Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
GUI Transportation

Touch Interfaces In Cars Difficult To Use 233

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the states-ban-changing-fan-speed-while-driving dept.
An anonymous reader points out an article about touchscreen dash interfaces in cars (in particular Cadillac's "CUE" interface). From the article: "I do not recall anyone ever complaining about the iOS interface and there have been plenty of attempts to replicate the experience and its flow of control. ... As simple as iOS may appear on the surface, it is incredibly well-executed balance that matches the requirements of a touch interface for phones, tablets and other horizontal screen devices. Changing the user scenario, hardware, or software will alter the requirements for the desired user experience as well. ... CUE is not as transparent in its usage as, for example, the iPhone. We are used to certain buttons that are located on the dash – sliders and dials that we expect in places that we can quickly memorize. In the end, you want to be able to reach for such a button without taking your eyes off the road. There are no such buttons on the XTS dash. Instead, there are some capacitive touch buttons for basic climate controls, audio volume and seat heating/cooling. Since the buttons are activated by touch, they feel the same." A touchscreen UI for some functions sounds perfectly sane (how do I set the clock again?), but ditching all of the dash buttons sounds like a recipe for disaster. I've heard from iPod users (and my own experience with my long-dead Neuros echos) that the click wheel was easy to use blindly; the move to a touchscreen made it impossible to use without looking at it.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Touch Interfaces In Cars Difficult To Use

Comments Filter:
  • by red crab (1044734) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:19AM (#40982171)
    Using touch screen controls on a car is akin to texting on your mobile; taking eyes off the road to see your dashboard or stereo controls is an inherently bad idea.
    • by Rei (128717) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:40AM (#40982247) Homepage

      I've worked in the field before, and you're absolutely right. Thankfully, there's a lot of people who realize how bad these systems are and are working to come up up with more tactile solutions. Popular approaches are things like steering wheel buttons for controls with sounds to help keep you sure of what function you're operating on. Ultimately, the car is likely headed to a system where there are multiple dumb screens networked into a single "smartphone"-like compute platform for the vehicle. The screens provide independent interfaces but can display common shared applications being run by the compute platform, such as the current route on a GPS app or the currently playing music in a music/radio app. The driver's is the same display as the speedometer and other gauges, is not a touch screen (obviously), and is designed only for quick glances to get summary information while only moving the eyes a few degrees from the windshield. The center dash can go away, since drivers shouldn't be having to look over that far and mess with things over there, and since thus it makes more sense to have the passenger's display right in front of them (requires a bit of airbag/glove box repositioning, but is doable). Freeing up the center console and getting rid of all of these independent, heavy, inefficient standalone "boxes" (which often work poorly together) in lieu of a single embedded multifunction platform provides a massive number of benefits, from more interior design options for what to do with that extra space to reduced wiring costs, reduced weight, dramatically reduced power consumption, upgradeability, security, and on and on. It's the future of vehicles. The Tier 1s won't like it, as their entire business is built on said "boxes", but they'll have to deal with it sooner or later.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by hattig (47930)

        Good post, and certainly describes the future of the car dashboard - hopefully in the near term rather than the long term!

        Certainly a single display can replace all of the current dials, and also instead of, e.g., "Engine Warning" icon lighting up, it can say "Your O2 sensor is broken". When using steering wheel functions (only buttons needed are "function select" and "home (back to standard dash display)" ("up"/"down","home", left hand side of steering wheel) and "function adjust" ("up"/"down"/"disable", r

        • by Viol8 (599362) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @07:12AM (#40982623)

          "Certainly a single display can replace all of the current dials,"

          Sure it can, but that doesn't mean its better.

          ""Engine Warning" icon lighting up, it can say "Your O2 sensor is broken""

          They could do that already in the LCD or VFD screens that most cars have. They don't because car manufacturers want you to take it down the dealers and pay for a diagnostic.

          "or voice control, the display can alter to show what you're changing directly"

          Oh wonderful, so you change the radio station and suddenly your speedo vanishes. Genius!

          "Hmm, pretty close to the buttons on an Android phone really."

          We're not talking about phones or toys , we're talking about large powerful vehicles which can kill people if the driver is distracted by playing around with silly technology-for-its-own-sake gimmicks.

