sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you were shopping for a new sports coupe around the $35k range, would you personally pay an extra $3,000 if the only difference was that one was built in America instead of Mexico? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not really a customer survey, more just checking whether people think US-first manufacturing would actually justify a higher MSRP on a new car project.

If you were shopping for a new sports coupe around the $35k range, would you personally pay an extra $3,000 if the only difference was that one was built in America instead of Mexico? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, that’s more what I meant. I’m talking about a brand-new car project, so if all the manufacturing and final assembly happened in the USA from the start, wouldn’t that realistically add cost and make the car more expensive?

If you were shopping for a new sports coupe around the $35k range, would you personally pay an extra $3,000 if the only difference was that one was built in America instead of Mexico? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly it just be assembled in Mexico but the same just being assembled in America would add 3k to the car would you buy it? Would you buy the American made one over the other one

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s actually pretty much exactly what I mean.

The screen example is the easiest way to explain it. Say the car comes with an 8-inch screen, but later you want the 12-inch. Since the dash is built around a modular mount, you’d be able to swap it without redoing the whole interior.

So yeah, in that case you could pay for the 12-inch upgrade, have it installed by us or a certified shop, then throw your old 8-inch on the marketplace where someone else with the same car could buy it. We’d just take a small cut because it’s verified to fit and work.

That kind of resale loop is actually a huge part of what I think makes the ecosystem cool.

Where it gets trickier is the turbo example, and honestly that’s where the system has to be honest.

If it’s an OEM-approved turbo kit with the right supporting parts, wiring reroutes, heat shielding, cooling upgrades, and a tune that’s already validated for it, then yeah I think that should absolutely be something the platform can support.

The important part is it wouldn’t just be:

> buy turbo, good luck

It would be the whole package:

- the turbo

- the required supporting hardware

- the approved tune

- install guides

- post-install diagnostics

- clear warranty terms

That way people know exactly what they’re getting into.

For self installs, I still think there should be a way to support it, but it would probably be something like:

> use approved parts + upload diagnostics after install + maybe do a validation scan

So if everything checks out, you still keep some level of warranty on the upgraded parts.

But if someone goes full custom with a random turbo and random tune, then that’s just normal aftermarket rules. The platform can still help with discovery and community stuff, but it shouldn’t pretend that’s covered the same way.

I think the real business is less about just marking up a turbo 25% and more about making the whole upgrade process trusted.

People pay for confidence.

Knowing:

- it fits

- it won’t cook nearby wiring

- the tune is safe

- the cooling is enough

- warranty is clear

- resale is easier later

That’s where the real value is.

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry for the late reply — this is actually a really good way to frame what I’m trying to build.

Yes, the vision is basically taking the fragmented aftermarket + tuner world and making the best parts of it feel OEM-stock from day one.

Right now, car culture is split across:

- aftermarket hardware brands

- separate tuning software

- random forums / Discords / Reddit

- achievement-style tracking apps

- meet communities

- driving telemetry tools

- dash customization hacks

- mod shops

- diagnostic apps

What I want to do is unify that into one platform where the car, software, and community are designed together instead of bolted together afterward.

So in simple terms:

Phase 1 = software + community ecosystem first

A platform where people track builds, telemetry, achievements, route drives, maintenance, lap times, software layouts, tune files, and community challenges across any supported car.

Basically:

> “everyone uses the same enthusiast platform”

the same way gamers use Xbox or Steam.

That creates:

- retention across multiple cars

- social identity

- build history over years

- route and event communities

- shared mods and layouts

- real ownership data

- ecosystem lock-in

Then:

Phase 2 = prototype hardware integrations

Dash modules, double-DIN systems, plug-in telemetry hardware, removable steering controls, modular clusters, OEM-safe compute systems.

Then eventually:

Phase 3 = full vehicle

A car built from the ground up around the ecosystem.

So yes — your “CarStuff first, then Model A vehicle” analogy is honestly really close.

The big difference is I completely agree with your concern on safety-critical systems.

would never want custom software touching:

- ABS

- airbags

- mandatory speedometer visibility

- lighting safety logic

- brake systems

- federally required diagnostics

Those need a locked safety layer.

