Blog

  • Rescue baby bird has lost its nest rescue animals bird pet… Beautiful Dogs Love

    Rescue baby bird has lost its nest rescue animals bird pet… Beautiful Dogs Love

    BUYING
    ADVICE
    High-Performance Kit Cars That Are More Affordable Than They Look
    BY SARAH BLOOMFIELD SEPT. 16, 2025 4:45 PM EST

    Wako Megumi/Getty Images
    Sure, building a car model is fun, but putting together a life-size, working version of a car you can actually drive is so much more satisfying. Kit cars are essentially prefabricated parts you assemble yourself to build a car. Many kit cars are designed to resemble rare or far too expensive models that are usually out of reach for the average budget, such as the Ford GT40, Porsche 356, and Shelby Cobra. That said, a few are true originals that look and drive like nothing else on the road.

    Building the car in your own garage eliminates the assembly cost, which makes it a lot cheaper. For some kits, you need a donor car, or a specific model and some of its major components. Donor cars don’t have to be in perfect condition, and buying one cheaply can keep the price of building a kit car low.

    Other kits provide nearly all the parts you need to assemble a working car model. Sometimes you can buy the kit in installments to help with affordability. Buying the parts this way also gives you time to complete each step as you go, so you don’t get overwhelmed during the building process. Quite a few companies make kit cars today, but they don’t all focus on high-performance models. Some of the top companies offering kit cars include Factory Five, Burton Car Company, DDR Motorsports, and Dakar Cars Limited. Here, you’ll find details about some of the most affordable high-performance kit cars available and the companies making them.

    Exomotive Exocet — $7,999

    Exomotive
    Exomotive brought the MEV Exocet to the United States in 2013, but the company’s founder, Kevin Patrick, took an immediate interest in the Exocet soon after it was released in 2010. Kevin built his own MEV Exocet and loved it so much that in 2011, he went to MEV headquarters to secure a place as the only Exocet provider in the U.S. But the Exocet required refinement before it could be brought to the country, which meant a collaboration between Kevin Patrick and Steve Mills, founder of MEV.

    Touted as the easiest kit car in the world to build, even inexperienced mechanics and hobbyists can construct the Exomotive Exocet if they put in the effort. Build time is estimated at around 100 hours, and the starting price for the Exocet Base model is an affordable $7,999. You’ll need a 1990-2005 Mazda Miata donor car (next-generation Miatas won’t cut it) and a Mazda, Honda, or GM engine to complete the build. A mid-level MEV is available for $8,299, and it adds a roll bar tube, harness mounting tubes, and more front and rear downtubes. An off-road/race package can make it easy to wander from the pavement in your Exocet, but it will cost you $8,999 to upgrade.

    Under the hood, the Exocet can support Mazda’s 1.6- and 1.8-liter engines, Honda’s K- and J-Series blocks, and the EcoTec, LFX V6, and LSX V8 powertrains from GM. The ultimate power, torque, and top speed for the Exocet depend on the engine equipped and other customization features and mods made during assembly, which might affect the car’s weight. Output generally ranges from 100 to 700 horsepower.

    Speedster Werks 356 A Speedster — $9,120

    Bonhams Cars
    Dedicated to supporting car lovers who want to experience the satisfaction of building their own cars, Speedster Werks is a kit car company that’s been in business for more than 20 years. Although Speedster Werks is well-known for its Porsche 356 A Speedster replica kit cars, the company partakes in several other ventures as well. In addition to prototyping, Speedster Werks takes on bespoke and small vehicle projects, production of small-scale parts, and glass-reinforced plastic (GRP) repairs. The company is based in the U.K., but the 356 A Speedster kit car can be imported to the U.S.

    Everyone’s drawn to the classic look of the Porsche 356 A Speedster, but who can afford one? With fewer than 5,000 of this model produced, not only is it rare, but it also fetches a significant price at auction, with models selling for $200,000 and up. However, if you’re willing to put in a little elbow grease, you can get a 356 A Speedster replica kit car from Speedster Werks for £6,750, which converts to about $9,120 USD.

    Building the 356 A Speedster replica requires a shortened VW chassis, as the GRP body shell in the Speedster Werks 356 A Speedster kit fits perfectly on this frame. The kit includes the front and rear engine hoods, one-piece doors, headlight bowls, bumpers, and a prefitted front luggage area. It also comes with all the necessary hinges and an engine bay kit. All that’s left to contribute is the engine, and this car’s ready to build.

    Dio Tipo 61 — $9,500

    DioCars
    Bill Bonadio is a serious car enthusiast who began building his own cars when he was a teenager. Inevitably, this led to him starting his own kit car company, DioCars, in the ’90s. It all started with two amateur car builders in the ’60s who made a replica of the Maserati Tipo 61 “Birdcage” using a Triumph TR-3 chassis. When Bonadio came across a version of the Maserati replica in the ’70s, he thought it was the real deal. After realizing it was a replica, he contacted one of the original builders about becoming a dealer.

    It took some time, but eventually, Bonadio was able to build and sell the Dio Tipo 61 kit car, which can be built on the chassis of several models with anything from a two- to an eight-cylinder engine. The specifications for the chassis are pretty flexible for the Tipo 61 — a rarity for kit cars. Basically, any frame with a wheelbase between 88 and 102 inches will work, as long as the rear track is 45 inches and the front track falls somewhere between 45.5 and 52 inches.

    A Dio Tipo 61 car kit costs $9,500, but this only gets you the front and rear body sections, lower body panels, and the molded door sections and two doors. Other components, such as the windshield and hood hinges, cost extra but won’t add too much to the overall price. An original Maserati “Birdcage” from the ’50s has an estimated value between $5 and $6 million, making the price of the Dio Tipo 61 kit car even more appealing.

    DF Goblin V1 — $9,950

    DF Kit Cars
    DF Kit Car got its start all because of the immense satisfaction that comes with building a car from the ground up. After the company’s owner completed his own car build using a Chevrolet Cobalt donor car and parts he fabricated with CNC equipment from his family business, he wanted to share the experience with others. So in 2015, DF Kit Car was born. By focusing on creating an easy-to-build, fun-to-drive kit car, DF Kit Car is making a name for itself in the kit car community.

    The DF Goblin V1 is the first kit car to come from the company, but a Goblin V2 is on the horizon. For now, you’ll need a 2005-2010 Chevrolet Cobalt or Pontiac G5 donor car to get started with the Goblin V1 build. The kit is sold in three stages, but you only need the first two to build a working Goblin V1. The third stage is optional, as it only includes accessories and other parts that allow for customization, no critical operating components.

    A base Goblin V1 kit will run you $9,950 for both stage one and two, plus the cost of the donor car and, if needed, the engine. Of course, the price of the kit car varies depending on the donor car model, drivetrain, and powertrain. If you want options like a new parking brake, customized steering wheel, or tow bar, it will cost a little more. The Goblin V1 can support engine blocks with outputs that range from 140 to 260 hp and either an automatic or manual transmission, putting you in complete control of the final outcome of your Goblin V1 build.

    DDR Grullon GT8 — $19,995

    YouTube/DDR Motorsport
    In 2001, Diego Grullon combined his 25 years of experience in the racing industry with the talent of a team of car specialists to launch DDR Motorsport. The goal was to create an impressive component kit car that could rise above the competition. Innovation, quality craftsmanship, and a focus on supercar design elements make the kit cars from DDR worth buying and building. Based in Florida, DDR Motorsport fabricates a lineup of relatively affordable GT kit cars, as well as doing some prototyping and manufacturing for customers.

    Although the base price for the Grullon GT8 high-performance kit car is almost $20,000 — which could buy you a great used car — the car that this kit is based on, the McLaren F1, typically sells for $20 million or more at auction. When put in perspective, DDR’s self-build version that uses a Corvette C5 donor car is certainly, and it sure looks more expensive than it is. An upgrade to the Grand Prix version will jump the price of this kit car to between $23,000 and $26,000.

    With the kit, you get the components to create a sophisticated supercar, including a welded tubular steel frame and hand-laid fiberglass body. In the engine bay, any of GM’s longitudinally mounted LS1 to LS7 V8 engines will fit, so you have a few choices. A six-speed transaxle, shifter, and cables from a 2000-2004 Porsche Boxster S donor car provide smooth gear changes, but you’ll need an engine-to-transaxle adapter plate to mate the gearbox to the engine.

    Factory Five Mk4 Roadster — $20,990

    Factory Five
    Factory Five is a big name in the kit car industry. It is, after all, the largest kit car component manufacturer in the world. Located in Massachusetts, Factory Five has a massive manufacturing facility dedicated to creating the parts necessary to build each of its exceptional kit cars. While many kit car companies have limited model options, Factory Five offers hot rods, coupes, roadsters, and trucks to appeal to a wide customer base. The company provides top-notch customer service, ensuring an enjoyable kit car experience, from building to driving.

    A complete Factory Five Mk4 Roadster kit is affordably priced at $20,990. You can pick up the base kit for $14,990, but the complete kit is a better deal because you need fewer donor parts to finish the build. Going with the complete kit means you really only need to supply a working Ford engine, transmission, fuel pump, battery, and rear end with brakes, wheels, and tires. Everything else comes with the kit.

    The Mk4 Roadster is modeled after the Shelby 427 Cobra of the ’60s, an iconic yet extremely rare model. During the Cobra’s production run, fewer than 1,000 models came off the line. At auction, a 427 Cobra can bring in more than $1 million, putting the car well out of reach for pretty much everyone. With the Mk4 Roadster, you get to put the car together yourself, which makes driving the kit car all the more enjoyable when you finally get to take it out on the road.

    What Does It Take To Build a High-Performance Kit Car?

    DF Kit Car
    Kit car companies strive to make their products easy to assemble, but that doesn’t mean just any gearhead has the fortitude to build a car from the ground up. Yes, you might start with a donor car, but there’s a lot of time and effort that goes into putting all the pieces of a kit car together. So the main thing it takes to build a kit car, aside from the burning desire to drive a car you built yourself, of course, is the determination to see the job through.

    Having a garage with enough space to strip a donor car and then build a kit car is another necessity if you want to build your own car. You definitely want to keep the parts out of the elements as you work, and a place to keep everything organized is also nice. Mechanic’s tools are a must, but you can also check the kit car maker’s website and building guides to see if you’ll need any special tools or equipment to complete your car.

    Don’t overlook finding a solid community of kit car builders who can help and support you through the building process. Many kit cars take about 100 hours or more to finish, and knowing people who have built a kit car can encourage you to keep going with your project.

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    BUYING
    ADVICE
    Consumer Reports’ 10 Best Used Cars Under $20,000 Are A Great Way To Dodge Republican Tariffs
    BY LOGAN K. CARTER MARCH 31, 2025 5:25 PM EST

    Toyota
    While President Donald Trump’s strategy to make America great again continues to make the lives of America’s non-billionaires harder and less affordable, Consumer Reports just released a list of the top 10 sub-$20,000 used cars. The models on this list aren’t necessarily the most exciting, flashiest, or fastest vehicles on sale, but they all perform well in Consumer Reports’ rigorous tests, and perhaps most importantly, in long-term reliability. With worsening inflation and impending new car tariffs set to skyrocket the price of most new cars starting April 2, it’s a tough time to be an average American consumer.

    If you aren’t rich and you’re looking for a new-to-you car that is likely to provide safe, comfortable, and trouble-free ownership for years to come, you might want to keep the cars on this list at the top of yours. In order to compile this list, several factors were considered including crash prevention, crash safety, predicted long-term reliability, resale value, and efficiency. Consumer Reports says:

    “The strategy we employ for selecting used cars emphasizes value within a price range, and it means that the highlighted models may not have been the highest-scoring models when tested new. Instead, they’re often good cars that depreciated more than others, making them more attractive as used cars than they were when new…. At the same price, rivals are often years older—potentially from a previous generation. In other words, to buy a direct rival at the same model year and mileage, you would have to pay thousands of dollars more.”

    These are the 10 sub-$20,000 used cars that Consumer Reports recommends, along with some of our thoughts on each selection.

    Best car under $10,000: 2016 Mazda 6

    Mazda
    The Mazda 6 is the only car on this list that’s likely to be below $15,000. It’s a great choice for anyone looking for affordable, safe, practical, and efficient motoring, and it also happens to be one of the more fun-to-drive cars in the mid-size sedan segment. It’s even available with a genuine six-speed manual transmission. 

    The entire 2014-2021 generation of the Mazda 6 is recommended here, but the 2016 Mazda 6 offers the most under the $10,000 mark. Its road test scores and reliability ratings are above average, and owner satisfaction is average in Consumer Reports findings.

    Top sedan under $15,000: 2019 Toyota Corolla

    Toyota
    You knew it would be here, the ubiquitous Toyota Corolla. Its legendary reliability is legendary for a reason; like every Corolla that came before it, it takes a licking and keeps on ticking. It’s certainly not the most exciting car ever produced, but it will deliver years of affordable, reliable, efficient, and safe motoring for anyone pragmatic enough to buy one. 