          "Still, the latest version of Eclipse is available in a version for car application development"

          Excelllent , so we can look forward to some really reliable efficient java apps running our cars can we? I can't wait. Actually I'll probably have to when I'm stuck at the side of the road with a java exception dump showing on the dashboard.

          "I think the primary input has to be voice, with steering wheel buttons as a backup"

          I think you're talking out of your arse. Why would I want to have to press some push to talk button (unless the computer can figure out when you're talking to it) then fucking DESCRIBE what I want the car to do such as turn down the volume when in 1 second I can reach over and do it myself on a proper volume control without even looking??!

          "In fact, the Microsoft Steering Wheel "

          Now you're just trolling.

          • Speedo (Score:4, Funny)

            by tepples (727027) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [selppet]> on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @08:33AM (#40983129) Homepage Journal

            Oh wonderful, so you change the radio station and suddenly your speedo vanishes. Genius!

            That could so be taken the wrong way [wikipedia.org].

          • by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @10:00AM (#40983977) Journal

            Oh wonderful, so you change the radio station and suddenly your speedo vanishes. Genius!

            Officer, I swear I was just listening to the radio on the way back from the swimming pool. I don't know what happened!

          • by tlhIngan (30335)

            ""Engine Warning" icon lighting up, it can say "Your O2 sensor is broken""

            They could do that already in the LCD or VFD screens that most cars have. They don't because car manufacturers want you to take it down the dealers and pay for a diagnostic.

            They don't because of another reason - most people won't know WTF is going on. "WTF is an O2 sensor? Am I going to die?". Hell, you'll probably find people with windows rolled down in the winter because they think the climate control is broken because of a bad O2 s

        • by FireFury03 (653718) <slashdotNO@SPAMnexusuk.org> on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @07:29AM (#40982737) Homepage

          instead of, e.g., "Engine Warning" icon lighting up, it can say "Your O2 sensor is broken".

          Don't be silly, how then would the main dealer be able to charge you a £100 "diagnostic fee" for the 30 second job of plugging an ODB II reader in?

          • You can buy one at most places for around $60 (US). And a pretty good one at that.

            I agree with the speculation of why they don't include it, but for people who have no idea that an ODB II readers is, the additional information that ah O2 sensor is broken won't keep them from taking it to a dealer anyway.

            Every independent garage has an ODB II reader.

            And no shade tree mechanic goes without. Its time for the car manufacturers to come into the 1990's.

            • for people who have no idea that an ODB II readers is, the additional information that ah O2 sensor is broken won't keep them from taking it to a dealer anyway.

              Maybe not, but if the additional happens to be "gas tank cap not properly screwed on" (OBDII code P0455*), that might save the user a trip to the dealer.

              (*Yes I know that's not what the code actually is, but a loose gas cap is, by far, the most common cause of the problem that raises that error code.)

        • by Joce640k (829181)

          I think the primary input has to be voice.

          The day I have to go around shouting at all my household devices to get them to do anything is the day I no longer want to live on planet earth.

          • by dlingman (1757250)
            Who wants to yell at household devices? I'll pay a thousand bucks right now if I can get a module that does voice command -> doing things implanted in my kids.
      • > and are working to come up up with more tactile solutions.

        Working on? Don't the tactile solutions exist for over a century already? Buttons, wheels and handles.

      • by Joce640k (829181) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @07:42AM (#40982791) Homepage

        Ultimately, the car is likely headed to a system where there are multiple dumb screens networked into a single "smartphone"-like compute platform for the vehicle. The screens provide independent interfaces but can display common shared applications being run by the compute platform

        What about blind people? They have no problem using real buttons, how will they be able to use the new 'smart' system?

      • I agree...

        I'd like to see decently tactile steering-wheel mounted buttons with up/down/left/right, ok, and cancel/back
        (sort of like my beloved MX-950 universal remote control) so I can keep my eyes off the controls, and ... well, perfectly, a HUD on the windscreen, but if not that, then a decenly readable screen which is close enough that I'm never ever fully removing my view from the road, and with a UI designed to show just what's needed at a glance and not get too complicated. I think modern mapping GPS

      • by mcgrew (92797) *

        I often wonder how some engineers ever graduate college. Some people never learn! The first car radios in the digital age replaced the knobs with buttons. Knobs came back because dammit, when you're driving you need tactile feedback, not visual feedback, from controls. So now the idiots are getting rid of knobs again!

