Welcome back to the working week. If you’re a fan of the complicated interplay between industrial policy, economic nationalism, and global car production it might thrill you to read about it. If you’re a German automaker that relies on the United States it might kill you.
The Morning Dump is going to be about politics this morning, because politics seems to be impacting every aspect of the car market. A new bill in the US House of Representatives is likely not aimed directly at Mercedes-Benz, but that’s definitely the automaker most likely to be impacted. At least Mercedes doesn’t produce a lot of cars in Canada. It’s looking like the USMCA could be replaced with two bilateral agreements, and Canada might be the loser there. American Axle is a major supplier to GM, who might not be getting key products for truck production since the UAW has called a strike after years of what it claims are stagnating wages.
That’s a heavy TMD, so I’m going to end on a special car I can’t stop thinking about that was just announced this week.
Congress Seems To Have It Out For Mercedes
CNBC has the direct headline “Mercedes-Benz may be shut out of U.S. market under bill aimed at Chinese automaker ownership.” Yikes! What’s going on here?
Mercedes the automaker (not the person) makes a lot of cars in the United States and has former football coach Nick Saban as both a dealer and champion. I do not think, realistically, Mercedes cars will end up being banned for sale anytime soon. However, there’s a new bill, the Motor Vehicle Modernization Act of 2026, which was voted out of committee last month and could have that impact as written. As CNBC reports:
Mercedes-Benz’s largest individual shareholder is the state-owned Chinese automaker BAIC, formerly the Beijing Automotive Industrial Corp., with a 9.98% share. The potential implications of the legislation on the automaker are previously unreported.
Several people familiar with the legislation who spoke to CNBC cited gray areas in the bill that, depending on how they’re interpreted, could ban Mercedes-Benz from operating in the U.S.
Two sources who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity for fear of repercussions or because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly said they believe the bill, as it’s currently written, would ban the company.
“The language is unambiguous,” said a former automotive policy advisor and lobbyist who was consulted about the bill.
If you take BAIC’s ownership and add in Li Shufu, who also founded Geely, you end up with nearly 20% of the company in the hands of Chinese companies or individuals. So what language are we talking about here? CNBC says the bill “would prohibit automakers that have “any direct or indirect equity interest by a foreign-adversary government.” There was reportedly an amendment on May 21st, but I haven’t been able to find it. Similar language does appear in the Connected Vehicle Security Act of 2026, which says this:
On and after January 1, 2027, the importation, manufacture, sale, resale, or introduction into interstate commerce in the United States of a connected vehicle is prohibited if—
(A) the country of origin of the connected vehicle is a covered country or the connected vehicle is designed within a covered country, without regard to whether—
(i) at the time of importation, sale, resale, or introduction, the vehicle is equipped with any covered software or connected vehicle hardware subject to a prohibition under paragraph (2) or (3); or
(ii) any such covered software or connected vehicle hardware—
(I) is removed from the vehicle before importation, sale, resale, or introduction; or
(II) will be installed after importation, sale, resale, or introduction; or
(B) the manufacturer of the connected vehicle is a joint venture, subsidiary, or other entity in which more than 15 percent of the equity interest, voting interest, board representation, or other indicia of control, whether directly or indirectly, is owned or controlled by an entity, or combination of entities, organized under the laws of, or with its principal place of business in, a covered country.
That’s China, for sure, since Russian car manufacturing is on its back foot and not exporting anything soon. This doesn’t apply to most countries that sell cars here, because they are not adversarial. The Trump Administration has already given a waiver under existing laws to Volvo so it can sell cars here, in spite of being owned by Geely, seemingly because Volvo goes through a lot of effort to wall off its connected cars.
Protecting American consumers from surveillance by a foreign government–at least one we’re adversarial with–makes sense, and these efforts go back to the Biden Administration and are seen as being mostly bipartisan. Would Alabama Republicans be happy to see Mercedes-Benz harmed? Absolutely not. These bills haven’t been passed yet, so there’s still time to clarify this, though it’s part of a larger move by both parties to secure American production.
