of government. When people can safely and fairly choose who their leaders are, they can safely and choose new leaders that better align with their interests.
When the people can safely and fairly communicate all of their ideas to one another, then there is more transparency to how they are treated, and allows them to ask for more fair and equal wages that we are all capable of earning.
None of that exists, hence my support for tariffs.
The only problem with that statement (which I agree with), is that over here on the gluttony side of the pond, we are not choosing “leaders”. Only figureheads. The money trail is almost impossible to follow.
It’s unfortunately that deep. No hybrid is gonna solve the way more powerful machine.
Chinese EVs are cheaper because they’re better at building them at scale. Subsidies helped the industry stay alive long enough for them to get to that point.
How 9 people liked your comment is beyond me. No offense to you for your thoughts, of course.
None taken. It’s a controversial topic, for sure. Have you travelled to China yourself?
Are we talking about EVs now, or the 19th century Opium Wars?
Same difference, really.
I get the pushto make EVs more engaging but I don’t think replicating what gas cars did is necessarily the correct approach. I’d rather see manufacturers come up with new ways to add driver engagement to vehicles rather than synthesizing the previous experience.
I know GM recently filed for a patent that would allow braking to be biased to the left or right sides for turn in via paddles behind the steering wheel. Not saying it’s the answer but would add engagement in a way that isn’t “faked” which is where I think manufacturers should be looking.
If there is no clutch doing actual clutch stuff, no thanks.
Fake shifting in EV Porsches will be like their approach to one pedal driving: something they could easily implement and allow the owners to chose their driving experience but won’t because Porsche always decides their way must be the only way.
I have less than 0 interest in any of the simulated shifting nonsense. You’re literally engineering a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist that makes the car slightly worse. I also think it’s a little bit of a cop out. The biggest gripe with performance EVs so far is that they’re not very engaging. I think finding ways to make them feel like ICE vehicles is stupid and misses the plot.
I’d rather engineers stop wasting time and resources on this, let EVs do what they’re actually good at, and find other mechanical ways to make them more engaging. Give them better steering. Get rid of brake by wire. Find creative ways to make them lighter. Pull all of the stupid, unnecessary tech out of them and make them more driver focused. Etc.
I don’t really care one way or the other, but a lot of the feedback on the Ioniq 5 N has been pretty positive in terms of simulating shifting/sounds. This is all just getting started, so I think it’s reasonable to assume some of this could ultimately result in a better driving experience.
I honestly think they’re missing the point when they try and simulate this. Or, I will also accept that this may just be me, but…
A large part of why a manual transmission is more engaging is because of the direct control of the vehicle it gives me. I am assuming that in these simulated manual EVs there will be no way to feather the clutch to hold position or more advanced maneuvers like heel-toe shifting won’t be possible. But the direct control I have is a huge part of why I like it. In these simulated things it will just be an illusion. I just don’t see the point and I think the existence and creation of these is just missing the point entirely.
I’m sure a lot of people that never learned to drive a manual (and never cared to I guess) will enjoy the novelty of it. And more power to them if they do enjoy it. Just don’t try and tell me it’s a manual EV and insult those that really do enjoy the control.
Can one of the writers do a story on the anti-thermal event devices being developed (I know Hyundai and GM have done work here). Fire retardents, shielding, thermal channels etc. It is definitely something that EV makers have to address, because having whole parking lots of EV’s burning up is not sustainable.
I am much more concerned with this statement (for which I hope some nuance was literally lost in the translation).
The electric engine is better than an ICE
Than with fake shifts or not. Quite honestly, I don’t care either way there.
I read that as an engineering perspective and talking about the motor itself in a vaccum, not necessarily in relation to its application.
When you look at motor characteristics that engineers have been chasing forever the electric motor is hard to beat. Smooth power deliver over the whole rev range, low rpm torque, low vibration, low noise, efficiency, reliability, emissions.
Maybe that’s the nuance?
It could be and I suppose it is fair to say that most of the downsides of EVs are tied to the battery rather than the motor itself, but it’s still a jarring statement from a representative of a performance car brand.
To me it’s exactly this, the battery. IMHO, an electric motor is better in every single parameter, except the one that Tim the Toolman Taylor likes, the sound.
I actually think the sounds from performance EVs are cool. We just haven’t had time/experiences to associate the sounds with performance and fun enough to trigger that part of our brain. So it’s possible that over time that will change.
I agree completely. The whole EV thing is still quite new. I would also kinda prefer just the raw sound, versus the Dodge solution, but I kinda like that too.
The downside is 100% the battery I think. But It’s tricky to talk about the motor without wrapping the battery into the conversation so I think most people lump them all together in their minds.
As for the statement. With the proliferation of half-truths and spin from everywhere I find statements like that refreshingly honest even if they are a little jarring. But maybe that’s the engineer in me, focused on a single problem/part.
I’ve thought that >5 speed automatic drivetrains that slush shifts seamlessly and do their darnedest to isolate the ICE are secretly wishing to be electric.
I’m in favor of manual shifting of manual transmission as more fun than automatic shifting in general.
But, I’m not in favor of faking manual shifting with something that doesn’t require shifting at all. Straight up fake. If someone said “hey I can make you shift your boat motor 5 times every time you take off from a stop” I would look at them like they were a moron.
Porsche is absolutely right.
Performance drivers have wanted smoother acceleration forever. The answer was more speeds in the transmissions.
Full electric comes along all of a sudden a “not like that!” from some of them.
More speeds in transmissions (beyond 3 or 4) are all due to fuel economy and emissions legislation, not performance drivers wanting smoother acceleration. The epitome of smooth acceleration was the Buick Dynaflow transmission (1 gear, never shifts!) – and performance drivers hated those.
Performance drivers may have wanted closer ratios to keep their engine in its power band, but even a close ratio 4 speed can get you all the way from parking lot crawl to far extra-legal speeds with typical car engine RPM ranges. I can pretty much promise that no Porsche or Corvette owner was clamoring for that 7th gear over-over-over drive gear that made their shift pattern look like a Fast and Furious meme come to life.
It’s the same thing as having real engine noises vs synthesized noises pumped into the speakers. Authenticity is good, fakery is bad.
Yes I think there’s definitely something to this. While I haven’t driven most of these, the most positive “engaging” EVs I’ve seen reviewed all seem to maximize the potential (no pun intended) of their powertrain, e.g. instant throttle response and very powerful and easily controllable regen. EVs with pedal mapping that mimics ICE throttle response and light regen and creep modes all feel more “artificial” somehow, like engineers have papered over the best parts of EV powertrains for the sake of familiarity. At least offer the option to control it (many do thankfully).
I think a lot of the “engagement” problems are also weight related. How many modern vehicles (ICE or otherwise) weighing north of 5k lbs are super engaging? I think just the nature of making something so heavy fast and nimble necessitates many layers of electronic systems with complex controls. Which is why those 5k lb “sports cars” can do some amazing things and blow your mind with acceleration and lap times, but somehow the driving experience can feel less direct and “engaging” than it is in a modern HD pickup.
Did anyone tell Dodge that I wonder.
Yes, but all the answer Dodge gave was, “You’d like it too, if you had robot ears.”
Dodge believes their minions are easily fooled.