    Toyota included its safety suite, Toyota Safety Sense P, as standard on all Corollas starting in 2017, so from that year on all Corollas included desirable safety features including standard automatic emergency braking with pedestrian detection and lane-keep assist. Whenever you’re discussing intelligent used car purchases, the Corolla should be on the list.

    Best SUV under $15,000: 2018 Mazda CX-5

    Mazda
    Now that we got the prerequisite boring-to-drive-but-great-to-own Corolla out of the way, you can also find Mazda’s handsome and fun-to-drive compact crossover, the CX-5, at a comparable price. The CX-5 was redesigned for 2017, and 2018 brought desirable safety features like standard blind spot warning, low-speed automatic emergency braking, and rear cross-traffic warning systems. 

    In higher trim levels, the CX-5 is quite luxurious, and it offered a turbocharged engine on some models after 2019. The CX-5 scored above average in its road test and reliability testing, so it’s a great choice for anyone who wants an affordable, reliable, and somewhat fun-to-drive crossover.

    Best Hybrid Under $20,000: 2019 Toyota Camry Hybrid

    Toyota
    Alongside the Corolla, the Camry may not be the most exciting choice, but it is a very intelligent one, and its hybrid models offer impressive reliability and outrageous fuel efficiency, around 45 miles per gallon according to owner-reported mileage, though Consumer Reports’ Camry Hybrid got 52 mpg. It scores well above average in its road test scores, reliability, and owner satisfaction ratings. 

    It also offers the same standard safety equipment as the Corolla, with automatic emergency braking with pedestrian detection, adaptive cruise control, and lane departure warning with lane-keep assist, and yes, standard Apple CarPlay was introduced for 2019.

    Best small SUV under $20,000: 2021 Kia Sportage

    Kia
    Kia updated the Sportage in the 2020 model year, bringing improved reliability, refreshed styling inside and out, and standard safety features including automatic emergency braking and lane-keep assistance. It scores above average in the road test, well above average in reliability, but below average in owner satisfaction surveys. This is a case of a model that might not have been top of its class when new, but still offers a great package for a lower price than its competitors due to depreciation. 

    Since you didn’t buy it new, you don’t have to shoulder the brunt of that inflation, so you can get a newer model with desirable features for less money than a comparable RAV4 or CR-V.

    Best Hybrid SUV under $20,000: 2018 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid

    Toyota
    The Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, like the Camry Hybrid and Corolla, is an easy vehicle to recommend to buyers looking for reliable and efficient transportation, as long as excitement isn’t on the wishlist. The RAV4 received a hybrid powertrain option in its 2016 update, but Consumer Reports highlights 2017 and 2018 model years as the ones to look for thanks to a bump in reliability reports from its surveys and additional features. 

    2017 and 2018 RAV4 Hybrids earned above average scores in road tests, well above average reliability rankings, and average owner satisfaction.

    Best three-row SUV under $20,000: 2020 Mazda CX-9

    mazda
    Another Mazda made the list, which means another win for those who find joy in the act of driving. The CX-9 is not the biggest three-row SUV in the segment, but it received above-average scores in the road test, reliability, and owner satisfaction rankings. Mazda dealers can retrofit CX-9s with Apple CarPlay, and the 2020 model year is recommended because it received a refresh that brought standard pedestrian detection for the automatic emergency braking system. 

    2021 models got a new infotainment system, but its reliability predictions dropped below average. A used CX-9 offers a lot of car for the money, and it’s a fun-to-drive car at that.

    Best luxury SUV under $20,000: 2017 Lexus NX

    Lexus
    If you’re really concerned about looking fancy despite being on a tight budget, the Lexus NX offers the best combination of affordable, reliable, and safe motoring, if you find one with the right options. CR recommends finding a model with the optional blind-spot detection system since some drivers find the NX’s outward visibility to be subpar. 

    While it is a Lexus, it’s based on the Toyota RAV4 and doesn’t offer occupants the same levels of isolation and coddling as other Lexus models, but it’s still a good choice. 2018 models may push over the $20,000 mark, but they include standard automatic emergency braking which is an important feature. It scored above average in its road test, well above average in reliability, and average in owner satisfaction.

    Best pickup truck under $20,000: 2015 Toyota Tacoma

    Toyota
    If you need a sub-$20,000 pickup truck that won’t leave you stranded or hemorrhaging money on repair costs, the 2015 Tacoma is the truck for you. It ain’t perfect – it received average road test scores and owner satisfaction scores – but it is reliable with an above average predicted reliability score. 

    It’s a 10-year-old truck now, but it holds its resale value for a reason, and though it was the final year of this bodystyle, the update didn’t drastically change much.

    Best sports car under $20,000: 2020 Mazda MX-5 Miata

    Mazda
    The fourth and final Mazda on this list is the most fun to drive, the legendary Miata. If you’re vertically gifted like me it might not be a good fit for you (literally,) but if you’re closer to average height and you want a fun, reliable, and satisfying-to-own sports car, get a Miata. 

    It got a big power bump in 2019, so look for 2019-or-newer cars, and if the one you find doesn’t have CarPlay, it can be retrofitted by a Mazda dealer. It earns above average reliability and road test scores, and scores well above average in owner satisfaction, plus owners say it can easily return over 30 mpg.

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    QOTD
    These New Cars Just Aren’t Worth The Money
    Stellantis is taking a lot of heat in today’s Answer Of The Day
    BY  AMBER DASILVA FEBRUARY 7, 2024 7:30 AM EST

    Stellantis
    Cars: They cost too much. Big cars, little cars, fast cars, slow cars — the only things they all share are that they’re too expensive to buy, too expensive to own, and never worth enough when you’re trying to sell yours. Earlier this week, we asked you for the most overpriced new cars, and you gave us a wealth of answers. Here are some of the best.

    Infiniti QX80

    Infiniti
    For me, it’s the 2024 Infiniti QX80 (MSRP: $74,150 – $88,450). I’ve driven one as a rental car and couldn’t believe the price they charge for this land barge. It’s old, slow, inefficient, large (but not roomy), cumbersome to drive, and, at least to my eyes, not even great to look at.

    To top it off, Infiniti has already teased a replacement that will (ostensibly) be a whole heck of a lot nicer, so why would you plunk down your hard-earned greenbacks on a new one of these? Literally any other option at this price point is a win, or do the responsible thing and get the Toyota Grand Highlander/GR86 combo: have your cake, eat it too, and you would still save thousands.

    I’ve always thought that the QX80 looks like a Lexus GX 460 that’s sitting underwater. You could also be underwater, looking at the Infiniti on dry land. Either way, it’s a watery Lexus.

    Submitted by: paradsecar

    Toyota Supra

    Toyota
    Really hard to justify this thing being $13,090 more than the Nissan Z, with (in my opinion) worse looks, objectively less power, and the inherent BMW-ness of the whole thing.

    It’s okay to be wrong sometimes. The Z is great-looking, but to say it’s better than the Supra? C’mon.

    The Supra is really an interesting case, because I can’t think of a vehicle for its price that I’d rather own. The Z, the Mustang, nothing else really grabs me the way the Supra does.

    Submitted by: Give Me Tacos or Give Me Death

    Jeep Grand Wagoneer

    Stellantis
    The Jeep Grand Wagoneer is the first car that comes to mind. First off, its hideous at any price, especially for a 6-figure car competing with the Escalade, Range Rover Heavy, X7, and others in its class. Second, why make it a Jeep? Sure, its the only passenger vehicle brand in Stellantis’ portfolio that is doing well and has a future, but nobody is going offroading in this behemoth. It should have been a Chrysler, especially at this high pricepoint. If this vehicle started out around $50K or $60K and topped out at around $80K, it might be more paletable. Third, does the market really need another full-size, gas-guzzling vehicle like this?

    Regardless, this ugly-ass monster is selling like hotcakes in my town so there are plenty of people feel the need to have a huge, ugly vehicle so what do I know?

    The Grand Wagoneer is difficult to understand until you see one in person. It’s sort of like the Grand Canyon — it always looks smaller in photos. Then you actually see it, and you go “Jesus Christ, people go inside that? Why?

    Submitted by: oddseth

    Dodge Hornet

    Stellantis
    The new Dodge Hornet. Somehow, Dodge has decided a car that’s smaller than a Honda CR-V, should cost $49,000 when spec’d with AWD and a hybrid powertrain. The interior has some very nice features, but for what you get, $49K is a tough pill to swallow.

    I appreciate the Hornet’s design, but I can’t get over that badge. Just two red stripes slashed diagonally down the center of the uppermost grille. Uppermost of three grilles, by the way.

    Submitted by: Deal Killer – Powered by Audi

    Lucid Air Sapphire

    Lucid
    I can’t get behind the Lucid Air Sapphire being worth $219,000 more than the Air Pure. In Canada the Air Pure is $108,000. The Sapphire is $327,000.

    It’s a weird scenario because I do think the Pure is a $100K car and the Sapphire has hypercar numbers: 1200(+) hp, 0-60 in 2 seconds, 330km/h top speed, and it has 675 km of range. Those are $300,000 car stats.

    But to have a $200,000 price variation on the same platform seems absurd to me.

    I know Porsche has a similar spread but when you get to the $300,000 and up mark, you’re getting some pretty dedicated equipment. Plus there’s like 37,000 models between a 911 Carrera and a top end GT3 RS.

    Yeah, but that’s 219,000 Canadian dollars difference. Here in the U.S., that’s something like 30 bucks. Not a small jump, to be sure, but many buyers find it worth it for what they get.

    Submitted by: JohnnyWasASchoolBoy

    Any ICE Car

    Ford
    Any internal combustion engined car. When gas costs $100 / gallon in 2030 and you’re still paying your 96 month loan, you will have regrets

    Eventually, sure, the lack of demand will cause a collapse on the supplier side of the supply chain for gasoline and negate any benefits gained from the past few decades of economies of scale. I’m not sure it’ll happen in the next 96 months, though. We’ve got at least a 120-month loan before we hit $100/gallon.

    Submitted by: neverspeakawordagain

    GMC Yukon Denali

    GM
    GMC Denali. Tahoes/Yukons are already over priced lumps of junk. Then you have a dressed up version pushing 100K? I can not think of one redeeming quality for one of these.

    You can guarantee its transporting max 1 kid, maybe a Toy size dog, a couple Stanley cups, overpriced pocket book, golf clubs, your missing visor and half zip pullover, your Target pickup order and ChickFila lunch.

    I used to work at a GM dealer, and I can tell you that no Yukon Denali has ever held more cargo than listed in that comment. Most of them have less.

    Submitted by: waveridin1959

    ‘90s Skyline GT-Rs

    MrWalkr, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
    if new old car that you can bought via special program is included then Nissan Skyline GT-R R32, R33 and R34 (via Skyline Restoration Program)

    It started from 400k usd excluding the car, and yes you can request them to source the car for additional cost so I suspect it’s around 500k USD

    Hayase, we’re really pushing the definition of a car’s MSRP here, but I’ll allow it purely because I love Skyline GT-Rs so much. If I ever win Powerball, I’ll have to get myself a new-old-stock R34. I’ll let you drive it, to see if it’s worth the cost.

    Submitted by: hayase

    Mansory, Just All Of It

    Mansory
    Anything Mansory releases.

    Sure, I’d love to pay way more than MSRP for a exotic, that has been beaten within an inch of it’s life with an ugly stick.

    I genuinely wonder who the target market is for these builds. People with way too much money, way too little taste, and a desperate need for everyone they see to know both those facts? It’s a car for Logan Paul, I guess.

    Submitted by: Knyte

    Top-Spec Jeep Wranglers

    Stellantis
    It’s a shorter list of what actually IS worth the money. But I’ll try to show how nuanced and tricky this is:

    Take, for example, the Jeep Wrangler. Accounting for inflation, the Base model 2 door at 31,895 has SO MUCH more standard than you could ever get on a JK, TJ, YJ, etc. Adjusted for inflation, it’s no more expensive than a Jeep has ever been.

    Couple that with the resale, you have yourself a vehicle that is worth every penny.

    However, if you go crazy ordering the options up, and you do it wrongly enough, you can end up with a $60,000 jeep that has bone stock wheels, cloth seats, no heated seats or remote start, just a base model looking Jeep that somehow costs $60,000 dollars. Worth that? Not even close.

    I still think base Jeeps should sell in the low $20k range new. You should be able to go out as a young adult and purchase a convertible SUV to take all your friends down to the beach in, and it should be genuinely affordably on entry-level wages.

    Submitted by: R4ndyD4ndy

    Dodge Durango

    Stellantis
    Dodge Durango. It was last redesigned 13 years ago and still costs over $41k for a 2WD base trim with cloth seats.

    If that $41k included the Hemi, maybe Stellantis would have something nice on its hands. Probably not, but maybe.

    Submitted by: StevieWelles

    BMW XM

    BMW
    BMW XM. Starting price is $160K for what is essentially a spruced up X5 PHEV with a V8 and polarizing style. Is it a nice car to drive? Yes, absolutely. It is worth as much as a new M3 and an X5 50e combined? Hell no.

    The thing with the XM is that it doesn’t look comparable to the X5. It looks about six times larger. Bavarian Canyonero energy.