Canada Seems The Odd Man Out In Trade Talks So Far
The Trump Administration has already dropped more shoes on the car industry than a drunk kangaroo at a DSW, yet more remain. A Doc Marten-sized boot still exists in the form of whatever’s going to happen to the United States-Mexico-Agreement, which was a key piece of legislation from President Trump’s first term but is no longer acceptable to him.
US trade representatives are in Mexico City negotiating a deal and the latest report, via The Detroit News, doesn’t sound great for Canada:
As initial talks between the United States and Mexico begin this week over how to restructure the USMCA trade deal, U.S. negotiators are seeking 82% North American content in vehicles made regionally, with 50% of that value produced in the United States, four people familiar with the matter told Reuters.
In the past, content from Canada was so undistinguished from content from the United States that it’s not even labeled as being from anywhere else. This seems to be changing, as the article mentions:
The shift, if accepted, would be a major break from the current USMCA. It requires that 40% of the “core parts” value of North American passenger vehicle passenger cars be produced in high-wage jurisdictions, effectively the U.S. or Canada. That threshold is 45% for pickup trucks. Overall, vehicles must have 75% North American content to qualify for preferential treatment under USMCA.
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said earlier this week he wanted to strengthen North American rules of origin “in a way that enhances U.S. content in these goods” to boost manufacturing in the United States.
The UAW will be happy to hear this, although the UAW is a little busy right now.
UAW: No Contract, No Axles
Both GM and Stellantis are going after Ford, which is dealing with an aluminum shortage and therefore is behind on building its super popular F-150s. GM might be in trouble itself, as the UAW is striking the American Axle plant responsible for making key parts for both the Silverado and Sierra.
Why is the UAW striking? The Detroit Free Press explains:
During 2008’s Great Recession, with American Axle on the brink of closing, workers took the massive pay cuts to keep the facility open, the UAW said.
Josh Jager, Local 2093 bargaining chair, said that he was among the workers who, in 2008, went from making $29 an hour to $14.50.
“We did it to save the company, we did more than save them — we made them billions of dollars,” Jager said of the pay cuts. “So tonight, it’s about getting our fair share.”
Workers seem to have a point here, stating that the highest wage is $22 an hour, which is less than the $29 an hour they used to make (or $44 an hour adjusted for inflation). The UAW also says that the company has generated over $8 billion in profits over the last decade.
I Am In Love With Tolman Edition Escort XR3i
Part of me thinks I’m going to have to live in England for a year just to get all of the European Fast Fords I want to drive out of my system, and UK-based car exports Tolman Engineering are making any delays even harder with its latest creation, which is a Ford Escort XR3i that’s been completely gone over to make it kinda perfect.
Specifically, Tolman’s goal isn’t to make an entirely new car via massive engine swaps and the like, but rather to keep the original character and merely enhance it. It’s very Pygmalion (or My Fair Lady if you’re a philistine).
Despite being far easier to opt for a later unit from Ford’s range and in line with Tolman’s ethos that it should still feel like an XR3i, the original 105PS 1597cc CVH unit was retained – though substantially revised to solve the performance, noise and harshness issues that contemporary road testers rued. Now it features a 16V Zetec head, new pistons and rods, a revised and stronger bottom end with a modified RS1600i cam cover.
Often criticised in period as underwhelming, Tolman turned to today’s damping technology to transform the Escort’s handling. Up front, its solution is to draw on experience and parts from Ford’s RS1600i homologation special and mate these with Bilstein dampers and a bespoke front anti roll bar. The changes offer more castor options to improve steering feel and turn in within the limits of Ford’s original set up. A key but subtle difference is the bespoke 15” alloy wheel designed by Tolman. Honouring the 14” ‘Dog Leg’ design fitted to thousands of Escorts, Tolman has created the larger diameter variant, retaining the original’s centre section, machined down to create a cap that retains the original factory casting marks. As well as filling the Escort’s arches – it runs at standard ride height, the non-invasive upgrade enables greater tyre choice to further improve handling and package upgraded AP discs on the front and to swap the rear brake drums for discs.