        And what moron decided to put wiper controls and especially headlight controls on the turn signal??? I've driven cars with the headlight controls there, my car isn't as bad, it just has the wip

    • by Lumpy (12016) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @06:11AM (#40982349) Homepage

      Which is why Siri and Google both are epic failures on their voice control. If I ask for something verbally and the phone returns something to display, that is a complete EPIC fail.

      And it seems that caddilac also wants to follow this epic failure path. although not as bad as companies like kenwood or Clarion. Ever try to use one of those aftermarket stereos? Their UI designers and programmers are some of the WORST in the industry.

      • Which is why Siri and Google both are epic failures on their voice control. If I ask for something verbally and the phone returns something to display, that is a complete EPIC fail.

        Google for "Siri Eyes Free".

      • hold the phone to your ear when using siri to get audio feedback instead of visual feedback.

      • Which is why Siri and Google both are epic failures on their voice control. If I ask for something verbally and the phone returns something to display, that is a complete EPIC fail.

        Which is rather easily taken care of on a car system by using text-to-speech, so the onboard computer can speak out its answers (and that's a technology which has been available for ages, the necessary hardware to do it today is as cheap as dirt.)
        and combining it with head up display (available for ages too, modern pico laser projector can do it nicely, with good contrast and luminosity, very low power requirement and very cheap hardware).

        hmmm... slowly modern cars will start to look like japanese giant mec

    • by Z00L00K (682162) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @06:12AM (#40982351) Homepage

      Even push buttons that aren't easily identifiable by touch is a problem. If you can't identify with touch you must take your eye off the road.

      And too many push buttons in a row all identical is a nightmare.

      • Keep the touch screens, ditch the driving [slashdot.org]

      • That's why, most of the buttons that the drivers needs (rain wiper, cruise control, access to information on the dash board, volume and phone control...) are either on the steering wheel or on adjacent levers:
        button you can reach and find without losing eye contact.

        The problem is the rest. But the rest is very probably something that you usually turn on/off while starting to drive and that you ignore afterward (like air conditionning).

        • by Z00L00K (682162)

          Unfortunately - with the large number of buttons on the steering wheel these days this is starting to be a problem there too.

    • by Compaqt (1758360)

      A voice of sanity!

      Seriously, I'm beginning to think that we may need a new economic model.

      What was the problem that they were attempting to solve?

      You've got all these teams of engineers and designers, and so somebody comes up with a crazy plan to totally redesign the UI of a car. Oops, did I say user interface? I meant user "experience".

      Interface is when you go to Walmart. The interface for paying for your stuff is take your shopping cart to the line. Experience is when you go to Nordstrom's. You sit on a s

    • by jafiwam (310805)

      Using touch screen controls on a car is akin to texting on your mobile; taking eyes off the road to see your dashboard or stereo controls is an inherently bad idea.

      Yup. On it's surface, in the middle, and after analysis the touch-screen in a car idea is monumentally stupid. MAYBE for electronic screens in the back for kids.... but then you have the "greasy non functioning screen" problem.

      The problem is especially compounded when your market is old, probably can't see so well up close, and somewhat technophobic in the first place.

      A better system would be an advanced aircraft like screen, square with simple large graphics and buttons around the edges that change us

  • by Mashiki (184564)

    I've got something already similar in my GMC Terrain, plenty of things are done by touch screen and with nearly 8mo behind the wheel on it. I don't have a problem. In fact, I can do everything right off the steering wheel without anything besides a casual glance at the centre console. If anything, if more of it was done by touch screen I'd be happier, there's enough damn buttons there to make me think I'm getting in a plane and I'm preparing for takeoff, there is information overload with the design. M

    • The lack of a physical keyboard reduces the utility of tablets and phones to commuter toys for me. Trying to replace perfectly functioning physical main vehicle operation controls with touchscreens reduces that vehicle to a deathtrap.

