Kazunori Yamauchi on Gran Turismo Fan Expectations, SUVs, Expensive Wheels, Tourist Trophy, and More

[Dave A]

People who like to gatekeep what qualifies as fun/enthusiast/sports cars - like you're doing here with crossovers when you say you don't know any car enthusiasts who drive one despite it being presented to you - love to say front-wheel drive cars aren't fun and only rear-wheel drive (or certain AWD) cars are, and the concept that FWD can be fun enrages them.

My project car that you've randomly gushed about as being more exciting than my CX-7 despite knowing nothing about it (or apparently either of them) is front-wheel drive. So it'll be fun to see you reconcile my "real exciting car" project in my garage with it being front-wheel drive, especially as you've just proven the point...

Just to add my own experience to this, some of the most fun I've had in a car was in a modified Golf MKII around Oulton Park. The car was stripped, engine tuned, suspension upgraded and had wider wheels and good tyres. Still road legal and still front wheel drive. It didn't have a huge amount of poiwer, around 200bhp I think, but I didn't own it and I couldn't say for certain. But it was ridiculously light and handled on rails until the rear stepped out slightly which you could hold, or bring back in with absoute ease.

Then you have the modern day hot hatches with mid bogglingly good LSD's that despite being a lot heavier than a car like Rosie the Golf MKII retain that ability to corner very fast and with precision.

I would go as far to say that a car enthusiast who ignores FWD cars because, well they're FWD, is a pretty limited car enthusiast.

 

[Famine]

Just to add my own experienceto this, some of the most fun I've had in a car was in a modified Golf MKII around Oulton Park. The car was stripped, engine tuned, suspension upgraded and had wider wheels and good tyres. Still road legal and still front wheel drive. It didn't have a huge amount of poiwer, around 200bhp I think, but I didn't own it and I couldn't say for certain. But it was ridiculously light and handled on rails until the rear stepped out slightly which you could holdor bring back in with absoute ease.

Then you have the modern day hot hatches with mid bogglingly good LSD's that despite being a lot heavier than a car like Rosie the Golf MKII retain that ability to corner very fast and with precision.

I would go as far to say that a car enthusiast who ignores FWD cars because, well they're FWD, is a pretty limited car enthusiast.

I did my ARDS (racing licence, for non-Brits) in a supercharged Mini Cooper S at Croft. Aside from being a lot of fun to drive and that being the literal reason they are course instructor cars there and at a lot of other tracks, supercharger go weeeeeeeeeeeee is one of the great automotive sounds. Also got told off for going too fast, because supercharger go weeeeeeeeeeeee.

But I guess fRoNt WhEeL dRiVe CaR iS gRoCeRy GeTtEr.

 

[lqpl]

We still love you famine, but even the turbo version-

 

[Famine]

We still love you famine, but even the turbo version-

Aside from being the second rarest Mazda sold in Europe in three decades (we officially got the RX-7 as well; Mazda sold 200 in the UK, compared to 1,200 petrol CX-7s; I can't speak to LHD models of either), the most powerful Mazda sold in Europe ever until November 2022, and a Mazda 6 MPS - a Q-car sports saloon, the vehicle type beloved of car enthusiasts, and rated alongside the ST220 (which I have also owned) or Vectra VXR (if you're mad) - underneath, I guess not.

But, alongside the weird choice to post images of text instead of quoting, you also seem to have missed the point that it's a crossover that I, a car enthusiast, own and drive. That creates at least one car enthusiast who drives a crossover that @SWAGMASTER69 can now think of rather than the zero previously.

 

[Techlet]

Is that an SUV or a standard groccery getter family car?

I have friends for whom this is their family daily driver and grocery getter.

And enthusiast SUVs that Kaz brought up, like the Cayenne GT or the Urus or the Bentayga the Aston DBX or the X5 or the G63 or the Purosangue or the Range Rover Sport or the Trackhawk, aren't exactly standard grocery getters either. GT7 already has plenty of those.

There is a massive market for high performance SUVs and they represent a big part of car culture nowadays. Their omission from a game like GT7 is glaring.

 

[Grimm6Jack]

I won't mind SUVs being in Gran Turismo, as long as the whole car updates aren't SUVs. Unless you have a single update with all of the SUV rivals like the Purosangue, Urus, Stelvio, Evoque. I wouldn't mind that, after all, it's a reality that they do have a fanbase and are a trend. I would rather these over any kind of VGT. 100%.