I love it so much it kind of hurts.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
Boards of Canada has new album out, and it’s kinda weird! “Father and Son” is the track that stood out to me most at first listen.
The Big Question
Which car would you give the full Tolman treatment if money was no object?
Top photo: Mercedes
Most of these regulations seem like they are built for exemptions. Like the router ban you go and say we have us servers nothings going to China. We design in somewhere other then China manufacturer the hardware in Asia. They get a stamp saying all is good. Volvo got one, I bet BYD will get one for buses. The Chinese class 8 trucks will get them. Who ever else shows up shows their us servers and systems aren’t sending data to China will get them. I guess in a way it keeps infrastructure and engineering offices and jobs on the us. That seems to be what the are really looking for. On the face of it, it looks really dumb but really it’s just sort of stupid.
TBQ: Mitsubishi Mirage because something that small with more than double digit power sounds like a blast.
The way to prosperity is not isolationist and protectionist policies; our most prosperous times have been when we tax the rich. We need to support this strike.
We also need to help our neighboring countries. A high tide raises all ships and all that. Instead of battling China, help them out. If they have citizens with wages competitive to the US, then suddenly off-shoring manufacturing doesn’t make sense. Same with Mexico. Most people don’t join drug cartels because they have lots of great opportunities in front of them. Want to get rid of a bunch of drug cartels? Improve the quality of life in their home country. Give them assistance with education. Same for the US; we would fix a lot of issues at home if we gave people a hand up instead of a boot to the neck.
It’s remarkably simple, yet here we are.
“…our most prosperous times have been when we tax the rich”
Source? Any light examination proves this incredibly false. Just because it makes you feel good to say does not make it so.
Okay, prove it then.
It’s oft repeated, but apparently not remembered, that the tax rates on income above 200k annually in the US was 91% in 1950.
At the same time, the US gini coefficent — a measure of wealth inequality — was around 0.35.
And we had consistently strong economic growth. The 1950s and 60s saw US economic growth average around 4% a year.
The average c-level executive made about 20x the typical worker.
The CEO of GM made ~600k in 1950. That’s a little over 5 million in today’s money.
Economist refer to this period as the great compression.
The average c-level executive makes 340x more than their employees today in America.
Income inequality started to climb in the 70s, along with stagflation and anemic growth. US economic growth was below 3% through the 80s, and has dropped to a little under 2% annually in the last 20 years.
By the mid 2000s the gini coefficent was above 0.5. And the top marginal tax rate was down in the mid 30s, and the capital gains rates were around 25%.
Light examination shows this to be exactly dead on. Tax the rich, and we all do better.
OK. Explain it to us since you seem to have some alternate “facts”.
Didn’t they just give Volvo an exception for the same thing? Why can’t they just do the same for MB?
Or cry me a river and float your way down it and figure out how to comply.
There are two very simple solutions to Mercedes-Benz issue of ownership if that bill were ever to pass:
A) Stock buyback.
B) Bribe the Trump Regime.
I’ll go with A.
Meanwhile, I’ve long thought a restored R129 dogleg 300SL – upgraded to Brabus 3.6-24 spec would be a wonderful thing.
I guess MB shouldn’t have disavowed their practices during the war.
The founder, Daimler, died in 1900.
So it’s less personal than conversations about Henry Ford at the time.
I’m not getting the connection. MB used slave labor during the war, which they’ve since disavowed. That has nothing to do with Gottlieb Daimler, Wilhelm Maybach, or Henry Ford.
I did not make that connection. I thought your comment was related to generally supporting a specific regime of the day; something Henry did.
Didn’t Volvo just get an exception for this? https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/26/volvo-cars-wins-us-approval-to-keep-importing-vehicles-with-connected-car-technology.html
If Volvo can get an exception, I don’t see why MB can’t.
I have directions for Greer on where to go and how to get there.