    Submitted by: Wampasaurus

    Any Mini

    Mini
    I mean, pretty much all of them. Car prices are stupid high. However, gun to my head time? Pretty much any Mini. They aren’t bad cars, per se, but for what they are they are weirdly overpriced.

    Skeffles, who’s threatening your life over this question? Tell them to stop. Better yet, put me on the phone, and I’ll tell them to stop. There’s no need for this to be difficult.

    Submitted by: skeffles

    Toyota Crown

    Toyota
    Toyota Crown, I really like it for its weirdness. But the interior is not worth its $40,000 base price, for that price you could almost get the fully loaded Outback Wilderness far better appointed.

    The Toyota Crown has a head start in earning its MSRP, in that it seems targeted at folks who’ve been earning Social Security and their union pension for 15 years by the time of purchase.

    Submitted by: Chris

    Mitsubishi Mirage

    Mitsubishi
    The Mitsubishi Mirage. (How many people were either just reminded that the Mirage is a thing or googled if it’s still being made?) For ages, the only thing going for it was that it was cheap. With promos and dealer discounts, not too long ago you could get one new off the lot for under $10k. They may still be the cheapest new car, but they’re venturing for from cheap.

    Let me correct that, the price is venturing far from cheap. The car itself is still cheap as hell. Now the only thing it has going for it is that it’s one of the few cars still on the market.

    This is an interesting question here. The Mirage is one of, if not the singular cheapest car on the market right now, but it’s still possible for it to feel too cheap for its asking price. So long as Mitsubishi keeps finance rates down, though, it may not be an issue.

    Submitted by: TRath

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    CULTURE
    JALOPNIK EXPLAINS
    Here’s How Keyless Cars Can Start Even With A Dead Fob Battery
    BY NICHOLAS WERNER MAY 25, 2025 6:55 PM EST

    Muanpare Wanpen/Shutterstock
    We really are living in the future when your car just magically knows you’re there without you having to do anything. The jingling of keys used to be the universal symptom of turning a car on, but these days, more and more drivers merely have to push a button. Most of the time, your keys never have to leave your pocket or purse (though if that key is perfect, maybe you’ll want it to).

    Of course, it isn’t magic, it’s a radio signal coming from your key fob. And the transmitter for that signal is powered by a battery. So, what happens if the battery goes dead? Are you locked out of your car? Curse this modern age!

    Not to worry, because the people smart enough to engineer an entire car were also smart enough to think of a backup. First of all, some fobs actually contain a physical key (you may have to push a button or pry open a panel to get it, although some keys and key fobs are even weirder). That’ll get the door open, and some cars even have an old-school ignition keyhole to get the engine started. For cars with a push-button start, however, all you have to do is physically put your dead-battery fob in a designated location, and the button will still work. If you’re wondering how on earth the car knows a dead key is there, the answer, once again, isn’t magic, it’s science.

    Induction coils to the rescue

    Thank You For Your Assistant/Getty Images
    Your car uses a radio frequency identification system to know which remote key it should be opening for. Essentially, the car constantly sends out a little signal with a certain code, and then listens for the properly encoded response. Your fob listens for that ping, and when it detects it, sends back the right code. This way, your car opens for you and you alone.

    To work properly, then, your fob just needs to transmit a signal, which takes electricity, hence the battery. In case the battery goes dead, both your car and the fob are also fitted with induction coils. Just like a wireless charger for your phone or even a hotel card key, the magnetic field generated by one of the coils causes an electric current to flow in the other. In other words, the coil in your car (pulling energy from the car battery) will magnetically cause electricity to flow in your fob, thus powering the transmitter.

    Where is this coil in your car? Well, every car manufacturer seems to have come up with a different answer to that, so it’s best to check your owner’s manual; that will tell you where to place your dead fob to let the start button work. For your own peace of mind, probably better to do that now, rather than wait until it’s an issue.

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    CULTURE
    NICE PRICE OR NO DICE
    These Movies And TV Shows Have The Best Car Casting
    BY AMBER DASILVA MARCH 5, 2025 10:30 AM EST

    Apple TV
    Have you ever tuned in to a movie or TV show and seen a car that absolutely ruins the movie for you? Well, today we’re not talking about that. Today we’re here to talk about the vehicles that actually made a movie or show better — cars so well-cast that they improve the atmosphere, speak to a character, or just generally make watching a better time. Earlier this week, I asked you for your favorite examples of car casting in movies and TV, and today we’re looking through your answers. Let’s dive in. 

    Stranger Things

    Stranger Things.

    What makes it impressive to me is that they didn’t fall into the classic trap of period pieces.

    Most street scenes in most period pieces populate the roads and parking lots with cool cars of that era. All the movies and TV shows based in the 50s have bright pastel colored tail finned cars that look to have about 30 coats of wax on them.

    Stranger Things got it right (well other than Barbara’s car, but there’s a LOT of not right about how that character was treated). It’s supposed to be 1983. The parents generally own 5-10 year old cars. The cool car that is driven in 1984/85 by a high school student is a 79, or 6 year old Camaro. The street scenes and parking lots have a lot of dirty late 70s cars with some missing a hubcap or the like.

    Which is reality. Imagine a show 30 years ago based in 2025 high school life. And half the parking lot was Hellcats and C8s with an occasional Telsa X or the like and not a single 2010 Camry in sight.

    The thing is that Stranger Things Casting must have been hard. Finding a perfect 1983 325 Convertible is do-able in 2023. Finding a rusted out 4 door 1977 4 door sedan… not so doable, because that would have been scrapped

    Have you considered that Steve might really just be that rich? 

    Submitted by: hoser68

    The Batman

    The Batman (the most recent one with Pattinson) quietly had some brilliant car casting. Bruce Wayne showing up to a funeral in a C2 Corvette, Penguin driving a Quattroporte, the DA in his Lincoln. The scene where they are looking for clues in the garage had some pretty legit hardware in it too. On top of all of that, they took the Batmobile in a new direction that was sort of demon lovechild of a classic muscle car and a Dakar prerunner.

    All of that mixed with insane Batman/Penguin chase scene has me convinced that somebody on the production team was a serious car person.

    One of my first videos for Jalopnik was, when you really got down to it, just being horny for the Batmobile from this movie. I stand by that take. 

    Submitted by: Tahoe Guy

    Gattaca

    I loved the cars in “Gattaca” at first sight. Every single one of them is gorgeous without being over the top. And the combo of futuristic e-sounds and greenish headlights still works perfectly for me.

    I’m a big fan of colored headlights, though I do think they should be yellow. Can we do that to all cars now, to signify that we live in the future? 

    Submitted by: Ara Can

    The Great Gatsby

    The Great Gatsby, beautiful classics from the ’20s perfect match with the story and great cinematography. Honorable mention for the short lived HBO series, Perry Mason.

    Gatsby has the advantage of being set in an era of truly beautiful cars. It’s cheating, really. 

    Submitted by: towman

    Robocop

    The Ford Taurus in the original Robocop was a major change from the blocky cars of the 70’s to this more organic and rounded car. It really shaped a new generation of design.

    I’m so thankful you specified the original Robocop here. I do not want to think about the other one. 

    Submitted by: milanst

    Magnum PI

    the entire cannonball run line up.

    magnum PI. there is a guy in my area with a black 308. He drives it all the time and fully rocks the mustache. I even saw him with the short shorts on at the gas station.

    station wagon from Better off dead (John Cusack)

    I’d ask if it really counts as a Magnum PI reference if the car is black, but the mustache really seals the deal.

    Submitted by: Roberto Arango

    Breaking Bad

    It’s been discussed ad nauseum, but Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul have some of the best car casting there is. Walt’s Aztek then his 300, Saul’s Esteem then his Cadillac, and even the Eclipse driven by Kim Wexler. Jesse had that low rider Monte Carlo at first, but then when he hooked up with Walter, he got that low profile Tercel. They’re all just perfect for each character.

    Remember that time they paused the show to do a dubstep Chrysler ad? I remember that. No matter how hard I try, i’ll never forget that.

    Submitted by: Stillnotatony

    Mindhunter

    The super creepy series Mindhunter NAILED the car casting. I also recently finished Dark Winds and that one was pretty good other than Longhorns Suburban being lifted and having a 90’s steering wheel. Love old period-correct cop cars.

    Personally, I think if someone’s hunting minds in a vehicle, it should be a nautiloid. Maybe I’m just a traditionalist. 

    Submitted by: DustynNguyenDood

    CHiPs

    Pure 70’s cheese….CHiPs.The vehicles matched the characters perfectly.

    The fact that none of these cars appear to be made from tortillas or potatoes makes me question the creators’ true commitment to chip accuracy. 

    Submitted by: Stinky Stu

    Archer

    Archer

    Archer has the advantage of being sort of unmoored in time, which lets the creators pick and choose their favorite cars. They’ve got good taste. 

    Submitted by: 4speed

    Iron Man

    Iron man. When he first rolled up in that V10 Audi R8, oof. That car just fit the character so well, it’s subtlety, beauty and tech. Then we have a scene in his Garage. you can see a Shelby, what I think is a Saleen S7, a Tesla roadster, and a couple of bikes. Interesting cast of vehicles.

    Audi paid good money for Iron Man, and boy did it work. I still remember my first time seeing an R8 after the movie. 

    Submitted by: Agon Targeryan

    Glass Onion

    Glass Onion.

    The rich facing Bro Influencer D-bag has a 70 charger, 69 Mustang and a custom Harley, another drives an S Class.

    There’s a Ducati Panigale V4S and the utlra rich Elon stand in has a “custom one off” car which is actually just a Porsche 918 Spyder with a Weissach package

    I do still want to ride a Panigale V4S, that’s still on my bucket list, but a rich guy buying one as a display piece is so very on brand for rich guys. 

    Submitted by: JaredOfLondon

    True Detective

    First season of True Detective.

    I grew up in the Gulf Coast of Florida in the Nineties, it’s the only show I’ve ever seen that nailed life in that part of the country, and it was pretty much the same from Louisiana to Florida.

    The cops rolled hard in unmarked Caprices and you could not throw a rock without hitting some 4x4s beat to hell but still running. Hell, even the riding mowers are correct.

    If someone’s getting the lawn mowers right, you know they’re dedicated to an absurd degree. 

    Submitted by: Omer Carrothers

    Transformers

    Here’s a different opinion. The original Transformers had a great cast of cars. From the at that time unreleased Camaro to the rest of the GM fleet of vehicles it featured

    10-year-old Amber absolutely adored the Camaro from that movie. It was the coolest thing she’d ever seen at the time. 

    Submitted by: Gerrit DeBoer

    The Fast And The Furious

    Millennium ones: Taxi (1998), Gone in 60 Seconds (2000), The Fast and the Furious (2001) & The Transporter (2002)

    I still want every car from this movie. Nearly every car from this series, honestly. I  want Mia’s Integra so incredibly badly. 

    Submitted by: GTSpecial

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    QOTD
    These Are The Dumbest Looking Cars Of All Time, According To You
    Some cars just look dumber than others. It is what it is.
    BY  ANDY KALMOWITZ MARCH 4, 2024 7:15 AM EST

    Ferrari
    Sometimes cars look beautiful. Sometimes cars look functional. Sometimes cars look downright ugly. And sometimes, well, cars just look dumb as hell. Of course, “dumb” is a very subjective concept, possibly even more subjective than beautiful and ugly. It’s an interesting concept in that way, and it’s what led us to our question from last week.

    We wanted to know what you thought the dumbest-looking car of all time was, and by George did you deliver. We’ve got everything from the highest-end exotics that look goofy to three-wheeled economy vehicle mistakes and pre-Great Recession American cars.

    What I’m saying is, you folks understood the assignment. You get that “dumb” is more of a feeling and a vibe than an actual objective observation. I’m really proud of all of you. And with that, let’s take a look at what cars your fellow Jalops think are the dumbest looking of all time.

    Reliant Robin

    Riiiiiiiight, put one wheel in the front for maximum instability…it’s “genius”.

    And then there was the time on Old Fart Top Gear when Clarkson took one of these deathtraps for a literal spin.

    Un-effing-believable.

    The Robin does look dumb as hell, but I really appreciate it for the sheer fact it gave us so many iconic bits on Top Gear.

    Submitted by: the1969DodgeChargerFan

    Fiat Multipla

    Fiat
    It just looks like no adult was involved in the design process.

    Here’s the thing, 4jim. You’re wrong. The first gen Multipla is actually really cool looking. I will not debate this. Sorry, amigo.

    Submitted by: 4jim

    1960 Plymouth Valiant

    Plymouth
    1960 Plymouth Valiant -The wimpiest of Mopars with lines going all the wrong directions that helped kill the fin craze

    Holy hell, this thing is dogshit. The auto industry was in a dire situation before the muscle car came around, wasn’t it?

    Submitted by: Alan Schwarz

    Ferrari Enzo

    Ferrari
    Veeerrrryyy unpopular opinion incoming.

    I know, I know. It’s a technological wonder. I know Ferrari made you own a GTO, F40, and F50 just to be allowed to buy it. I know it’s a Ferrari halo car.

