QOTD: Will Anyone Unseat Max Verstappen?

So, Max Verstappen is returning to Red Bull.

That question is settled.

The next question, then, is can any other driver end his dominance?

Read more
  • Lorenzo I'll probably be tagged as a troglodyte or old geezer, but all I want on a steering wheel is an airbag and a horn (which I never use). I don't let computer programs drive my car, and I never use cruise control either. @toolguy, there are situations where a competent driver can get into an accident through no fault of their own, and have need for a functioning airbag. The lap and shoulder seatbelt is the best safety measure, but the airbag can reduce the severity of injuries. Automakers need to realize their added "features' are largely unneeded and often unwanted, especially when they add to the cost of buying and operating a vehicle. Electronics companies have demonstrated that their products have short lifespans. Auto electronics will break down long before a vehicle has reached the end of its useful life. If automakers aren't smart enough to keep the needed vehicle controls separate, the government is likely to force them to do so.
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh it only hurts the buyers of the base engine. so ... less than 10%. However these changes hurt the OEM because it signals the products end of life trajectory is beginning weakening brand strength.
  • JMII The base engine allows people to get into the vehicle at a lower price point and some are fine with the performance at that lower level. Personally I've become spoiled by power and features so I avoid the "base" model / engine in pretty much any vehicle I am looking at. Better off waiting two years for the depreciation and getting a fully loaded used vehicle vs a brand new base model. Buyers regret is real, nothing worse then realizing you could have gotten something nicer. https://fletch.tv/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/v8-cat.jpg?w=326&h=253
  • VoGhost I'm more focused on the top and transmission choices. Convertible + MT is more to my liking.
  • Theflyersfan Mixed feelings on this one. It used to be where the base engine was an underpowered boat anchor bolted into a model that typically just had one letter after the car's name. Think of the ungodly underpowered, especially with people and cargo inside, 4-cyls that Ford shart out with the Taurus back in the 80s as an example, or the Iron Duke that GM would have ridden into the grave if they could. Basically these were rental specials and low price crapmobiles for newspaper ads. Get the buyers in, and then upsell them. It's different now, except for the example above with the 2.0L turbo-4 in that Jaguar. Given how wonderful that V8 is, what Jag did there with the 4 is a felony. Base engines now make so much more power, some use less gas (but looking at you Ecoboost), and can be just as smooth as the larger engine. But with these base engines tend to come with a lot less equipment, so by the time you option the car up to what you desire, you're right smack in the range of the bigger and better engine that likely came with that equipment standard, so for resale value and clout, you'd go with the bigger engine. Audi does that as I recall. So I think it depends on the vehicle if it hurts or not. For pickup trucks that might actually do some work beyond shuttling kids to school and hauling air, nope. Toss that base engine. Same with a 5,000 pound CUV. Small base engines are going to be overworked and as Volvo found out early on with the twin-powered I-4, burn out. For something like a Supra, the 2.0L was a gateway in, with decent performance, but odds are the buyer of a Supra has the funds to step into the I-6 model anyway. For one of the last remaining sedans and coupes, it will hurt. A perfectly good 2.0L-4 is just as good as a medium sized V6 these days, and the cost of entry is likely less. Think of the Civic and Mazda3. Normal vs. Turbo. They chuck the non-turbo, they will lose a ton of sales because the price gulf is pretty wide there.