But this is a civil chat, so I’ll say it seems like a great time for us to drop the Chicken Tax and adopt EU crash safety standards here in Canada.
All our co-operation with US desires has gotten us is screwed by the current US admin.
Do I want it this way? No. But just like a toxic relationship where your spouse alienates all your friends and makes you totally dependent on them, continuing that path only ends in tears.
Man, I’m sorry. 2017-2020 should have been vital lesson in the fragility of the American experiment. Instead, 2025-every minute since have selfish, stupid victory lap for venality and cruelty.
I originally wrote “every waking minute,” but let’s be honest, the bad shit doesn’t remotely let up even when we’re sleeping. We’re always abducting or bombing or stealing or cutting off aid or screwing allies or cutting funding basic science and health, much less research (or or or…) somewhere.
It’s awfully dim considering the sun never sets on the evil of the Orange Empire.
Our current government is the stupidest clown car full of avaricious sociopaths ever. China doesn’t need to use their partial ownership to sneak surveillance into a Benz. They’ve been in the US telecom networks for years by exploiting holes we left for our own spies.
Any access they need in the future will be graciously provided by admin-friendly zero IQ MBAs underinvesting in software security, because being picked as a winner by the current government requires fealty. Fealty to this admin is the mark of an idiot with endless greed and a four year old’s understanding of how the world works.
Honestly, I would love Merc to be banned. They make disgusting things these days that are just rolling trash. It would be a net positive.
Regarding the reason for the ban, “Fuck China in all and every way possible” is my official stance on anything related to them. I will readily admit this seems short sighted if we aren’t banning a ton of other things as well. And until we get our Pharmaceutical ingredients at a minimum, produced on US soil, that would be a real problem.
Let’s imagine this happened. And let’s also imagine that Daimler somehow survives.
How would that shape their future cars and lineup?
Could be an interesting exercise.
I guess it depends on the “how”. Do they survive as a car company? Right now, I think their best bet is to go full bore back into German Defense Industry. Tons of money will be pumped there soon and they and VW have factories looking for action.
But does that require them to remove the Chinese ownership as well? You would think it would.
Well, I was thinking just about cars…
They are onshoring production of pharmaceutical production (or trying to) with a 100% tariff on critical medicines. Honestly I had no idea until I saw your comment and looked it up.
It actually seems like a good use of tariffs, I wonder why it hasn’t been talked about.
Imagine if, instead of all the renewed “Red Scare” tactics aimed at China, we actually started making laws protecting the US consumer and their data? Proper privacy laws would make much of this China absurdity a non-issue.
That’ll never happen, they’re happy to sell you out to whomever lines their pockets.
Whoa there, we can’t have laws on the books that the filthy unwashed masses might turn around on the upper class!
Trump has it out for the EU almost as much as he does for China (Jyna) so what’s stopping him from declaring Germany or Italy as foreign adversaries and banning sales of all German or Italian cars?
By the looks of things, if that was to happen, the first ones banned would be SEATs and Cupras.
“NATO has been screwing us for years!” /s
“Don’t get me started on those god damned Penguins either…”
What a shit show we are forced to live in.
But the Turd’s Rock America music celebration seems dead.
Works for me.
My dogs have a better grip on rational thought than the giant Orange Turd ever had.
What a fucking mess.
Would be almost humorous if it wasn’t real..YMMV.
Mercedes Could Be Banned From Selling Cars in the US Over Chinese Ownership
*looks at Mercedes lineup*
I mean… I’m trying to care, but I’m coming up short I guess.
Makes two of us.
I’d say ban all current car production, but that would make the cars I actually want to buy more expensive. So might as well let the average idiots buy all the current junk.
The language of the bill does seem to support this, although I’m not a lawyer. I just want to make sure we’re all clear on how incredibly short sighted and stupid this is, because any Chinese automaker that is fighting one of these western companies with an established US presence could simply sabotage them buy buying a percentage prior to the enforcement start date.