    It’s goofy looking. It’s got an overbite that just screams “My parents couldn’t afford braces.” No car should look like it was rear-ended so hard that the body got pushed forward.

    You’re braver than me for saying this. The Enzo is confusing. I think it’s overall a good-looking car, but when you compare it to the rest of the Ferrari hypercar lineup (F40, F50, LaFerrari), it’s not very good.

    Submitted by: JohnnyWasASchoolBoy

    The Amber

    NEXTA/Twitter
    The anticipated Amber Russian EV…a face only a tadpole could love.

    Lol I forgot about this thing.

    Submitted by: gokstate

    Youabian Puma

    You mean other than the Youabian Puma? It’s the de-facto answer to this question…

    I remember seeing this thing on some Discovery Channel show when I was a kid. I thought it looked badass, and honestly, I still do.

    Submitted by: Skamanda

    Gen. 2 Dodge Durango

    Dodge
    There’s something about the 2nd gen Dodge Durango that never sat quite right with me. Most of it from the A-pillar aft is fine, if a bit boring, but the front fascia just looks a mess. The bumper juts out like a French Bulldog with an underbite, and they tried to make the headlights and crosshair grille look like a Ram but instead of blending into the wheel arch it awkwardly juts out like it was tacked on. Even though its Chrysler Aspen sibling was a forgettable badge-engineering job, it at least had a coherent design throughout.

    These things looked bad then, and they look even worse now. However, the Durango that followed it (which is still on sale) actually held up pretty well in the looks department.

    Submitted by: pardsecar

    The Amphicar

    Amphicar
    May I submit for your consideration, the Amphicar. It’s a car! It’s a boat! It’s not really good at being either! And it’s ugly…

    Well, LBJ was a pretty cool dude, and a cool dude would never own anything that was dumb, so I am inclined to say the Amphicar does not look dumb. Sorry, fella.

    Submitted by: GTB

    Gen. 1 Hyundai Tiburon

    Hyundai
    Look at this thing.

    It’s not designed for practicality so it doesn’t get a pass there, it’s supposed to be a “cool” car you wanted to buy to look sporty. But those headlight bulges with oddly-proportioned outside lights and signals/reflectors, none of which lined up, weird badge in intake that looks like a booger, and the HUGE hips both front and rear that make the already tiny wheels look even tinier. And finally the rear spoiler which was inexplicably kinked at the ends with straight lines when the rest of the car is all swoopy. Just dumb.

    This is indeed dumb looking, but the second-generation Tuburon was so cool I am willing to forget it.

    Submitted by: savethemanualsbmw335ix

    Diahtsu Copen

    Diahatsu
    Do we like the Daihatsu Copen here. i always thought the design language looked.. a little confused and “doofy” the low headlights.. the almost sporty nature of it… not sure what it is about this thing that bugs me.

    HORRIBE TAKE. STOP IT.

    Submitted by: the_AUGHT

    ‘58-’60 Dodge Truck

    Dodge
    Can we put fins on a truck? and stick its tongue out behind braces?

    The 58 face looks like a geek with horned rim glasses being upset because you knocked over his chocolate Milk.

    The removal of the bumper guards and additional chrome make the 59 just say “Ahhhh”

    The 60 changed the grill but kept the tongue out. It also looks like it’s caught between thoughts it will never have.

    Fortunately Dodge, Changed the style dramatically in 1961.

    And the scale drifted from “So Stupid it’s ugly” to “So Ugly it’s stupid.”

    I’m sorry, dude, but this looks good. This is not dumb. Fins are cool.

    Submitted by: hoser68

    Ssangyong Actyon

    Ssangyong
    A coupé SUV before coupé SUVs were a thing, with the ugliest nose and butt to ever disgrace the roads (and yes I’m saying this knowing that the Edsel and the Aztek exist)

    That’s the dumbest boy I’ve ever seen, good lord.

    Submitted by: edu-petrolhead

    Landau Baby

    Cutlass via Wikimedia Commons
    The anodyne Japanese sedan with the dealer-installed vinyl roof. It’s already kind of dumb enough on a big boxy Malaise era land yacht, but it’s even worse stripped of full context. Like, imagine walking around in athleisure wear with a massive powdered wig on your head because that’s what classy people wore like 200 years ago.

    I (please don’t judge me) really enjoy a Landau top on cars that don’t deserve one.

    Submitted by: Maymar

    Chevy HHR Panel

    Chevrolet
    In line with the SSR, I’m going to go with the HHR. Specifically the work-ified version with no side windows. It practically screams “I shouldn’t be allowed within 500′ of a school”.

    Sounds like there are some issues here that need to be worked through.

    Submitted by: IstillmissmyXJ

    Tesla Cybertruck

    Tesla
    We’re all hear to say Cybertruck, right?

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1804244/movies-tv-shows-best-car-casting/

  • A Rescue baby deer fell into pit rescue animals petsoftik… Beautiful Dogs Love

    A Rescue baby deer fell into pit rescue animals petsoftik… Beautiful Dogs Love

    Tesla Cybertruck, Volkswagen ID Buzz, Ford F-150 Lightning, And More New EVs Face IIHS Crash Tests With Mixed Results
    BY LOGAN K. CARTER SEPT. 16, 2025 5:03 PM EST

    IIHS
    The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) shared moderate overlap crash test results for seven EVs today, many of which have never been evaluated by IIHS before. The Tesla Cybertruck, Volkswagen ID Buzz, BMW i4, Tesla Model 3, Ford F-150 Lightning, Nissan Ariya, and Chevrolet Blazer EV make up the vehicles that faced off against the IIHS’ deformable barrier, and the results were mixed. Four of the seven EVs achieved the IIHS’ highest rating of good in the updated moderate overlap test, while one scored the second-highest rating of acceptable, one earned the second-lowest rating of marginal, and one got the lowest possible rating of poor. Each vehicle was also evaluated on the performance of their headlights, and the performance of their pedestrian crash avoidance systems. 

    The IIHS’ updated moderate overlap crash test simulates an offset crash between two vehicles traveling in opposite directions, like if someone crossed over the center line on a two-lane road, at a 40% overlap at slightly under 40 miles per hour. It was updated and made more challenging in 2022 with the inclusion of a small woman or 12-year-old child-sized crash test dummy in the rear seat as well as an average size male dummy in the driver’s seat.

    Updated moderate overlap results

    The most common reason for vehicles to struggle in the updated moderate overlap test is high injury metrics on the dummy located in the rear seat. The Cybertruck, ID Buzz, i4, and Blazer EV all earned the highest rating of good in this test, so they all offer excellent protection for front and rear-seat occupants in this test, and good protection for front and rear occupants in a similar real-world crash. It should be noted that this test only applies to Tesla Cybertrucks that were manufactured after April 2025, since that’s when Tesla made changes to the Cybertruck’s frontal underbody structure.

    Tesla’s facelifted Model 3 got the second-highest rating of acceptable because the smaller dummy in the rear showed a “somewhat elevated risk of chest injuries due to high belt forces.” The Nissan Ariya earned the second-lowest rating of marginal in the updated moderate overlap front crash test because the rear-seat dummy showed that a similarly sized human would face a high risk of chest injuries due to the seatbelt.

    Then there’s the Ford F-150 Lightning, which earned the lowest score of poor because the rear-seat dummy showed a high risk of chest injuries, as well as a high risk of injuries to the head or neck. The lap belt of the rear dummy’s seatbelt also slipped off of the dummy’s pelvis during the impact and onto the abdomen, which increases the risk of internal injuries.

    Headlight rating results

    IIHS
    None of the vehicles evaluated in this test earned a good rating for the efficacy of their headlights. The IIHS evaluates a vehicle’s headlights by measuring the distance over which the headlights provide adequate illumination on both straightaways and curves. It also tests the headlights or excessive levels of glare that may dazzle oncoming drivers.

    Neither the BMW i4’s standard or optional headlights performed well in the IIHS headlight evaluation. The standard system got the lowest rating of poor, and the optional system came in one rung higher at marginal. Both provide inadequate illumination on the high beam setting, and the standard headlight system creates excessive glare with its low beams, too. 

    The Tesla Cybertruck earned a poor rating in the IIHS’ headlight evaluation tests because its headlights cause significantly excessive glare for other motorists. The Volkswagen ID Buzz, Chevrolet Blazer EV, Tesla Model 3, Nissan Ariya, and Ford F-150 Lightning all achieved the second-highest rating of acceptable in the IIHS’ headlight evaluation. 

    Front pedestrian accident avoidance system test results

    IIHS/ YouTube
    Every model evaluated in this set of tests either earned a good or acceptable rating for their front pedestrian crash prevention systems. Each system is evaluated on its performance in 10 recreations of real-world scenarios. The only test scenario performed in daylight is a child-sized dummy running out into the street from behind a parked car, performed at 12 mph and at 25 mph. Nighttime scenarios are all performed with both the vehicle’s low beams on, and again with the vehicle’s high beams on. The first scenario is an unobstructed adult-sized dummy crossing a street at nighttime, and the test is performed with low beams and high beams at both 12 and 25 mph. There is also a parallel test, where vehicles drive toward an adult-sized dummy walking in the same direction of travel as the car at night, performed at 25 mph and at 37 mph with both high and low beams active.

    The BMW i4 saw the IIHS’ highest rating of good in the front crash prevention test, where it either prevented or vastly reduced the speed of impact with a crossing child dummy in daylight, a crossing adult at night, and a parallel impact with an adult at night. The Tesla Cybertruck, Ford F-150 Lightning, Nissan Ariya, and Tesla Model 3 all earned good ratings in the IIHS’ front pedestrian crash prevention tests, but only the Teslas avoided hitting the pedestrian dummies in every single test. The other cars avoided collision in most tests, and greatly reduced the speed of impact in others.

    The Volkswagen ID Buzz and Chevrolet Blazer EV both earned acceptable ratings in the front pedestrian crash prevention tests, with the ID Buzz only avoiding collision in four out of the IIHS’ 10 tests. The Blazer EV avoided collision in all but two of the 10 scenarios, but it still hit the pedestrian dummy walking parallel in the same direction as the car at night at 18 mph, and its pre-impact driver warnings were too late.

    Head to the IIHS website for the full detailed breakdown of each vehicle’s performance in these tests, as well as the explanation of how vehicles are evaluated, and detailed test protocol and technical information. Most of the vehicles evaluated in this cycle are also rated on their seat belt reminder systems and the ease of use of their LATCH car seat systems, which can be found on the IIHS website as well.

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    BUYING
    ADVICE
    Buy One Of These Electric Pickup Trucks Instead Of Humiliating Yourself With A Tesla Cybertruck
    BY OWEN BELLWOOD MARCH 19, 2025 1:25 PM EST

    Jetcityimage/Getty Images
    When it was first revealed back in 2019, the Tesla Cybertruck was just a ridiculously angular truck that nobody thought would ever actually exist. By the time it finally went on sale in December 2023, it had become an emblem of everything wrong with Tesla boss Elon Musk, and over the past year that’s only got worse for the big dumb truck.

    Things have now gotten so bad for Cybertruck owners that they’re getting poop and eggs thrown at their stainless steel trucks, and some are resorting to novelty bumper stickers to argue that they aren’t fans of Musk anymore, either. If all the abuse has got too bad for your friendly neighborhood Cybertruck owner, then they needn’t worry, as there are a handful of other electric pickup trucks out there that aren’t half as dumb as Tesla’s Cybertruck.

    Ford F-150 Lightning

    Ford
    Starting price: $65,090

    Range: 240 – 320 miles

    If you just want a pickup truck that happens to be electric, then the F-150 Lightning is Ford’s truck for you. It looks like a regular F-150, drives like a regular F-150 and, despite having to haul around its own weight, is still rated to tow around 8,500 pounds of stuff whenever you need it to.

    When compared to the Cybertruck, the F-150 Lightning is much more likely to blend in and avoid the assaults of any eco-minded activists that brand trucks like this as greenwashing. It’s also much cheaper, but isn’t able to charge quite as quickly as Tesla’s truck, and can also share its power in an emergency situation through clever tech called bidirectional charging, which the Cybertruck also has.

    Rivian R1T

    Rivian
    Price: $71,900

    Range: 258 – 420 miles

    The slickest alternative to the Cybertruck you can buy right now is the R1T electric pickup from Rivian. The American startup’s flagship boasts distinctive style, but not in an “I was designed by a five-year-old” kind of way, a very usable range and a host of innovative flourishes baked into the design.

    The R1T produces up to 1,025 hp, more than the Cybertruck; has an 11,000-pound tow capacity, more than the F-150; and comes with a nifty gear tunnel to add in extra storage space, also not offered on any of its rivals. It also starts at nearly $10,000 less than Tesla’s offering.

    Chevrolet Silverado EV

    Chevrolet
    Starting price: $75,195

    Range: 390 – 492 miles

    Prefer your electric pickup truck from a legacy automaker? Then the Silverado EV could be the option for you. The electric iteration of Chevy’s iconic truck comes with a little design flair to set it apart from the gas-powered truck, as well as increased range compared with the options from Ford and Rivian — albeit at a premium.