I don't mind various car categories... As long as they aren't "alone" in the game. The S Barker is one such example or the Alfa 8C, and there's plenty of significant/lots of history cars from their eras that could've easily been put into the game.

The Ford Raptor and Toyota Tundra as well, only two of these pick-ups.


As for the use of SUVs in real life however... I'm yet to find a single valid argument to buy a SUV over any other type of car unless it's in very unusual conditions (snow for example).
If you buy a car to have like 1-2% better visibility or are too lazy to get inside a car... You have a lot more to worry about than just buying a car.

This is another topic alltogether though.

Will I find a problem for SUVs to be in GT7? Not at all.

Will I ever buy a SUV as my daily car IRL? Not unless the car market has only SUVs to sell, which fortunately, it's still not like that.

 

[VinylRichie]

Not sure if there's any mistranslation going on but this makes no sense, aside from the fact that the majority of crossovers & SUVs buyers are not car enthusiasts to begin with.

Further more, car enthusiasts who are buying a crossover or an SUV are often buying them as commuter cars, not as enthusiasts cars unless we're talking about proper offroaders. It's not that different from buying a boring o' sedan or hatchback as their daily beater. For a lot of car people, that's always been the case for a long time.

Personally, i don't mind them adding SUVs but it heavily depends on what are they adding and how will it fit the game. Are we adding in offroaders like the Land Cruiser, high end performance luxury like the Lamborghini Urus or are we just talking a plain old Ford Edge? Also, i find that comment pretty interesting as there's a heavy lack of SUVs in GT7 to begin with.




This also doesn't make any sense either. Fans don't mind adding in new cars, if anything the biggest complaints when it comes to cars is lack of post 2017+ cars.

Same deal with prototypes and concept cars, fans don't mind them that much if at all. It's just that they don't find the Vision GT stuff to be interesting for the most part.

Not a fan of SUVs, but those are for example very popular in Forza Horizon and requested, and I think you can consider most of the players of FH „car enthusiasts“.

Regarding the interview itself, Kaz said that the car creation rate lies by 60 now he said, does that mean that we now get 5 cars every month like in December?

 

[jrbabbitt]

Quoting a paragraph from above article:
“I think it’s because they take it for granted that car culture will continue into the future,” he comments. Noting requests for cars like the Toyota Chaser and Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IV, he states “If you do [only] that, it will probably end, easily. It is not connected to the future at all,” adding “if all you want is old cars that’s fine, but that will never last.”

I simply disagree with that it would never last because over the decades of motorsports there has been many countless cars that are famous to the sport, favourites of the masses, and historical examples that should be brought back to life via GT7. These cars of the past ARE the connection to the futures of motorsports, if it wasn't for some of these great and not so great cars were would not have what we have today.

Yes I also see the point of view that time moves forward and the new cars will and should be added to round out the collection and also needs to be varied in group, class, and overall "want of the fanbase"

 

[Normalaatsra]

I'm in love with this interview. It's so salt inducing.

 

[Famine]

As for the use of SUVs in real life however... I'm yet to find a single valid argument to buy a SUV over any other type of car unless it's in very unusual conditions (snow for example).
If you buy a car to have like 1-2% better visibility or are too lazy to get inside a car... You have a lot more to worry about than just buying a car.

For people with disabilities it is much easier to get into and out of an SUV than a regular car, and the high roofline and larger boot mean it's easier to fit mobility aids inside - although the higher boot floor often means heavy/large equipment such as powered wheelchairs needs lifting compared to an estate car (or a hatchback, though many have quite high boot lips), but then electrical hoists are also easier to fit inside SUVs due to the higher roofline.

SUVs also have typically better towing performance than estate equivalents. Those who tow - particularly if they are novices - are commonly advised to not tow a trailer in excess of 85% of the towing car's kerbweight (to avoid trailer-led situations), which means SUVs are more suited due to their higher kerbweights. That's not a legal requirement though.


That aside, the argument of what you really need from a car rapidly descends to the inevitable conclusion that nobody needs a car that sounds nice, goes quickly, has a manual gearbox, looks nice, has a nice interior, and we should all just have whatever the most basic car available is because nobody needs anything more than that.