Put another way, BYD could decide tomorrow to buy a 15% stake in Ford, a publicly traded company, which per the law would make it illegal to sell F-150’s in the US. But obviously this would be a problem. But if the law is that poorly worded and allows for things like this to happen, it can and will.
And to answer the “why” question of it, the math is fairly simple. If a Chinese manufacturer is having competition issues with a company that is largely profitable due to the US market success, they can simply decided a large investment that will go down by 50% may be a lesser cost of doing business compared to the gained market share. It’s not much different than minority percentage activist investors seeking their own goals.
Congrats congress, the bar was low, and yet you continue to break new ground at limbo.
Did you read the words of the bill, or just the summary of a summary of the news article? Just curious, not saying you are wrong, because I haven’t read the bill. I find if you aren’t reading the primary source these days, you’re often misled.
Going specifically off of the quote from the bill in the article, specifically the following:
(B) the manufacturer of the connected vehicle is a joint venture, subsidiary, or other entity in which more than 15 percent of the equity interest, voting interest, board representation, or other indicia of control, whether directly or indirectly, is owned or controlled by an entity, or combination of entities, organized under the laws of, or with its principal place of business in, a covered country.
With the starting effectively stating if any of the conditions are met, cars cannot be sold in the US. Again, I’m not a lawyer, so I could be missing nuance or legalize, but this seems pretty clear cut.
There isn’t enough outstanding shares of Ford for BYD to buy in one day. And the more they bought the price would increase more and more.
Even if a wizard waved a wand and made it possible it would cost way more than $10B and any administration could just exempt the domestic manufacturer the next day.
This whole Mercedes thing is just a back-channel attempt to further gut the United States Postal Service, by eliminating their supply of Sprinter Vans as new vehicles.
cinches tinfoil hat tighter
At my office we dumped all our Metris’s over 6 months ago (replaced with LLVs) as we await the ginormous new UPS sized trucks that look like a committee designed them with no input from carriers.
What we could have used is a fleet of mostly EVs (short daily routes) but obviously, this admin didn’t want to support that.
If we’re going to stop selling Mercedeses (?) here because of connections to China, then we may as well ban everything sold here that is made in China. Which is like, 90% of consumer goods. So…good luck with that. If they’re such an “adversarial foreign government”, why do any business with them at all?
Seriously. Ford sources a fair amount of it’s battery tech from China, so if we truly start breaking down how much of a car is from China, we are gonna get in trouble fast.
GM would certainly be screwed, even if they have very little Chinese ownership.
Also I don’t quite get why this article is singling out Mercedes-Benz when Volvo is literally owned by the Chinese lock, stock, and barrel. 10% ownership gets you something between jack and poop when it comes to actual control of a company, usually, and unless your last name is Ford.
The article mentions Volvo in passing. Apparently the Trump admin already gave them a pass on the current restrictions.
Yeah, we seem to be very worried about cars, but we all carry Chinese trackers (cell phones, etc.) with us 24-7. We forced the sale of tik tok because it was Chinese software, but we didn’t bother to consider where the device using it and it’s hardware and potentially software came from.
All the scammy products the trump family puts out are also made in China, unless of course, like the cell phone, it’s fraud and never actually produced, just deposits taken.
Don’t they still own an imperial fuckton of US debt as well?
And likely increasing as this regime spends fucktons and fucktons of money they don’t have on stuff basically no one wants.
That sounds like the goal in a way, but no way is it done overnight. It took decades to connect the global economy with China, it will take decades to undo it to minimize the impact.
Somehow, I was unaware that 20% of Mercedes Benz was Chinese-owned. Not sure how that (my ignorance) happened.
And though no one asked, Mercedes Benz hasn’t sold anything in America that I moistened my panties for since the very early 2000s. So, I personally wouldn’t miss them were they kicked out of the country, which I seriously doubt would ever happen.
This is also me. I had no idea there was any substantial Chinese ownership.
Isn’t the company technically called Mercedes-Benz? That could be a less-wordy differentiator.