    More expensive doesn’t always mean more better, however, and while the Silverado EV is an impressive machine, our testing of the truck found that it didn’t quite live up to the polish of the F-150 Lightning or Rivian R1T.

    GMC Sierra EV

    GMC
    Starting price: $91,995

    Range: 390 – 460 miles

    If you want to be able to cover more than 500 miles in your electric truck, then the GMC Sierra EV could be the perfect replacement for your Cybertruck. Based on the same platform as the Silverado EV, GMC’s offering comes with more range and a whiff of luxury that you might miss in Chevy’s EV.

    It is, however, a pretty ugly truck and might not appeal to everybody out there. At least its looks might not get you egged, but it’s something you’ll be aware of while utilizing its 10,000-pound towing claims or its charging speeds of up to 350 kW.

    GMC Hummer EV

    GM
    Starting price: $98,845

    Range: 282 – 318 miles

    Like the sound of all that but don’t totally want to lose the attention your Cybertruck brings, get a Hummer EV instead. Based on the same platform as Chevy’s Silverado and GMC’s Sierra trucks, the Hummer EV is a brute that’s almost as ridiculous as the Cybertruck. Almost. 

    For pretty much the same price as the Cybertruck, GM will sell you a Hummer with an extra 1,000 pounds of towing capacity, the ability to drive sideways (like a crab), and the largest battery of any EV in America. What more could you want from an enormous electric pickup? 

    RAM 1500 REV

    Stellantis
    Starting price: Unknown 

    Range: 350 miles

    If you aren’t in a rush to abandon your Cybertruck out of fear it’ll be the victim of a domestic terrorism, then you could soon swap it for Stellantis’ electric truck offering: the Ram 1500 REV. This beast will be the first all-electric pickup from Ram and is slated to launch once the hybrid Ramcharger model hits the market.

    When it launches in 2026, the 1500 REV will offer the greatest towing capacity of the trucks listed here at around 14,000 pounds, a range of roughly 350 miles on a single charge, and a payload capacity of more than 2,600 pounds, which is over 100 more than the Cybertruck can manage.

    Scout Terra

    Scout Motors
    Starting price: Under $60,000

    Range: 350 miles

    Another electric truck that might be worth waiting for is the Terra from the relaunched Scout brand. Revived by VW last year, the Scout Terra is an all-electric truck that offers 350 miles of range, a towing capacity of 10,000 pounds, and it’ll be sold direct-to-consumers, so you won’t have to deal with a salesperson piling on markups.

    What’s more, the Terra will also be available with an optional range extender in the form of a gas-powered motor. The range-extender models will be capable of covering around 500 miles on a charge, but will take a hit on towing capacity, which will be around 5,000 pounds when the new trucks launch in 2027.

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1814086/best-cybertruck-alternatives/

  • Rescue baby parrot lost its mother rescue animals petsoft… Beautiful Dogs Love

    Rescue baby parrot lost its mother rescue animals petsoft… Beautiful Dogs Love

    Feel Like You’re Driving A Real-Life Hot Wheels Car With This Automecca Sports Van ‘Brubaker Box’
    BY COLLIN WOODARD SEPT. 16, 2025 5:27 PM EST

    Bring a Trailer
    Hyundai is doing its best with cars like the Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 6, but sadly, even those cars aren’t truly insane. They’re real cars that are generally pretty practical, while just so happening to look a little different than the rest of their competitors. If you want something that looks like a real-life Hot Wheels car, you’re going to have to get a little more creative. Like buying this Automecca Sports Van that’s currently for sale on Bring a Trailer. I mean, just look at it. Now that’s a wild design. 

    Also known as the Brubaker Box (after the original designer, Curtis Brubaker), the Automecca Sports Van was built on an old Volkswagen Beetle chassis, looked like a spaceship on wheels and only had a single sliding door on the passenger side. Is it the most practical design ever? Not at all, but it looks cool as hell, and sometimes, sacrifices must be made in the name of fashion. It’s also only powered by an old Volkswagen 1.6-liter flat-four, so it definitely isn’t quick (even if the listing says the engine was rebuilt in 2022), but are you really going to mind the slow acceleration when you’re driving an ultra-rare space van?

    One rare space van

    Bring a Trailer
    Speaking of rarity, Brubaker reportedly only built three of them before he realized the company went bankrupt, and he sold the design to Automecca, which rebranded it as the Sports Van. Automecca then only built about two dozen additional examples before it, too, gave up on the Sports Van. So we’re talking about a vehicle that’s one of fewer than 30 that were ever built. Unlike other similarly rare vehicles, though, you should be able to do all the work to keep it running yourself if you want, since it’s pretty much just an old air-cooled Volkswagen underneath the futuristic bodywork.

    Inside, the dash layout is, uh, “minimalist?” Yeah, we’re going to go with “minimalist” here. It has all the inputs necessary for driving, and that’s about it. Is it attractive? Not really, but it’s functional. Move past the front row, though, and you’re greeted with a glorious red lounge area that’s very 1970s and looks ridiculously comfortable (as long as you don’t bring a blacklight anywhere near it). Oh, and you do get a Brother Aquatron VX-33 8-track player, so if you’ve got an 8-track collection you’ve been itching to listen to on the road, this van is pretty much perfect. 

    Sadly, while the Sports Van absolutely screams “real-life Hot Wheels car,” and one of the two roof-mounted surfboards literally says “Hot Wheels” on it, as our friends at the Autopian pointed out a few years ago, Hot Wheels never actually turned the Brubaker Box into an official Hot Wheels car. That really is a tragedy. Still, how cool would it be to own such a rare, wild design?

    Bring a Trailer
    Bring A Trailer
    Bring a Trailer
    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    BEYOND CARS
    TRANSPORTATION
    PLANELOPNIK
    Ford Once Made A Mile-Long Factory To Build Bombers Faster Than Anyone Thought Possible
    BY BENJAMIN GRACIAS AUG. 24, 2025 3:05 PM EST

    Bettmann/Getty Images
    By the middle of 1938, Europe had begun inching toward destruction. Adolf Hitler had taken over Austria, the beginning of Germany’s bloody campaign that would pull the continent into the chaos of World War II. Across the Atlantic, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt understood the need for the American military to be prepared for the coming war, something the country had failed to do before World War I. He petitioned Congress for 10,000 new airplanes, a big ask given that the country was still in the throes of the Great Depression, and nowhere near the military powerhouse it is today. Its Army Air Corps ranked even lower, with a meager arsenal of outdated planes.

    Congress reached a compromise, approving just over half of the requested number of planes to be built over the next five years. However, the tide of war was in Germany’s favor, and by 1940, the Nazis had conquered Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. It was only a matter of time before the U.S. would be drawn into the war, which happened in December 1941, when Germany’s ally Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Knowing this threat, Roosevelt pushed Congress again, this time asking for 50,000 planes a year. The task seemed impossible to many, but by 1944, America was churning out nearly twice that amount of bombers every year.

    All or nothing!

    Heritage Images/Getty Images
    Roosevelt achieved this feat by turning to an industry known to produce complex machinery on a large scale. Automakers are known for their engineering expertise and ability to produce a large number of components in a short time. Car companies took to building bombers and weapons. The B-24 Liberator became the go-to plane due to its long-range ability, making it a formidable asset to deal with enemy forces across the Pacific Ocean, as well as Britain’s affinity for the heavy bomber in the fight against Germany.

    Consolidated Aircraft held the contract to build B-24 bombers, but its output was anything but efficient (read painfully slow). The company built aircraft outdoors on makeshift rigs where workers spent hours attaching a single engine. 

    Ford was one of the carmakers approached to make parts for the B-24. In early 1941, Ford executive Charles Sorensen visited the Consolidated factory and was appalled by what he saw. Highly experienced in the field of production and assembly, Sorensen sketched a production line for the B-24 that night by breaking down the massive bomber into sub-assemblies that could be built like cars on a moving production line. Ford decided to be more involved. It declared that it would not build B-24 bomber parts; it would build the entire B-24.

    A factory large enough to accommodate 70 football fields

    Archive Photos/Getty Images
    In February 1941, the Army awarded Ford a contract to build B-24 planes, and the carmaker began construction of a massive production complex west of its home base in Detroit. The Willow Run plant grew to become the world’s largest factory at the time. It featured an unusual 90-degree turn, giving it a unique L-shaped layout. It solved two problems — avoiding stretching into a planned airport and having the entire facility inside one county, which helped save on taxes.

    By late 1941, and $47 million later, the Willow Run factory was operational. It was expensive, but not as expensive as a $90-million F-35 fighter jet crashing straight out of the factory. Ford even built an adjoining airfield so that the bombers, fresh off the assembly line, could be tested for fitness on the runway before being sent to war. Having a Short SC1 vertical-takeoff fighter jet that didn’t need a runway would have surely saved Ford money.

    To give you a scale of the operation, a B-24 bomber is 66 feet, 4 inches long, with a wingspan of 110 feet. The Willow Run factory, meanwhile, spans 3.5 million square feet. To staff this mega factory, the government provided assistance by transporting and housing much of the workforce and their families.

    The factory produced a bomber an hour

    Anthony Potter Collection/Getty Images
    The Willow Run factory was a turning point for the aircraft-building industry. It was the first time that instead of a bomber plane being constructed in one place, it was built by sub-assemblies being mated together on an assembly that stretched for a mile. Construction saw fuselages, wings, and tail sections come together at critical junctions, taking the shape of a bomber as it moved forward. Initially, production was slow. However, as efficiency improved, production shot up as well. By 1944, Ford was making one bomber every 63 minutes. At its height, the Willow Run factory produced 428 bombers in a single month.

    It wasn’t easy, though. With no usable blueprints from Consolidated, Ford’s engineers had to reverse-engineer thousands of bomber-part drawings before an assembly line could be set up. It came to a point where engineers were drawing up miles of technical schematics every day. Ford management had to navigate both the government and Consolidated Aircraft, which still held part of the original contract.

    Constant design changes from Consolidated caused hurdles, while congressional investigators found that meddling from the original contractor was causing delays. Eventually, complete control of the plant was handed over to a single plant manager, and from then on, production began to stabilize. Once the red tape cleared, Ford’s methods began to shine, and Willow Run became the most prolificAmerican factory during World War II.

    An industrial ecosystem

    Bettmann/Getty Images
    The workforce at Willow Run became a symbol of America during the war. As men were conscripted for war, women filled their places on the assembly line. Thousands of women entered the workforce, taking on jobs like riveting and spot welding. While some sources dispute this, Ford says the iconic ‘Rosie the Riveter’ poster, which went on to symbolize women taking on traditional men’s roles and become an iconic part of pop culture and the feminist movement, was inspired by Rose Will Monroe, a worker at the Willow Run plant.  

    People from all over the U.S. settled in Michigan, attracted by the promise of urban life and steady pay. Employment peaked at 42,000 before tapering off as production efficiency improved. Ford used every resource available to ramp up production. An example is using little people to climb inside the bomber’s wings to hold parts in place.

    The plant’s sheer size meant that managing the workforce required unusual solutions. The Willow Run plant site had an on-site hospital and a recreational field, and hordes of buses ferried workers every day from Detroit and surrounding towns. Willow Run wasn’t just an industrial experiment; it was a social one.

    An enduring legacy

    Bettmann/Getty Images
    By the end of World War II, the Willow Run factory had produced over 8,600 B-24 bombers. Production stopped a few months before the war ended in August 1945, but the B-24 already was on its last legs before that. 

    By 1943, the U.S. military had already started testing its new B-29 Superfortress, which offered a long range, could carry a bigger payload, and fly higher in the atmosphere as well, thanks to a pressurized cabin. For the time, it probably had a cockpit as cool as the one on the F-22 Raptor fighter jet. The B-29 was used to drop atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, leading to Japan’s eventual surrender to the Allies.

    The Willow Run factory was eventually sold off to other carmakers. Today, a portion of it serves as the Michigan Flight Museum. However, its legacy remains as the birthplace of mass-produced aircraft. The mile-long factory helped win World War II, one bomber at a time.

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    QOTD
    These Are The Car-Related Movie Mistakes That Really Bother You
    BY BRAD BROWNELL MARCH 14, 2025 10:30 AM EST

    Focus Features
    Sometimes movies get things wrong about cars. Heck, the cars don’t even have to actually be present in the movie for it to be wrong. The 2013 film “Dallas Buyers Club” is a period piece set in 1985, so how did Matthew McConaughey’s Ron Woodroof get a Lamborghini Aventador poster to hang on his wall when that car wouldn’t be launched for nearly three decades? This is just one of many Hollywood automotive mistakes that our readers pointed out this week when we asked which car-related movie mistakes bothered them most. Maybe Hollywood should hire the staff and commentariat of Jalopnik.com to help them with their car questions, because we certainly know a lot more about automobiles, how they work, and continuity errors than anyone at a movie studio seems to. So without further ado, here are my favorite picks from your automotive movie pet peeves. 

    This is one of the most-answered questions I’ve ever asked, and there were way too many good ones to fit in this post, so go check out the comments section of the question post for all the suggestions missed. I promise, it’s worth it. 