This is, of course, not how it works. We buy cars according to what we want from a car, and if someone wants a car that's a bit taller for whatever reason is important to them it's no less valid a choice than someone else wanting a V8 because noise. Or indeed both a V8 and a car that's a bit taller, since that's also an option.

Quoting a paragraph from above article:
“I think it’s because they take it for granted that car culture will continue into the future,” he comments. Noting requests for cars like the Toyota Chaser and Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IV, he states “If you do [only] that, it will probably end, easily. It is not connected to the future at all,” adding “if all you want is old cars that’s fine, but that will never last.”

I simply disagree with that it would never last because over the decades of motorsports there has been many countless cars that are famous to the sport, favourites of the masses, and historical examples that should be brought back to life via GT7. These cars of the past ARE the connection to the futures of motorsports, if it wasn't for some of these great and not so great cars were would not have what we have today.

Yes I also see the point of view that time moves forward and the new cars will and should be added to round out the collection and also needs to be varied in group, class, and overall "want of the fanbase"

Again, you see the word "only", right? His point is that if you only put old cars in the game, it won't last as a series. Old cars as well is fine.

 

[GingerBredMan]

Am I the only one that’s baffled by the fact that it takes 270+ days to scan a car? That seems incredibly inefficient.

 

[Famine]

Am I the only one that’s baffled by the fact that it takes 270+ days to scan a car? That seems incredibly inefficient.

Person-days and days aren't the same thing. If two people are doing a task that takes two person-days, it'll take one day.

You can probably calculate how many people they have doing modelling based on the numbers quoted. I know I already did

 

[Joey D]

I'm an automotive enthusiast that drives an SUV. I need to because I have a family and live in an area where 4WD is required. Is the 4Runner particularly sporting? Not at all, it's heavy, it's outdated, and it's slow. Do I enjoy driving it? Absolutely. Being an automotive enthusiast just means you like automobiles, it doesn't really matter what you drive. Would I like a sporty car? Sure, like many people, I'd love it and I hated that I had to sell my sporty Volvo S60, but vehicles are expensive and we all have life circumstances that dictate what we can drive.

Since so many people drive SUVs and crossovers now, they make sense in a game like Gran Turismo. While people do enjoy driving sports and race cars, there's something definitely cool about driving the digital representation of your vehicle in the game. I love being able to use the 4Runner in Forza Horizon and it's cool to go through "what if" scenarios with it since I don't have the time, money, or knowledge to really do any of it. For example, I was curious what a supercharged 4Runner might be like, thankfully Forza Horizon could give me the opportunity to do that. I have a 4Runner mod for beam.NG too and it's my most used vehicle. I have it configured to look exactly like mine right down to the same Michigan license plate.

As for the Tourist Trophy 2 comment? Come on Kaz, you know you want to make it and I want to shut up and give you my money.

Well, these are fitted with V8 engines and race at Bathurst.
View attachment 1221348

These been racing in Thailand for years.
View attachment 1221349

What series is that? I definitely would watch the hell out of it.

Is that an SUV or a standard groccery getter family car?

Oh no! It's a top of the line peak perfomance TRD PRO pickup truck that drives on a specially prepared road without a single mud puddle!

Most people who buy the TRD PRO don't do anything remotely off-road with them, so yes, they're grocery-getters and family cars. I know people with 4Runner TRD PROs that wouldn't dream of taking them off-road because they might scratch the paint (which is understandable when you drop nearly $70k on a vehicle).

As for the use of SUVs in real life however... I'm yet to find a single valid argument to buy a SUV over any other type of car unless it's in very unusual conditions (snow for example).

Snow isn't remotely unusual, but there are plenty of reasons to want an SUV. You might need to tow something, you might camp or do other outdoor recreation, or you might need ground clearance. While a pick-up can handle these things, pick-ups also don't have room in them for kids and other stuff. I wanted a Tacoma, but it didn't make sense because I need a covered cargo area to put stuff.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Kaz's words and his actions seem to contradict each other often.

"We have to cover more SUVs and crossovers" meanwhile GT7 currently has zero of either.
"Car culture is evolving, we have to consider modern trends" meanwhile GT7 was clowned on at launch for its lack of post-2017 vehicles.
Also... the Evo IV is already in the game.

I have massive respect for the man as the creator of the GT franchise, but a lot of what he says is just waffle.

Indeed, notice also how he deflects criticism of Vision GT by framing it as a binary choice saying a minority want "old" cars, as opposed to people wanting...actual cars.