Don’t worry, like the foreign-made router ban, there will be an opaque process by which the company donates money to whatever Trump’s latest grift is, and an exception will be granted.
I think they dropoed the Benz bit when they did the Mercedes-AMG and Mercedes-Maybach rebranding.
The company, I believe, is not called Daimler Benz anymore either.
I still call them Mercedes-Benz anyway because the rebranding is just the sort of lazy strategy to appeal noveau riches that someone like Gorden would’ve championed.
The website is still mbusa.com, and the name Mercedes-Benz is written out multiple times, so I’m sticking with it!
Have you seen the teeny tiny cars she drives? Mercedes-Bends.
https://media.tenor.com/LtFgjvHmXkYAAAAM/rim-shot-drums.gif
I think that might be an intentional joke. It definitely makes me giggle.
Yeah I figured. I know I’ve seen comments on articles with Mercedes in the headline, where people said “I thought you meant Streeter! You had me worried!”
I am no fan of the current administration.
But they are correct on the merits with the Chinese ownership ban.
This is not Japan or South Korea entering our market, this is a peer or near-peer adversary. It would be like giving the USSR access to critical internal markets in 1960, if the USSR also had a major economy.
My fear is that when the party in charge changes, as it inevitably will at some point, that the less common good ideas, like this one, will be thrown out with the rest of the Orange Man Bad stuff.
I broadly agree, however my concern which I voiced in a comment above is that I do not see what is stopping a Chinese company to make an investment into a company with large US market share as a way to force them out of the market. My thought process is that if a company makes much of their profit or uses the US market as a large source of volume for vehicle development, a BYD or similar could effectively kneecap their competition by buying a percentage.
Yes this would be costly, but those companies are still desperate for growth, and at a certain value, handicapping the strongest competitors may be the cheapest path to market share. I’m sure there are faults in my logic, and I think restrictions are by and large beneficial, but if there are exploitable loopholes, the consequences could be severe.
I think in theory this is a potential exploit/loophole, but in practice it’s awfully hard to buy up a double digit percentage of a 12 figure publicly traded company in secret.
honest question, does it need to be in secret though? If anything they would want it to be transparent if the goal is to kneecap the competition. I’m also wary on how the inverse would go for companies like Mercedes. Being publicly traded and potentially losing one of it’s largest markets in under 12 months, how does the board handle something like this? Can they force divestment? If so, would it even be possible if 20% is owned by Chinese individuals or groups that wouldn’t allow it? Does that ownership just get shuffled and hidden by shell corporations?
Again, not that I have any or all answers, but this does seem to be a bill that has some serious legal ramifications that are not fully fleshed out, and an effective date 7 months from today is an awfully quick timeline for something so wide reaching. I’m genuinely not sure how to feel or what would happen, but this level of legislative haste seems dangerous, especially when many US based manufacturing plants are on the line.
I’m not a lawyer, a legislator, or a corporate executive, so my knowledge on some of this is limited, but losing access to the US market would be a major failing of the board’s fiduciary duty to shareholders, so they are likely justified in taking extreme measures to prevent enough shares falling into Chinese hands where the law’s provisions would trigger.
The exact form those remedies would take isn’t quite clear to me either. Corporations have defense strategies against hostile takeovers and some of those seem like they would be applicable here too.
I don’t really understand the dynamics of the world. I asked a question after a talk at Stanford by a guy who was speaking about economics in a digital world. My question was why is there no worry about the national debt (in 2014 it was “only” 22 trillion) and why was the US openly trading with it’s closest near world rival. Both questions got a shrug from the speaker.
As a fellow “old man yelling at clouds,” who has been trying to raise the alarms of our ever-increasing national debt since the 1990s I am finding it interesting that there are so many people actually bringing it up now.
I guess it took rising interest rates (and the corresponding increase in interest payments) to make anyone care enough to look.