    Flippin’ Aston Martins

    In Casino Royale, after Vesper gets kidnapped and Bond chases after the villains in his Aston Martin DBS. He’s supposedly going fast enough that he catches some air on a hill but when he jerks the wheel to avoid running over Vesper the DBS somehow flips and rolls while executing a simple accident avoidance maneuver that’s not that dissimilar from what you might see on MotorWeek. All resulting in a barrel roll (admittedly quite spectacular and rivaled only by the minutes-long rollover scene in Talladega Nights.)

    At the very worst that should have been a spinout and instead, an exotic car somehow failed the Moose Test. That scene, as a car guy, always bother me.

    Suggested by LarriveeC05

    Clean 911

    The self healing Porsche 911 in Commando. The car goes on its side, but Arnold pushes it over and we see a damage free car on his departure…

    Suggested by Mikeuptain

    Fast and Furious wasn’t a documentary?

    That whole first race in Fast n Furious where Brian was racing his Eclipse against Dom. After hitting the Nos, his tuning computer reads danger to Manifold…Ok like which manifold? intake, Exhaust? and then the floor in the passenger seat falls off, like what?

    Suggested by Agon Targeryan

    Downshifts at Daytona

    Downshifting in a situation where they are supposedly already driving as fast as possible.

    Also somewhat related – when the dubbed engine sound doesn’t match the vehicle. This happens way more often than you might expect.

    Suggested by Stephen

    Better burnouts

    OK, you know what I absolutely hate more than anything else? When there’s tire marks on the road from the previous takes…. “OK, great burnout scene, but lets do it one more time in the exact same spot”. Whether it’s parallel stripes from a burnout or fun swirls from something more intense, it always kills the mood for me. Just pick a different location, dammit!

    Suggested by Kumciho

    Forever fuel

    That movie fuel never degrades. You often see it in Zombie movies or other similar world-as-we-know-it-ended type movies. Someone comes upon a car that’s been sitting for years, they find a battery (if they even bother to address needing a battery), they hop in, start it up and away they go! That is just not how octane-based fuel works, let alone the sea of other issues that come with an engine that has sat for years, mice chewing wires and nesting in things, moisture-related damage, etc, etc.

    Suggested by Dakiraun

    NASCAR engine in an EV

    Gotta go with the E-Tron in the avengers making V8 noises. It seems small, and is overdubbing cars incorrectly is a running hollywood theme but this is supposed to be Tony Stark’s super cool high tech expensive future car. Like it being an EV was the entire point they picked it and yet…vroom vroom.

    Suggested by JaredOfLondon

    Pull up like skrrrt

    Squealing tires on dirt/gravel roads. Grinds my gears every time.

    Suggested by Thomas Hajicek

    What’s the payload capacity of a Ford Ranchero?

    In Goldfinger, crushing a 5000lb Lincoln Continental (plus anonymous mobster and what apparently should’ve been another 2000lb of gold based on value), and placing the cube in the bed of a Ford Ranchero with an 800lb payload. Odd Job should’ve been driving one of the very first lowriders.

    Suggested by Maymar

    Dude, where’s most of my car?

    Continuing to drive a car that has no source of fuel, among other issues. See: ‘View to a Kill’

    Suggested by 007 Guest

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    BEYOND CARS
    Alleged Horse-And-Buggy Thief In Way More Trouble Than If She Had Just Stolen A Car
    A buggy isn’t legally a motor vehicle, which makes things much worse for the thief in court.
    BY  AMBER DASILVA JANUARY 26, 2024 7:30 AM EST

    Bruce Yuanyue Bi/Getty Images
    A Michigan woman allegedly stole a horse and buggy from an Amish couple while they shopped at a Walmart last weekend. The appeal of the crime is obvious — no USB cables to mess with, no sensors to fool, just hop in and go. Yet, if you’re looking to follow in this woman’s footsteps, a word of caution: The penalties for stealing a horse and buggy are much, much worse than just stealing a car.

    First the details of the case from the local Sturgis, Michigan, Fox affiliate, Fox 59:

    Police in Sturgis, Michigan, about 90 miles south of Grand Rapids along the Indiana border, were called to a local Walmart on Saturday after an Amish family reported that their buggy and horse had been stolen.

    A truck driver, who was parked nearby, told investigators that he saw it happen and gave a description of the suspect.

    Police said they had already made contact with the suspect, a 31-year-old Sturgis woman, earlier in the day at the same Walmart. They did not detail the circumstances surrounding the earlier encounter.

    Later in the evening, the horse and buggy were found unoccupied nearby, police said. The woman was found at a nearby motel and taken into custody without incident.

    Sounds like the suspect’s life might not be going great. It got much worse when she decided to go low tech with her larceny. In fact, she’d be in way less trouble if she’d just stolen a car.

    The distinction between the two comes from an odd bifurcation within auto theft law. Stealing a car with the intent to take it from its owner forever is different — and more harshly penalized — than nabbing one for a simple joyride. Within Horse Law, however, no such distinction exists. Steve Lehto, former Jalop contributor, broke it all down.

    Had this woman stolen a car for a joyride, she may well have been charged with a misdemeanor. Had she stolen one with the intent to deprive the owner of it permanently, she’d be charged with auto theft — a felony, sure, but only one felony.

    Instead, by stealing both a horse and a buggy, this women managed to be charged with two felonies. Larceny of livestock — the horse — is unambiguously a felony offense in Michigan. Regular larceny — the buggy — can be a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the value of the item stolen, but Amish buggies don’t come cheap. It’s entirely possible that this woman could be convincted of two separate felonies from one single Walmart visit.

    So, for the enterprising thieves in the audience, stick to cars. Horse and buggies are slower, harder to hide in a garage, and much worse for you if you get caught. Plus, a car is a lot less likely to kick you.

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1810735/car-movie-mistakes-reader-answers/

  • Rescue cat trapped in crack in wall rescue animals kitten Beautiful Dogs Love (1)

    Rescue cat trapped in crack in wall rescue animals kitten Beautiful Dogs Love (1)

    Boeing Built A Flying Star Wars X-Wing: Here’s Why
    BY PAUL STADDEN SEPT. 16, 2025 6:05 PM EST

    Paul Briden/YouTube
    In December of 2019, Walt Disney World opened the Rise of the Resistance attraction at its then-new “Star Wars”: Galaxy’s Edge area. What better way to celebrate than by partnering with Boeing’s NeXt division to transform a pair of experimental garden shed-sized 20-by-17.5-foot drones into X-wings for the opening ceremonies? (Don’t worry — if you missed them, you can see the Boeing X-wings on display at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum’s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia.)

    The Boeing CV2 Cargo Air Vehicle doesn’t operate the way an actual X-wing starfighter would, of course. In “Star Wars,” according to Wookiepedia, the T65B X-wing uses four 4j.4 fusial thrust engines. To power these engines, manufacturer Incom installs a Novaldex 04-Z cryogenic power generator and a set of cryogenic capacitors inside the S-foils. There also are four GBk-585 hyperdrive motivators for entering hyperspace. How else would you exceed the speed of light?

    Boeing’s X-wing, conversely, is an experimental drone with X-wing body cladding. But the underlying electrical vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft is still cool as far as real-world technology goes, with its six pairs of stacked propellers (12 total) providing redundancy in case one motor fails, as well as enough thrust to carry 500 pounds. Boeing NeXt started prototyping in 2017 and wind tunnel testing in 2018, completing 150 test flights by the following year. 

    While the CV2’s future looked promosing, Boeing NeXt was shut down in 2020 after major financial hits because of Boeing’s 737 Max grounding headaches and the COVID-19 pandemic. Maybe if they’d settled for some plain cubicles instead of pouring cash into HOK-designed offices with “liquid metal” ceilings, glass-plate coffee tables suspended from propellor nose cones, and flying-saucer lighting, they could have saved a few bucks.

    Disney somehow gets access to Boeing’s experimental drones (probably because money)

    Michael Vi/Shutterstock
    Point is, the CV2 eVTOL never entered production. According to Electric VTOL News, Boeing NeXt crafted “at least two” CV2s. This makes sense, since it crafted “at least two” X-wings. While Boeing’s goal was to make large deliveries and intra-factory complex materials handling fast and cheap, Disney had entertainment uses in mind. Right, why revolutionize delivery speeds and lower transportation costs when we can create temporary diversion at a theme park?  

    Actually, a little positive public relations might be a smart way to break through general apprehension and skepticism toward drones and shed some of their stigma. When regular drones fall from the sky during a light show, it’s scary. With drones the size of Volkswagens, it’s more terrifying, so they need all the PR help they can get. 

    Even though the recent “Star Wars” movies and shows have had a mixed reception, to put it mildly, it’s still exciting to see an X-wing fly overhead. However, Boeing’s CV2 never had a chance to succeed in the marketplace. Maybe it could have if Boeing had taken advantage of the CV2’s entertainment value before the 737 Max/pandemic problems. Thanks to Disney, the CV2 went from “obscure delivery tool” to “spaceship that brought childhood dreams to life.” But after Rise of the Resistance’s opening weekend, the parks never used them again. It feels like a missed opportunity to show how drones can be safe and useful.

    Remote control, but only to a point

    Seksan Mongkhonkhamsao/Getty Images
    During those Rise of the Resistance flights, the CV2s were controlled by ground-based operators. But an Aviation Investigation Final Report from the National Transportation Safety Board details a June 21, 2019 “contingency landing” in Beeville, Texas in which a Boeing CV2 sustained “substantial damage.” It states, “The pilot does not control the flight path, speed or attitude of the aircraft in flight, all flights are preprogrammed. The only ability the pilot or ground control station operator has to affect the flight is through contingency management via the ‘abort to planned zone’ (APZ), ‘land now’ or ‘cut power’ (terminate the flight) commands.” 

    At first glance, it might seem like the CV2’s operators aren’t doing much more than babysitting, and a stray 1 or 0 in the drone’s code can lead to catastrophe. But testing in a vast, fenced-off airport helps programmers identify bugs, and in the case of that Texas CV2 crash, the drone experienced unexpected high winds that messed with its navigation system.

    Still, it’s understandable when people have apprehension about autonomous drones. They act sort of like living things, but clearly aren’t alive. A study on whether drones can enter the uncanny valley — that is, a feeling of unease as a robot comes closer to being human-like — found that the more animal-like a drone appeared, the more unsettling people found it.. A good example would be if Universal Studios dressed Boston Dynamics robots as Toothless from “How to Train Your Dragon” and let them loose in its park. But that would be silly, right?

    Oh, and scientists are developing robots that can change their own batteries. Does that put you at ease?

    COMMENT(S)
    RECOMMENDED
    QOTD
    These Are The Car-Related Movie Mistakes That Really Bother You
    BY BRAD BROWNELL MARCH 14, 2025 10:30 AM EST

    Focus Features
    Sometimes movies get things wrong about cars. Heck, the cars don’t even have to actually be present in the movie for it to be wrong. The 2013 film “Dallas Buyers Club” is a period piece set in 1985, so how did Matthew McConaughey’s Ron Woodroof get a Lamborghini Aventador poster to hang on his wall when that car wouldn’t be launched for nearly three decades? This is just one of many Hollywood automotive mistakes that our readers pointed out this week when we asked which car-related movie mistakes bothered them most. Maybe Hollywood should hire the staff and commentariat of Jalopnik.com to help them with their car questions, because we certainly know a lot more about automobiles, how they work, and continuity errors than anyone at a movie studio seems to. So without further ado, here are my favorite picks from your automotive movie pet peeves. 

    This is one of the most-answered questions I’ve ever asked, and there were way too many good ones to fit in this post, so go check out the comments section of the question post for all the suggestions missed. I promise, it’s worth it. 

    Flippin’ Aston Martins

    In Casino Royale, after Vesper gets kidnapped and Bond chases after the villains in his Aston Martin DBS. He’s supposedly going fast enough that he catches some air on a hill but when he jerks the wheel to avoid running over Vesper the DBS somehow flips and rolls while executing a simple accident avoidance maneuver that’s not that dissimilar from what you might see on MotorWeek. All resulting in a barrel roll (admittedly quite spectacular and rivaled only by the minutes-long rollover scene in Talladega Nights.)

    At the very worst that should have been a spinout and instead, an exotic car somehow failed the Moose Test. That scene, as a car guy, always bother me.

    Suggested by LarriveeC05

    Clean 911

    The self healing Porsche 911 in Commando. The car goes on its side, but Arnold pushes it over and we see a damage free car on his departure…

    Suggested by Mikeuptain

    Fast and Furious wasn’t a documentary?

    That whole first race in Fast n Furious where Brian was racing his Eclipse against Dom. After hitting the Nos, his tuning computer reads danger to Manifold…Ok like which manifold? intake, Exhaust? and then the floor in the passenger seat falls off, like what?

    Suggested by Agon Targeryan

    Downshifts at Daytona

    Downshifting in a situation where they are supposedly already driving as fast as possible.

    Also somewhat related – when the dubbed engine sound doesn’t match the vehicle. This happens way more often than you might expect.