  • M-B system (Score:4, Interesting)

    by AliasMarlowe (1042386) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:24AM (#40982187) Journal

    Our Mercedes cars have a system [wikipedia.org] which uses a knob which you twist/push in the center armrest. It's far superior to a touch interface for the GPS navigator, and mp3/radio control (even video once the car is stopped).

    Stuff touch interfaces for this kind of thing.

    • Prius (Score:5, Informative)

      by Kupfernigk (1190345) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:33AM (#40982215)
      All the important stuff is duplicated on the steering wheel. If I'm busy and the passenger wants to fiddle with the air conditioning, I can direct them to the touchscreen and I don't have to do anything. This to me is the ideal situation. The passenger can play with things that don't endanger anything, I can concentrate on avoiding the BMW driver who thinks that the little propeller sign on the front of his car means that he can pull out in front of people without looking.
      • by hAckz0r (989977)
        not only are they duplicated on the steering wheel, but they are well designed and many will deactivate (greyed out) while the car is in motion to prevent accidents.

        Un fortunately this forces the driver to pull off the road just to select a predefined destination in the navigation system. Which would cause more accidents? pushing two buttons or pulling off and back on a busy highway?

        fwiw I never tried the voice control to see if navigation is deactivated by voice when the buttons are greyed out.

      • There is nothing inherently wrong with these interfaces that can't be fixed by requiring a co-pilot in all moving vehicles. Some might complain, but that's progress.

    • Our Mercedes cars have a system [wikipedia.org] which uses a knob which you twist/push in the center armrest.

      The knob in the center console was copied from the BMW i-drive system, which has been the subject of derision from the automotive press for years. Basically, it's a mouse instead of a touch screen - so you still need to have your eyes on the screen, watching the cursor instead of the road. Whenever a bad UI is discussed in any car, they usually end up by saying "at least it's better than i-drive".

  • No kidding (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Lack of tactile feedback is a bad idea when you are driving, because it forces you to look at the controls instead of the road. It's a fad, just like the days when they started replacing rotating knobs for stereo volume with a more awkward control that was linear, or even worse, a series of digital buttons. An analog knob is much easier to control. The companies pushing for an "all touchscreen" interface are pursuing a bad, unsafe design. The programmability of a touchscreen is great, and you can fit la

  • Touch is a fad (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hairyfish (1653411) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:32AM (#40982211)
    Ok not a fad, but its required application is far lower than the current hype curve that everyone seems to be jumping on these days. Touch works in a phone where you have a casual short-use, multi-function device. But it doesn't work on a desktop where you need to input data 8 hours a day, it sucks on a volume knob where you want analog-like gradient control, and it has no place in a car where you should be looking at the road. The worst example I can think of is those stupid shopping mall store directories that are now interactive touch screens. What is wrong with a paper map? It works, anyone can use it, and most importantly many people can use it simultaneously. Technology for technology's sake, it is the bane of my existence.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MacBurn11 (2430370)
      I wish it was...I already hated touchscreens when they came to mobile phones and mp3 players, so i couldn't use them anymore without pulling them out of my pocket. On my touchpad it is fine, even in that map scenario a touchscreen could be useful (selecting a target and showing the fastest way from the current location to it), but in a car a touchscreen is a possible security risk, what with not paying attention to the road and so on.
  • by Bazman (4849) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:36AM (#40982231) Journal

    My 1983 Series 3 Land Rover has big chunky knobs and large switches for everything. Engineers have been happy with those things for the user interface for a hundred years, why change now?

    Reliability? Not judging by the 'my car UI failed after 3 months and spent two weeks getting a replacement' post.

    Probably marketing (look at the gee-whiz dashboard! See its shiny goodness!) and maybe even insurance (so they can tell if you did indicate or were fiddling with the radio before crashing) and also built-in obsolescence (oh, you need an upgrade, $$$ plz kthx, no, nobody else can fix it) unlike on a car with knobs and switches where anyone can replace a switch.

    I hope these touch screens work with gloves on...

    My Land Rover does have two switches on the centre of the dashboard that I have no idea what they do...