 

[jrbabbitt]

For people with disabilities it is much easier to get into and out of an SUV than a regular car, and the high roofline and larger boot mean it's easier to fit mobility aids inside - although the higher boot floor often means heavy/large equipment such as powered wheelchairs needs lifting compared to an estate car (or a hatchback, though many have quite high boot lips), but then electrical hoists are also easier to fit inside SUVs due to the higher roofline.


That aside, the argument of what you really need from a car rapidly descends to the inevitable conclusion that nobody needs a car that sounds nice, goes quickly, has a manual gearbox, looks nice, has a nice interior, and we should all just have whatever the most basic car available is because nobody needs anything more than that.

This is, of course, not how it works. We buy cars according to what we want from a car, and if someone wants a car that's a bit taller for whatever reason is important to them it's no less valid a choice than someone else wanting a V8 because noise. Or indeed both a V8 and a car that's a bit taller, since that's also an option.

Again, you see the word "only", right? His point is that if you only put old cars in the game, it won't last as a series. Old cars as well is fine.

Where do you see the word only in that quoted paragraph that I posted, that word is there but in brackets and further up in this article it was said translations were not perfekt, so if the bracketed word was added for context but not in the actual translation, it should not be there...
That's precisely why I quoted the whole paragraph so I would not be accused of paraphrasing.

 

[Famine]

Where do you see the word only in that quoted paragraph that I posted, that word is there but in brackets and further up in this article it was said translations were not perfekt, so if the bracketed word was added for context but not in the actual translation, it should not be there...
That's precisely why I quoted the whole paragraph so I would not be accused of paraphrasing.

I wrote the article and did the translation - and wrote that the translations won't be perfect. I know what's in there.

The word "only" is in parentheses in that section because it's implied in the phrasing used rather than explicitly as a word as far as I can tell - translating from other languages, particularly Japanese (I only have a high school equivalent qualification in it, as part of my first degree), is tricky because phasing often implies words that aren't necessarily said explicitly. You can't just add words to a translation if they weren't said; the parentheses (a totally standard way of making unspoken/misspoken/abbreviated words "correct" to the reader; the original Japanese article does it with "Lanevo 4") make it clear that they were not


You also don't need to think very hard to see why he's talking about only adding old cars being a bad idea: Gran Turismo 7 has old cars, and adds old cars, and has one of the specific old cars mentioned.

Obviously he's not saying the entire concept of adding old cars is bad while actively adding old cars to the game; he is talking about only adding old cars - and also says "if all you want is old cars, that's fine, but that will never last".

His point is VGT (it's in response to a question about VGTs; when they're announced people complain on social media [and forums] saying things like "I want a Chaser") engages with the future and that's necessary along with the existing and past aspects of car culture. He's saying that concentrating on the past and ignoring the future is not a good way to keep your game going.

I can see his point to an extent, although I don't agree that VGTs are a particularly good way to do that. Some are, many aren't.

 

[DK]

I play racing games to get away from the Qashqais, Sportages and Straßepanzers that clog up the roads.

 

[Chikane_GTR]

Cool article a few things.

I have nothing against more SUVs or trucks bring them on.

The old cars comment as long as there's a even split between old and new that's all I ask for.

So the only thing stopping pd from making TT2 is the fact they cant think of a controller style motorcycle wheel for tt like gt.

 

[Grimm6Jack]

For people with disabilities it is much easier to get into and out of an SUV than a regular car

Nice... That's an extremely low percentage of people. And that still depends on the disability the person in question has which makes it an even lesser percentage overall.
Yet like half the cars if not more now, I see on the streets are SUVs.

and the high roofline and larger boot mean it's easier to fit mobility aids inside - although the higher boot floor often means heavy/large equipment such as powered wheelchairs needs lifting compared to an estate car (or a hatchback, though many have quite high boot lips)

So... not really much of an advantage really in this practicality aspect.

SUVs also have typically better towing performance than estate equivalents. Those who tow - particularly if they are novices - are commonly advised to not tow a trailer in excess of 85% of the towing car's kerbweight (to avoid trailer-led situations), which means SUVs are more suited due to their higher kerbweights. That's not a legal requirement though.

Another very low-percentage of people. This however I can agree with the larger weight (and thus torque) of the SUV will help with that.
But again, a very niche thing which doesn't explain the vast amount of SUV sales.