    Suggested by Stephen

    Better burnouts

    OK, you know what I absolutely hate more than anything else? When there’s tire marks on the road from the previous takes…. “OK, great burnout scene, but lets do it one more time in the exact same spot”. Whether it’s parallel stripes from a burnout or fun swirls from something more intense, it always kills the mood for me. Just pick a different location, dammit!

    Suggested by Kumciho

    Forever fuel

    That movie fuel never degrades. You often see it in Zombie movies or other similar world-as-we-know-it-ended type movies. Someone comes upon a car that’s been sitting for years, they find a battery (if they even bother to address needing a battery), they hop in, start it up and away they go! That is just not how octane-based fuel works, let alone the sea of other issues that come with an engine that has sat for years, mice chewing wires and nesting in things, moisture-related damage, etc, etc.

    Suggested by Dakiraun

    NASCAR engine in an EV

    Gotta go with the E-Tron in the avengers making V8 noises. It seems small, and is overdubbing cars incorrectly is a running hollywood theme but this is supposed to be Tony Stark’s super cool high tech expensive future car. Like it being an EV was the entire point they picked it and yet…vroom vroom.

    Suggested by JaredOfLondon

    Pull up like skrrrt

    Squealing tires on dirt/gravel roads. Grinds my gears every time.

    Suggested by Thomas Hajicek

    What’s the payload capacity of a Ford Ranchero?

    In Goldfinger, crushing a 5000lb Lincoln Continental (plus anonymous mobster and what apparently should’ve been another 2000lb of gold based on value), and placing the cube in the bed of a Ford Ranchero with an 800lb payload. Odd Job should’ve been driving one of the very first lowriders.

    Suggested by Maymar

    Dude, where’s most of my car?

    Continuing to drive a car that has no source of fuel, among other issues. See:

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1810735/car-movie-mistakes-reader-answers/

  • Rescue cat was chased bullied by dog rescue animals p… Beautiful Dogs Love

    Rescue cat was chased bullied by dog rescue animals p… Beautiful Dogs Love

    Do RVs Need To Stop At Weigh Stations?
    BY UMMEAIMON SHABBIR SEPT. 16, 2025 6:25 PM EST

    Sheila Say/Shutterstock
    In most cases, RVs do not need to stop at weigh stations. These checkpoints exist mainly so state officials can check the weight limits and driver logs of commercial trucks. Passenger cars and privately owned RVs aren’t the focus, so unless your vehicle is unusually heavy or being used for business purposes, you can probably keep driving.

    The general threshold in many states is 10,000 pounds. If your RV or combined RV-and-tow-vehicle setup weighs less than that, you can bypass the station without worry. Many Class B RVs fall under this limit. Larger Class A and Class C rigs often exceed it, but even then, most states apply the rule to commercial vehicles only. There are exceptions, though, and that’s where confusion comes in.

    Some states treat all vehicles over 10,000 pounds the same, whether they’re private or commercial. Places like Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin fall into that group. Others raise the bar to 26,000 pounds, which pulls in only the largest RVs. Colorado, Oregon, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania follow this approach. Then there are unique cases like Delaware, which requires RVs over 46 feet long to stop, and New Jersey, which enforces the 10,000-pound rule for all vehicle types — RV or not. Because laws vary, the safest option is to check DMV or state police guidance before crossing state lines. There are also states where even living in your RV is illegal, so maybe check that out, too.

    Exceptions RV owners need to know

    Andrew Lichtenstein/Getty Images
    While most RV travelers can skip weigh stations, there are times when you may be required to pull in. The first is if you’re running a business from your RV — states often apply weigh station rules to business-owned vehicles. That includes RVs used for touring bands, campaign buses, or promotional vehicles. Even if you’re a small business owner who claimed your RV as a work expense, it’s best to assume you might fall under that rule.

    In several states, officers can direct any vehicle (not just trucks) into a weigh station. Alaska, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Maine, Mississippi, and Texas all give officers that authority. If you’re pulled in, it doesn’t always mean weight is the issue. Sometimes it’s a safety concern or even a speeding violation. Whatever the reason, the right move is to comply and follow instructions.

    Montana has its own take, requiring business-owned RVs over 8,000 pounds to stop. Missouri uses an 18,000-pound limit for mandatory stops, while Virginia sets its threshold lower at 7,500 pounds for trucks. South Dakota requires vehicles towing horse trailers to pull over, and Nebraska requires all trucks over 1 ton, though pickup-trailer combos are exempt. These outlier rules make it clear that “one-size-fits-all” doesn’t apply here.

    For travelers, the lesson is simple: Know the laws in each state you pass through. Even if most don’t apply to you, a few minutes of checking can prevent a fine or unnecessary stress on the road.

    Other ways to check your RV’s weight

    YouTube/Digital Barbell Online Coaching
    Even if weigh stations don’t usually apply to RVs, knowing your vehicle’s weight is still important. Every RV has weight ratings that affect safety and performance. Gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) is the maximum weight your RV can safely carry once loaded, while the gross combined weight rating (GCWR) adds the tow vehicle into the equation. Fifth wheels and heavy towables also need to stay under the gross axle weight rating (GARW) to avoid damaging suspension and axles. This is one of the things you should always keep in mind before towing a car with your RV.

    You don’t need a weigh station to check these numbers. Most truck stops have certified automatic truck (CAT) scales, which are inexpensive and can be used through an app like Weigh My Truck. This gives you an accurate reading of your RV’s weight without holding up commercial traffic. Another option is to estimate using your RV’s “dry weight” from the manufacturer and adding cargo, fluids, and passengers. It’s not perfect, but it gives you a ballpark figure.

    If you discover your RV is overweight, there are simple fixes. Empty waste tanks, travel with less water in fresh tanks, and ditch unnecessary gear. Swap heavy accessories like generators with lighter alternatives, such as a solar setup. Even small changes, like replacing glass doors with curtains or clearing clutter, can shave off weight. Nowadays, there are RVs that incinerate your poop using their exhaust if you really want to cut down on those few grams as well. Talk about being weight-conscious.

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1964400/do-rvs-need-to-stop-at-weigh-stations/

  • “Golden toad! Those who see it will become very wealthy.”

    “Golden toad! Those who see it will become very wealthy.”

    This Over-Wing Engine Setup Helped Boeing’s YC-14 Master Short Runways
    BY JACKSON LAMBROS SEPT. 16, 2025 7:25 PM EST

    Wikimedia
    The C-130 Hercules is one of the most beloved aircraft in military service today. Since the plane was introduced in 1956 as America’s next airlifter, military and civilian organizations have found plenty of use for its roomy cargo bay. In the past seven(!) decades, the Herc has had more utility than a Swiss Army knife, serving in airborne refueling, maritime patrol, search and rescue, aerial firefighting, and plenty of other jobs in the 70 nations it’s served.

    It’s not Lockheed’s only plane to be kicking hard at age 70, but it almost wasn’t that way. Just 15 years into the Herc’s life, the U.S. Air Force was looking for something new to replace it — a jet-powered airlifter designed to carry cargo deep behind enemy lines, and work out of airfields half the size of what the C-130 was used to. The Air Force chose two finalists in this Short TakeOff and Landing (STOL) competition, McDonnell Douglas with the YC-15, and what we’re looking at today: the Boeing YC-14. 

    At first glance, the jet looks like one of those chibi cars squished in Photoshop to look like a cartoon, and those massive jet engines atop the wings result in a look unlike any other. But its bizarre design is all function over form, because when speeds were low and lift was lower, the YC-14 could use its massive over-wing engines to do what no other jet could: generate its own lift. 

    Advantages of an over-wing design

    Christian Volpati/Wikimedia
    Made for the Air Force’s Advanced Medium STOL (AMST) Transport Project, the YC-14 had to be able to take off and land from a 2,000-foot runway — half of what the era’s C-130 was designed for — and have a 400-nautical-mile radius, all while carrying 27,000 pounds. The Air Force was also hoping for more room on the inside … enough to carry the Army’s M109 and M110 self-propelled howitzers. 

    So why did Boeing pick an over-wing design? First and most obvious is clearance. For an aircraft meant to work out of unpaved or damaged runways, having the engines higher up let the wings shield them from ingesting debris. And these runways weren’t just short, but could be nestled into mountainous terrain and be surrounded by buildings, trees, and other obstacles. Boeing’s solution? Build a plane that can make its own lift.  

    The plane’s two General Electric CF6-50D turbofans were massive, producing over 50,000 pounds of force each. They also produced plenty of exhaust gas that, when blown over the top of the wing, could increase lift. This is known as upper-surface blowing, when airflow is directed to the top of the wing and over the flaps. With the flaps lowered, the Coandă effect keeps the engine’s exhaust glued to the wing’s surface and redirects it toward the ground, giving the aircraft a forward and upward momentum. The concept had never made it beyond NASA testing, but for a big, heavy cargo plane operating at low speeds, it was the perfect choice. Boeing rolled the dice.

    If it ain’t broke …

    It worked. The surface blowing made the plane a rocket taking off, only needing 800 feet to get airborne. Once aloft, the YC-14 could ascend at 6,000 feet per minute — three times the C-130’s capabilities. It was impressive on approach, too, with landing speeds as slow as 68 mph, a rough headwind letting the plane stop in just 387 feet. And with takeoff and landing possible with just 800 feet of runway, the YC-14 smashed expectations for the contest. The plane could carry 27,000 pounds or 150 paratroopers for STOL operations, and up to 69,000 on conventional runways.

    After years of testing the two finalists, the Air Force declared the C130 the winner. Following the Vietnam War’s conclusion, the Air Force quickly learned two things. First, the C-130 was still a perfect airframe for its job, and a handful of upgrades could keep it in service for decades. Secondly, the Air Force also needed a bigger jet, closer to the carrying abilities of the C-5 Galaxy, with the C-130’s STOL capabilities. As a result, the AMST Project concluded in 1979, and the C-130 still holds its role. In its place came the Cargo Transport Aircraft-Experimental (C-X) project, in which the now-iconic YC-15-based C-17 Globemaster became the lifter the Air Force was searching for, able to carry 170,900 pounds of cargo to runways as short as 3,500 feet. 

    So technically, did McDonnell Douglas win? Or did Boeing win because it absorbed McDonnell-Douglas in 1997, including the C-130? Cool planes were made and lots was learned. Therefore, nobody lost.

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1964717/boeing-yc-14-over-wing-engine-design/

  • “Have you ever buried a dead little animal?”

    “Have you ever buried a dead little animal?”

    Here’s How Tire Speed Ratings Affect Ride Quality
    BY ALVIN REYES SEPT. 16, 2025 8:25 PM EST

    BLKstudio/Shutterstock
    The speed ratings of tires are more than just about the maximum allowable speed that the rubber can carry a load before failing, exploding, and causing a massive accident. It’s one of the many numbers written on a particular tire’s sidewall, and it can give drivers an idea of how it could affect the ride quality. The tire speed rating is typically an alphabetic symbol next to the load index or load rating, which ranges from S to Y; with each letter corresponding to a speed rating.

    For instance, an S-rated tire can handle up to 112 mph (180 kph), while a U-rated tire is good for 124 mph (200 kph). Higher up the spectrum is V-rated rubber at 149 mph (240 kph), while the Z, W, and Y can reach 149+ mph (240+ kph), 168 mph (270 kph), and 186 mph (300 kph), respectively. Tires with higher speed ratings offer superior grip, handling, and stopping power, making them ideal for aggressively tuned factory sports cars and exotic hypercars. Moreover, they provide better heat dissipation at higher speeds, but that’s where the benefits end.

    Sporty tires with speed ratings that are higher up the alphabet benefit from stiffer casings and softer rubber compounds to reduce “flexing” of the rubber. Flexing or squirming produces more heat, so a stiff construction is better for maximum heat dissipation. However, the advanced materials and construction also bring downsides, such as a stiffer ride quality, faster wear, and mediocre performance in cold weather. You’re fortunate to have a car that requires a V or higher speed rating, but lower speed ratings are more ideal if grand touring comfort is the goal.

    What tire speed rating is best for your ride?

    NATALLIA B/Shutterstock
    The tire speed rating has nothing to do with how fast you should be driving your car. In other words, having V-rated tires doesn’t give you the right to blaze through the city at 149 mph. The speed rating will almost always exceed the maximum speed limits in your state or locale, with most statutory speed limits ranging from 25 mph (residential and school districts) to 55 and 75 mph on rural highways and interstates.

    Most family cars, like compacts, midsize sedans, and small SUVs, can live with H, S, or T-rated tires. On the flip side, pickup trucks and half-tons should go for tires with N, P, Q, R, S, or T speed ratings. It’s never a good idea to mix tires of different sizes, makes, or brands, and it’s the same with the speed rating. Doing so may compromise the grip and handling qualities of your ride. 

    Although experts generally recommend installing the same size and type of tire on all four corners of the car, it’s possible to use tires of different speed ratings. However, they should be on the front wheels regardless of whether the vehicle is FWD, RWD, or AWD, to reduce the possibility of oversteer while driving. Furthermore, mixing tires with different speed ratings means the speed capacity will now follow the tire with the lower speed rating. Touring tires with an H or S speed rating will be comfier, quieter, and have longer wear characteristics than performance tires with V or higher speed ratings. Take these into account the next time you go tire shopping.