    • by aclarke (307017)
      Good for you if your '83 SIII dash switches work reliably. My '86 110 switches are always breaking or failing for some reason. Perhaps it's the 1984 metal -> plastic conversion. I actually put a Windows XP touch screen on the centre console at one point, with the computer in the cubby box, but ripped all that out when the iPad came out and was superior to my setup in almost every conceivable manner.
      • by nazsco (695026)

        Land rovers are rich people toy. They are made to fall apartat 100kmiles or a couple years.

        It's a feature. If it really were adventure cars it wouldn't came only in auto.

        And comparing buttons such as a rover dash to an ipod... What are you? 16?
        Do you even know you have more than a radio there?

  • ... were always over-rated. I hate having to repeat the same actions on touch interface devices because it doesn't register your motion. Buttons are nice, simple and consistent. I mourn the unpopularity of button based devices, I never understood why anyone would take a touch based MP3 player over one with well designed and placed buttons. I always hate accidentally causing music to skip or change songs on touch based devices.

    • I never understood why anyone would take a touch based MP3 player over one with well designed and placed buttons.

      Because a personal media player does more than play media. Only a few hand-picked developers ever got to develop .ipg applications for the click-wheel iPod, and if you don't like the selection, tough refuse. Anyone with $1000 to spare has a chance to develop .ipa applications for the iPod touch.

  • by KozmoStevnNaut (630146) <henrikstevn.gmail@com> on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:47AM (#40982265)

    Any car interior design that requires you to look at a display to change a setting, or even worse, require you to navigate through various menus through a joystick or a touchscreen to change settings, should have been scrapped at the prototype stage.

    On one hand, we have stereo controls mounted to the steering wheel, a brilliant invention that allows you to adjust the volume, change which station or track you're listening to or even pick up the phone, all without ever taking your eyes off the road. My car is slightly older so it uses a third stalk for these functions, but the basic principle is the same. You can adjust the stereo without ever taking your eyes off the road. +1 for road awareness!

    Because the designers of my car didn't have their heads stuck up their asses, the climate control unit has big buttons that are easily distinguished by touch. Any combination of heating, cooling, vents, defrosting, AC etc., I can do without ever looking at the controls. That's good UI design, with proper tactile feedback that you just don't get with touch controls.

    But now it seems we're moving in the opposite direction. Everything needs to have a touch display and fancy animations to further distract people from the act of driving. It sells due to the "ooh shiny" factor, but should be considered a danger to road safety on par with eating while driving.

    • by Trepidity (597)

      I'm guessing it may save costs also; although touchscreens are initially more expensive, it puts all the UI into software.

  • Cameras (Score:5, Insightful)

    by backwardMechanic (959818) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:47AM (#40982269) Homepage
    Think of a modern digital SLR versus an old pure-mechanical film version. The modern design is a pretty impressive balance between keeping the old layout for things you want to find quickly without looking (knobs, buttons, dials), and adding a load of new features that you don't need very often (menu based). Car UI designers would do well to learn from this approach.
    • by neyla (2455118)

      True, allthough you need easy access to some of the "new" settings too. For example digital cameras can adjust ISO-value, you can't do that with a film-based camera without swapping film.

      And still, changing it rapidly is handy, hell I've even wished for iso auto-bracketing on occasion (like there already is for exposure on decent cameras except prosumer Nikons)

      I'd prefer more wheels instead of yet another shift-button for the existing wheel, but I guess the shift-button is easier and/or cheaper to implemen

      • by Zeromous (668365)

        You can usually change ISO on film based cameras. You can get interesting effects by mixing ISO with unmatched film stock, but you can still change it if you want and shoot 100 ISO on 400 speed film.

    • Hear, hear!

      Wish I had mod points right now, you're absolutely correct on this.

  • by LordFolken (731855) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:55AM (#40982303)

    Switches offer tactile feedback, both that it was pressed and what position it is in. You can find it blindly after some practice.

    Touch-screens try to augment this (badly) with vibration, visual or audible cues. This is fine on a phone. In the car the audible works good. But you never know whether you have pressed the right thing.

    Also touch screens are fine as long as you are on a smooth road.. but as soon as it gets rough you will have difficulty to operate them.

    In Airplanes its even worse. I fly gliders as a hobby.. in the mountains the acceleration forces are so great that you can't even reach the dash properly. Even less hit a certain spot on a flat surface touchscreen. It requires a lot more attention and concentration than "just hitting a switch".