Wasn’t that the same argument last time around? Yet Biden kept a decent amount in place (Trade War 1.0 tariffs, taxes, etc) and just let Trump be the bad guy while Biden maintained status quo? Sure, you could argue Biden might have been stopped by Congress, but still, he wasn’t exactly chomping at the bit to reverse everything the prior guy did. Trump is the one largely going around throwing everything from the prior administration(s) in the trash, including his own.
Yes, true, and hopefully this repeats, at least in this case.
I do feel that whoever the next D president is, they will not have the temperament of Joe Biden. For better and worse.
That ship sailed a LONG time ago, my friend.
I would argue the tech that runs our world and stores our data is the far larger concern than the daily drivers of affluent people.
I don’t see the two as mutually exclusive, but the tech companies are at least located here and subject to US law, for whatever that is worth. And there is at least a history of the tech companies paying settlements for bad behavior.
Apart from sanctions and war, there isn’t much recourse against a CCP-backed Chinese company causing trouble here.
The blame (in my limited understanding) lies with upper management (infrastructure especially risky) insisting on a “god’s eye” oversee ability that they can access from their smartphone or laptop. I don’t understand how they didn’t see a vulnerability with that! Seemed obvious that some things should absolutely NOT be connected to the internet.
Key infrastructure should not be connected to the internet. Hell, we made an entire movie about it! (Live Free or Die Hard).
I can guarantee that Canada will be screwed over since I do a lot of business in Canada and the world seems designed to make my life as difficult as possible at every turn.
Everything seems personal with this administration, is someone still upset that their wife fancied the former Canadian PM?
Thousands of people fancied him. I saw people everywhere flying flags indicating that they wanted to have sex with him.
https://search.brave.com/images?q=f+trudeau+flag
And it’s huge shame. They’re such nice people.
Much like the States, MOST of us are. But there’s a very vocal minority doing their level best to besmirch our global image.
TBQ: All of my eighties heroes (and that is by no means a comprehensive list):
– Ford Capri 2.8 Injection
– Saab 900 Turbo Aero
– Rover SD1 Vitesse
– BMW 635 CSI
– Alfa Romeo 75 3.0 America
– Volkswagen Golf GTI 16v (Mk2)
– Peugeot 205 GTI 1.9
– Citroen CX GTI Turbo
I cannot imagine how far the pendulum may swing come November.
The administration is doing everything in their power to try to prevent those elections from happening, so I do believe the writing is on the wall to an extent.
I’m not sure I’m confident enough to know which way the pendulum may go, but it’ll sure swing.
I am frantically looking for a Kevlar crotch protector strong enough to protect my goods because if history is any indication, that pendulum will kick us hard in the jewels. Again.
When drowning, flail harder.
Real life lesson, that. Got carried out in the ocean farther away than intended by undertow more than once. Just relax, float on your back, backstroke calmly, parallel to shore till you can make progress towards shore. Once I ended up more than a mile down the beach, but never panicked, or tired. Humans float easily in saltwater.
Tolman my Fit!
https://www.autoevolution.com/reviews/honda-fit-review-2015.html
They need to TallMan the third gen Fit because I can’t get the driver’s seat in my daughter’s car to move back far enough.
I’m 5’7″. My partner is 5’9″. We always thank the Goddess we can fit in a Ferrari if the Fit goes south.
What a downgrade, though.
A gen2 Fit with 200-250 horsepower, MT, and handling to rival my FiST would be my ultimate daily driver.
I’m partial to my gen 3, but to each their own.
Second gen with a 6spd and 150 hp. Those are the only two changes I’d make to mine besides refreshing the body and interior.
I would want a Saab Sonnet to make 110% like that.
Swap the Ford V4 for a Honda V4 and really get some revs in there while keeping the character.
I wonder if a goldwing flat 6 would fit under the hood.
Steveston Motor Co. is actively installing one in a Classic Mini, so more than likely.
TBQ: NA Miata. would be fairly easy to do, get the drivetrain from a VVT NB miata, Wilwood LBBK, Xida Coilovers, nice exhaust, and some 15×8″ wheels and sticky 205/50/15 tires
Looks longingly at his miata in the garage, just missing the VVT swap