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1964771/how-tire-speed-ratings-affect-ride-quality/

  • “The most touching animal rescue! All living beings have spirituality.”

    “The most touching animal rescue! All living beings have spirituality.”

    4 Brake Problems You Can Diagnose Just By Listening
    BY BENJAMIN GRACIAS SEPT. 16, 2025 10:25 PM EST

    AvokadoStudio/Shutterstock
    Brakes are an important component of your car, as they allow you to stop safely and in time. However, brake components wear over time, especially brake pads in the case of disc brakes and brake shoes for drum brakes. It is critical to identify component wear and replace them on time, as ignoring them could lead to a cascading effect of failures.

    Manufacturers do provide a replacement timeline for brake components, like other car components. However, depending on your driving style, your brakes could see accelerated wear, necessitating replacement well before the recommended timeline. Thankfully, moving parts emit a noise, and in the case of brake components, they use friction to slow down vehicles, a byproduct of which is heat and noise. A worn-down or damaged brake component will emit a unique sound. 

    Knowing these sounds will help you better diagnose specific brake issues and rectify them before they cause further damage or, worse, brake failure. We will mainly focus on disc brake equipped vehicles as most modern vehicles have stopped using drum brakes. Different brake noises indicate different brake issues. Some common ones are grinding, squeaking, thumping, rattling, clicking, and squealing.

    Brake grinding

    Witthaya Prasongsin/Getty Images
    One of the most obvious tells is a grinding noise or the sound of metal-on-metal scraping. It is a noise that you not just hear but feel through the steering wheel in case of the front brakes grinding. A common reason for this is worn-out brake pads. A brake pad contains a composition of friction material with a metal backing plate that provides structural support. The composite friction material rubs against the metal disc, and its friction stops the vehicle. Different brake pad materials exist, like ceramic and organic brake pads. The composite friction material is designed to wear away, and once it does, the metal backing plate rubs against the metal disc, leading to a grinding sound. This metal-to-metal contact can damage the brake disc, which will be far more expensive to replace than the brake pads. The solution is to replace the brake pads ASAP.

    Another reason for the grinding noise could be due to foreign objects like a tiny stone getting lodged between the brake pads and disc, causing it to grind against the latter. It’s a simple fix and does not necessitate any brake component replacement. If you hear a rubbing sound while driving your car after it’s been stationary for a long time, rust has likely built up on the surface of your brake disc. Driving around in traffic and braking in between should get rid of the rust and consequent noise.

    Brake squeaking/squealing

    Unai Huizi Photography/Shutterstock
    A squeaking noise while braking is commonly diagnosed with low-quality brake pads. Besides poor braking performance, low-quality brake pads tend to emit a squeaking noise. Another reason could be the brake wear indicator on the pad coming in contact with the metal disc. Also called metal squealers, these are small tabs on the pads that give out a high-pitched squeal, indicating it’s time to change your brake pads. A chirping noise, which is similar to a squealing noise. It could be due to a foreign object, like a loose brake hose, coming in contact with the rotating wheel or disc. A good way to identify this issue is to check if the intensity of the chirping noise changes with vehicle speed.

    A groaning or creaking noise isn’t necessarily caused by a brake issue. It could be due to worn-out wheel bearings or suspension components. Braking can induce this sound as while slowing down, the suspension components move as well. Get the vehicle on a jack and rotate the wheel to check for bearing noise. If that’s not the problem, check suspension parts like ball joints and control arm bushes. If you hear a hissing sound while braking, it could be due to a vacuum leak in the brake booster. A damaged vacuum hose or a torn diaphragm would cause air to leak out, causing the hissing sound. Another way to diagnose it is the loss of brake boost, causing the brake pedal to feel abnormally stiff to operate.

    Brake thumping/rattling

    Nenov/Getty Images
    A clunking or thumping noise could be due to a loose brake caliper bolt, which tightening it could solve the issue. A rattling issue could be diagnosed as improperly installed brake pads, calipers, or anti-rattle clips, causing the brake pads to move from their original position while braking. This is a serious issue that could lead to poor braking, the vehicle pulling to one side under braking, or even brake failure. A rattling noise could also be due to warped disc brakes, causing the brake pads to hit against parts of the disc. This will also lead to vibrations felt in the brake pedal and steering wheel. A disc resurfacing or replacement could be needed in this case. That said, thumping or rattling issues are more likely to be due to loose suspension components than brakes.

    An uncommon sound is a moaning or low groaning sound accompanied by low stopping power. This could be due to glazed brake pads, where instead of a rough friction surface, the brake pads have a mirror-like, shiny surface. This happens due to frequent hard braking or riding the brake pedal, which overheats the brake pad surface to a point that it deteriorates and glazes over. While a temporary fix is to sand the glazed surface off, it is advisable to replace the brake pads entirely.

    Another uncommon sound, but one found in ABS-equipped vehicles, is a rapid grinding sound when ABS kicks in. While this is an indicator of the ABS working properly, the phenomenon is reserved for high-speed braking or braking over low-traction surfaces. If it is a common occurrence and even happens at low speeds, it could be due to a faulty ABS or wheel speed sensor.

    Good brakes save lives

    Setta Sornnoi/Shutterstock
    Brakes are vital parts of your car, and while it’s one thing to diagnose issues with your braking system, it’s another to prevent these issues from cropping up. There are some pre-emptive steps to ensure your brakes remain in top-notch condition. It starts with the following driving habits that ensure your brakes have a long, consistent life. 

    Firstly, avoid hard braking. Slamming on the brakes like your life depended on it puts excessive strain on your braking system, especially your brake pads (shoes in the case of drum brakes). This leads to excessive wear, necessitating a premature replacement of the brake pads. Keeping a safe distance from the car ahead helps you plan better in emergency braking scenarios, giving you ample time to react and gradually bring the car to a stop. Gradual braking goes a long way in preserving your brakes.

    The best way to preserve your brakes is to use them as little as possible. While it might seem stupid, anticipating your stops and lifting off the accelerator gradually slows your vehicle to a point where it can stop by itself. Engine braking is your friend, and can save you if your brakes fail at highway speed. Learning to use it along with your brakes exponentially increases your braking efficiency and life. Avoid clutching in while braking, as it simply releases your vehicle from engine braking and actually ends up increasing your vehicle’s speed. Beware, though, you can do engine braking wrong too. Other hygienic driving tips are keeping your foot off the brake pedal. A constant pressure on your brake pedal, however light, causes the brake pads to rub with the disc, and prolonged exposure leads to them overheating, causing excessive wear.

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1964304/diagnose-brake-problems-by-sound/

  • Canada May Drop 100% Tariff On

    Canada May Drop 100% Tariff On

    Canada May Drop 100% Tariff On Chinese EVs To Help Farm Owners
    BY COLLIN WOODARD SEPT. 11, 2025 4:38 PM EST

    Eric Alonso/Getty Images
    It didn’t exactly require a PhD in economics to predict that Donald Trump blowing up our trading relationship with countries we previously considered allies would only encourage those countries to work more closely with China. And that goes double for Canada, since Trump also reneged on the terms of the free trade deal he so proudly negotiated with them in his first term, while also loudly proclaiming that Canada should give up its sovereignty and become the 51st state. So it shouldn’t be much of a surprise that InsideEVs reports Canada is considering dropping its 100% tariff on Chinese EVs.

    If Canada does go through with dropping its tariff on Chinese EVs, it would be about more than just making EVs more affordable for Canadians. The goal would be to get China to drop the 100% tariff it placed on Canadian farm and food products. That would, of course, help farm owners, since they’d be able to sell a lot more of their products, including canola oil and soy beans, to China, while the rest of Canada would benefit from access to more affordable EVs. 

    That said, it’s far from a done deal and may still not go through. “The prime minister did say there is an EV review. We will see where that leads … the discussions are ongoing,” Canada’s Agriculture Minister Heath MacDonald told CTV News on Tuesday. “We are in a fragile position, but we are here to support the farmer first and foremost, and if that decision has to be made, then that decision has to be made.”

    Canadians already approve

    Art Konovalov/Shutterstock
    While Canada is still debating whether to drop its tariff on Chinese EVs, doing so would likely prove popular. As CTV News points out, a recent poll found 62% of Canadians surveyed “either support or somewhat support removing a 100 per cent tax on all Chinese-made EVs.” Meanwhile, only 29% of Canadians surveyed oppose or somewhat oppose the move.

    As Simon Fraser University professor Jonn Axsen told CTV News, Canada is likely headed toward an electric future, regardless of any temporary dips in demand, saying, “It is going to be a more efficient transition if we open up the market to anyone who can provide quality EVs that customers choose to buy. If anyone can enter the market, then there is only more choice for buyers.”

    If Canada does open up its country to Chinese EVs, cheap cars such as the BYD Seagull, which sells for about $13,800 in China, would probably still sell for more than they do back home. After all, they’d need to meet Canadian safety requirements, and they’d also need to be shipped over. But they’d probably still undercut the prices for EVs built by legacy automakers that cost far more. 

    Meanwhile, Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association, told CTV News, “As much as we don’t like the way the Chinese have build the industry, we know it is the future, so we can’t be running around with a blindspot. But also, giving away part of the market because enthusiasts want Chinese vehicles, well, we should also remember that these enthusiasts don’t employ anyone.”

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1965703/canada-may-drop-100-percent-tariff-on-chinese-evs-help-farmers/

  • Rescue cat on the road 😩 #rescue#animals#animalsoftiktok#rescueanimals#cat

    Rescue cat on the road 😩 #rescue#animals#animalsoftiktok#rescueanimals#cat

    These States Still Allow You To Ride In Truck Beds
    BY CHINO ORTIZ SEPT. 11, 2025 5:25 PM EST

    Shironosov/Getty Images
    If you grew up around those big pickup trucks, chances are you saw a few kids bouncing along in the back — maybe you even did it yourself. For a long time, it was practically a rite of passage in rural America. You’d pile in after a ball game or ride out to the fields on a summer evening, hair whipping around, no one worrying about seat belts or crash ratings. It felt free, almost rebellious. But nostalgia doesn’t erase the reality: truck beds were never designed for passengers. As for what states allow it, it really depends.

    The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) reminds us that truck beds offer zero crash protection or seat belts, but many states still let adults ride unrestrained back there — they don’t seem to care. It has been clear — no seat belts, no protection, and in a collision, the risk of ejection is high. The North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program conducted a crash test on riding behind the truck bed, and well, it ain’t a pretty result. 

    So why do some states still allow it? Partly culture, partly practicality. In farming communities, the bed was —and still is — used for hauling workers as much as hay. Lawmakers carved out exemptions to preserve that, and those rules just…stuck. However, as traffic got heavier and vehicles faster, the safety trade-off became harder to ignore. What once looked like a charming slice of Americana now reads more like an accident waiting to happen.

    The law says…it depends on what state you’re in

    oasisamuel/Shutterstock
    Unlike seat belt laws, which are fairly universal, truck bed riding rules are scattered across the map. In some states, it’s fully legal for adults to ride in the back, no strings attached. Alabama, Alaska, Indiana, and Wyoming have no explicit laws banning passengers in cargo areas, which means by default it’s legal. The “I” states (Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa) also joined team legal. You can party out on the truck bed, just don’t fall. Please. 

    Other states set conditions. Florida, for instance, allows adults but restricts kids — minors can only ride in truck beds if the area is enclosed or if they’re belted in somehow. Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, and Texas take a similar stance, letting adults over 18 ride in the back, but minors? Only if it’s a hayride, a parade, or agricultural work. Otherwise, the driver can be fined, and if something happens, face criminal liability. If you are aged 12 and below, it’s a no-no in Louisiana and Massachusetts. In Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, you must be at least 16.  

    Then, you have the stricter camp. New York, New Jersey, and Arkansas flat-out prohibit it, except for emergencies or official events like parades. That patchwork means a cross-country road trip could technically have you legal one day and illegal the next — without ever leaving the interstate. Unless you’ve memorized each state’s statute, it’s easy to trip over the differences.

    Riding in the back feels free – until it feels fatal

    Monkeybusinessimages/Getty Images
    Even in states that allow it, the safety argument is hard to ignore. A truck bed isn’t a passenger compartment — it’s metal and wood, not padded panels and air bags. A sudden lane change, a rear-end collision, or even a sharp pothole can send someone flying. Since so many states only restrict minors, adults often assume it’s fine, but legal doesn’t equal safe. 

    There’s also liability. In Texas, for example, drivers can be cited and fined between $25 and $200 for having minors in the back unlawfully. If an accident happens, the driver may face lawsuits for negligence. However, that legal gray zone still leaves plenty of room for argument in court. For minors, especially, courts tend to side with safety.

    And yet, the tradition persists. Rural communities still see pickup truck beds as functional seating, not a legal gamble. It’s a tension between culture and modern traffic realities. So yes, some states still let you do it. However, just because the law hasn’t caught up doesn’t mean physics won’t. What feels like freedom to ride at the back of that satisfying pickup truck at 30 mph on a dirt road feels very different at 70 mph on the interstate.

    Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/1963804/states-that-allow-riding-in-truck-bed/