  • Absolutely, the clickwheel was superior to touchscreens in some situations. One thing that pissed me off about the iPhone (when I had one) that kept me going back to my 1st Gen iPod Nano was that the touchscreen was, for me, useless on a plane. If I was dozing on a plane, I couldn't skip forward or go back with my eyes shut. I had open my eyes and turn on a bright screen, which was annoying both for me, and for others during a long-haul, overnight trip. Adjusting volume was easier too, though that is possib

  • by DrXym (126579) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @07:07AM (#40982587)
    Putting a UI into a vehicle which requires the user to take their eyes off the road to locate and touch a virtual button on a smooth surface is a car crash waiting to happen. IMO the pinnacle of this insanity has to be the Tesla Model S which sticks a 17" tablet in the middle of the dash. It might look great on paper but I wonder how many accidents will be caused by people fiddling with the screen and it's functions when their eyes should be on the road.
  • beginSarcasm {
    It is a GM car. OnStar will soon be driving for you, or at least report to the police what you were doing and stop the engine for them.
    return trollModeration }
  • One of the big problems in design these days (in all manners of design, including UI's in cars) is that the average consumer has no idea that things like this are a bad idea. They don't think about how tactile feedback, or how much they'll have to take their eyes off the road, or auditory input with visual output, or any manner of things that people like us (/.'s) think of. They think that touch is high tech, and therefore better (regardless of the implementation), they put form over function, they want t
  • Cars should all be required to include speakerphones for mobile phones, both Bluetooth and wired, that override the radio and pick up / hang up on voice command. When they've mastered that, they should get into heads up displays projected onto the road view. And move all dashboard buttons/knobs to the steering wheel, where they should be physical so hands can work them without eyes.

    Carmakers divert $billions and MPGs into safety because we regulated them into protecting us instead of killing us. We have to

    • by MtViewGuy (197597)

      Interestingly much of the MyFord Touch interface is done completely by voice command. That way, you don't need to even take the hands off the steering wheel most of the time.

  • Every in-car satnav I've seen has a legal disclaimer saying "dangerous to use while driving" which you need to accept every single time you get in the car.

    Do these new touch-screen interfaces have the same thing? Do I need to accept legal responsibility before turning on the A/C? What about things like Facebook and Pandora, which are highly distracting and have nothing at all to do with vehicle operation?

  • The Buick Riviera had all-touch-screen controls way back in 1986. (The screen was a small CRT display.) Consumer Reports hated it and described it as "future schlock". You can see a video of one here [youtube.com] (go to 0:20).

    You'd think that car companies could do better now, since we've got so many other examples of what a good touch-screen interface should be like.

  • I have a Prius and while I generally like the car, I hate the touchscreen interface that controls the radio, the air conditioning, etc. When we first bought the car, I found the display incredibly distracting... my eyes would keep wondering over to the fuel consumption graph. Now it's not that bad, but it's still jarring to change radio stations.

    The one saving grace is that there's a cluster of buttons on the steering wheel that also control most aspects of the climate control and radio, so you only occ

  • ...And that's the main reason I have a separate (from my touchscreen smartphone) MP3 player with tactile controls. That and that I don't wont to drag down the smartphone's battery more by also using it as a MP3 player.
  • by DCFusor (1763438) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @01:31PM (#40986449) Homepage
    I own a Volt, and it has both touchscreen and real buttons, well, capacitive and real buttons. I like it pretty well, though at first all that motion/animation and junk on the middle screen was hazardous (there are two, one in the usual spot for a speedo, that doesn't do much distracting). Still, people on the GM-Volt board used to complain that they'd hit the wrong "real" button when trying to change drive modes, and accidentally turn the car off. Gee, that only takes a short glance to confirm before you double-tap to re-map into "sport" mode, but some people....don't get it no matter how well executed it seems. I'm pretty doggone fond of this car - charge it off my solar system, cash just piles up in your wallet when you stop buying gas most of the time. The bling is fun, but it's not the core of the driving experience at all - it's the car that's great, not the bling.

Scientists will study your brain to learn more about your distant cousin, Man.

Working...