That aside, the argument of what you really need from a car rapidly descends to the inevitable conclusion that nobody needs a car that sounds nice, goes quickly, has a manual gearbox, looks nice, has a nice interior, and we should all just have whatever the most basic car available is because nobody needs anything more than that.

This is, of course, not how it works. We buy cars according to what we want from a car, and if someone wants a car that's a bit taller for whatever reason is important to them it's no less valid a choice than someone else wanting a V8 because noise. Or indeed both a V8 and a car that's a bit taller, since that's also an option.

It really depends on what kind of SUVs we talk about really.

For example, is the Nissan Terrano I and II or the old Mitsubishi Pajero considered SUVs? Because if so, those are actually useful SUVs for being a daily. Those can actually off-road.

When I talk about pointless SUVs I mainly refer to things like literally any "supercar" SUV (Urus, Purosangue), because these are just show offs. You want an exclusive show-off car that can actually perform, buy an actual supercar. And not a fat SUV.
And then you have the more common Qashqai, Tucson, CR-V, CX-5 and the like.
And those SUV coupé monstrosities.

These are no better than their wagon / estate / minivan variants, especially not when it comes to fuel consumption, safety, driveability...

And then there's the "people" problem. Majority doesn't even take into account the actual needs when buying a car anymore and just resort to superficial things like "I want it tall, or I want it to look nice, or I want it because it's the trend".

Heck, there's posts all over the internet with objective reasons of why SUVs are not a good car category in the grand scheme of things.
EDIT: LOL just type "Why SUVs s*ck" on google and even wikipedia has an article on it (and one with very good reasons at that btw).

For every argument for SUVs, there's 10 against it... (figure of speech in case this gets misunderstood).

 

[Famine]

Nice... That's an extremely low percentage of people. And that still depends on the disability the person in question has which makes it an even lesser percentage overall.

Yet like half the cars if not more now, I see on the streets are SUVs.

So... not really much of an advantage really in this practicality aspect.

Another very low-percentage of people. This however I can agree with the larger weight (and thus torque) of the SUV will help with that.
But again, a very niche thing which doesn't explain the vast amount of SUV sales.

I wasn't explaining "the vast amount of SUV sales"; I was giving you valid reasons to prefer an SUV over another vehicle type, which you said you've never heard before. Now you have three.

Incidentally, my wife's power wheelchair does fit in her estate car, but only when dismantled. It goes in mine without disassembly, though I have to lift it, and my seats are easier to slide in and out of. She still likes to use the manual gearbox on both it and her MX-5, but it's tiring so the auto in her car is better when she's driving; mine is best for taking her places... and is significantly faster and handles better She is, after all, a car enthusiast (which is still allowed even when you have a disability, a vagina, or both) and has raced Caterhams in Formula Woman, but her last car before the Swace (which is objectively a sack of crap) was a CUV (Mazda CX-3) and my current CUV is particularly useful to her.

It really depends on what kind of SUVs we talk about really.

For example, is the Nissan Terrano I and II or the old Mitsubishi Pajero considered SUVs? Because if so, those are actually useful SUVs for being a daily. Those can actually off-road.

When I talk about pointless SUVs I mainly refer to things like literally any "supercar" SUV (Urus, Purosangue), because these are just show offs. And then you have the more common Qashqai, Tucson, CR-V, CX-5 and the like.
And those SUV coupé monstrosities.

These are no better than their supercar / sports / wagon / estate variants, especially not when it comes to fuel consumption, safety, driveability and... off-roading (lol).

And then there's the "people" problem. Majority doesn't even take into account the actual needs when buying a car anymore and just resort to superficial things like "I want it tall, or I want it to look nice, or I want it because it's the trend".

Heck, there's posts all over the internet with objective reasons of why SUVs are not a good car category in the grand scheme of things.
EDIT: LOL just type "Why SUVs s*ck" on google and even wikipedia has an article on it (and one with very good reasons at that btw).

For every argument for SUVs, there's 10 against it... (figure of speech in case this gets misunderstood).

This is all... fine, I'm sure, but missed the point entirely.

None of it is relevant. Objectivity isn't relevant. Needs aren't relevant. People don't buy cars based on the exact minimum amount of vehicle they need, or on objective metrics. The argument "Well you don't need [x] so why buy [x]" is a non-starter, because you can make the exact same argument against all cars.

Why do you need a car that can do 0-60mph in four seconds? You don't; nobody does. Why do you need a car that sounds great? You don't; nobody does. Why do you need a convertible? You don't; nobody does. Who needs a Focus ST, or a BMW M3, or a McLaren 600LT? Nobody does. People buy them because that's what they want. Why is that different to wanting a Qashqai?

Someone wanting a taller car for whatever reason is no different from someone wanting, say, a two-seat, 600hp sports car for whatever reason. Sneering at them and the cars they buy because their choices aren't your choices is not... intelligent.

If we just distill all cars down to what you need only, there'd be just one car people can buy. It'd probably be a bloody Golf.

 

[ichighost]

I don’t mind SUVs just for the sake of variety but please give me more events to race on..

 

[RedRockValley]

People who say that SUVs/Crossovers are irrelevant to GT and not for "REEL CAR ENTHUSIASTZZZ" are ignorant to motoring history.


Maybe you have issues with them becoming more popular and their sizes, but to suggest they have no place in a game that centres itself pretty heavily around motoring history is bizarre. Take your automotive culture wars elsewhere...

 

[Grimm6Jack]

I wasn't explaining "the vast amount of SUV sales"; I was giving you valid reasons to prefer an SUV over another vehicle type, which you said you've never heard before. Now you have three.

I did say other than very unsual conditions though. ...

 

[Techlet]

When I talk about pointless SUVs I mainly refer to things like literally any "supercar" SUV (Urus, Purosangue), because these are just show offs. You want an exclusive show-off car that can actually perform, buy an actual supercar. And not a fat SUV.
And then you have the more common Qashqai, Tucson, CR-V, CX-5 and the like.

But a supercar can't also haul your luggage and four of your friends and maybe a dog or two for a road trip to show off.

 

[Grimm6Jack]

But a supercar can't also haul your luggage and four of your friends and maybe a dog or two for a road trip to show off.

But has the performance and the exclusivity... which is the main purpose of a supercar.

 

[05XR8]

What series is that? I definitely would watch the hell out of it.

 

[AudiMan2011]

But a supercar can't also haul your luggage and four of your friends and maybe a dog or two for a road trip to show off.

Fast wagons like the RS6 and E63 can do that job with supercar performance.

 

[Techlet]

Fast wagons like the RS6 and E63 can do that job with supercar performance.

Absolutely. And they too are entirely missing from GT7.

 

[RedRockValley]

But, alongside the weird choice to post images of text instead of quoting, you also seem to have missed the point that it's a crossover that I, a car enthusiast, own and drive. That creates at least one car enthusiast who drives a crossover that SWAGMASTER69 can now think of rather than the zero previously.

People are forgetting the new Puma ST exists too, a sports crossover which I've seen a lot of "car enthusiasts" rate pretty highly.

 

[Famine]

I did say other than very unsual conditions though. ...

Citing snow as an example. Unfortunately disabilities don't melt away, and aren't around for just two weeks of the year (in the UK, on average).

Blue badge holders (that being people registered as disabled in the UK, with disabilities that qualify them for the blue badge scheme that permits parking charge and certain parking condition exemptions, for either themselves or a vehicle in which they are travelling) account for around 8% of the UK's driving population: 2.35 million among a driving population of approximately 29 million. Disability among drivers in the UK is thus roughly four times more common than snow.

While not exclusively the case, SUVs allow them to retain a semblance of independence and normality more than any other car type. You can put whatever in them (including power wheelchairs) and go places, without having to rely on the help of strangers. And after all, cars are and always have been about the freedom to go wherever you want and do whatever you want when you're there; people with disabilities want that too.

And I'm also unhappy to report that - as someone who has 17 years on you and spent most of the period from your birth until your adulthood playing unwise field sports while having an undiagnosed hypermobility condition resulting in the comprehensive destruction of my hips, knees, and ankles so that some days I have to hold onto the walls to walk to my office on the other side of a 25-foot wide house but does not have a registered disability - with age comes a certain incompatibility with cars you have to plummet into and climb back out of.

When you reach your 40s (if you're unlucky), 50s, and 60s, a car seat where the hip point meets your ass height in a standing position is hard to overrate. And old people are a lot more common than snow.


Also I wouldn't have got my wife's new pear trees in anything with a lower roofline. I grant you that's an edge case, but for one brief moment they were the fastest little pear trees on the planet.