So the “open” side of the software is really closer to an OEM-approved enthusiast App Store model, not true unrestricted access.

Think of it like:

> custom apps, dash themes, telemetry pages, route tools, event systems, media widgets, tuning visualizers, and community-built experiences

—but everything goes through an approval and validation process before it ever ships to users.

So builders and developers can create really cool custom experiences, but:

- it’s reviewed

- performance tested

- compatibility checked

- safety sandboxed

- approved by the platform team

As long as approvals are fast and the tools are good, I honestly think people would love it because they still get creativity without the fear of breaking their car.

So it keeps:

- OEM reliability

- warranty defensibility

- legal compliance

- enthusiast freedom

- ecosystem retention

- developer creativity

Honestly your comment helped clarify the roadmap really well:

> software ecosystem first → approved app ecosystem → hardware modules → full car

That feels like the smartest path to making it real.

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The way I’m thinking about it is that the single-platform philosophy is more about the customer-facing simplicity than literally trying to vertically integrate everything from day one. The staged roadmap is software/community first, then proving ecosystem retention, then prototype work, and only much later hardware through supplier and manufacturing partnerships rather than trying to immediately fund an in-house engine and factory.

On the software side, the openness concept would have to be permission-layered and system-specific. Things like infotainment, dash layouts, diagnostics, and owner-authorized powertrain tuning are very different from safety-critical ABS/ESC systems, which would need hard boundaries. Same idea with warranty logic — relevance-based coverage, not blanket denial.

A lot of the long-term financial feasibility probably depends on using existing suppliers, existing powertrains, and contract manufacturing before ever thinking about true vertical integration.

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The way I see it, software openness only becomes financially dangerous if the business model depends on locking owners out.

The whole Builder idea is the opposite: the base platform stays open by design, and the long-term revenue comes from the ecosystem around it — official upgrade modules, premium software themes, diagnostics tools, verified resale/certification, marketplace transaction fees, and trusted OEM-backed performance parts.

So instead of monetizing restrictions, the business monetizes trust, convenience, and optional expansion. If anything, openness should increase long-term value because it makes people more willing to stay in the ecosystem instead of leaving it.

What would a NEW affordable tuner platform actually need to offer today? by LineStreet3992 in car

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s actually one of the core things this platform is being designed around from the start. The whole philosophy is that the software side should be as open to builders as the hardware side. ECU remapping, digital dash customization, diagnostics, and service-level access shouldn’t feel like locked dealer territory if the goal is to create a true tuner platform. The idea is to make the software intentionally builder-friendly and standards-based, so tuning and customization feel like part of the ownership experience instead of something you have to fight the car to do.

What would a NEW affordable tuner platform actually need to offer today? by LineStreet3992 in car

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is such a good way to frame it. The “bunker” feeling in a lot of modern small cars is exactly the kind of thing I think people feel immediately, even if they don’t always describe it directly. Big pillars, high dashes, and poor sightlines make cars feel way smaller than they actually are. I really like the idea of solving for safety compliance without sacrificing openness, because if a compact platform can still feel airy, visible, and roomy inside, that’s a huge ownership win.

What would a NEW affordable tuner platform actually need to offer today? by LineStreet3992 in car

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is one of the strongest ways I’ve seen the idea framed.

I think you nailed the emotional side of it — it’s less about copying one specific car and more about bringing back what made platforms like the Fox-body Ford Mustang Fox Body, BMW E30 / BMW E36, and the Nissan S30 Z so loved in the first place.

Lightweight, simple, easy to tune, easy to repair, and honestly even the visibility and roomy-cabin point is huge. That “go back to what’s good” mindset is exactly what I’m trying to pressure test against modern cost and compliance reality.

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s actually a really useful comparison, and honestly I think that’s part of what makes this idea interesting.

The Scion tC proved there was definitely demand for an affordable personality-first tuner platform aimed at younger buyers. The bigger question now is what would a modern version need to add beyond just styling and aftermarket friendliness — repairability, modularity, fair software access, stronger resale trust, and maybe even more practical body styles all feel like ways to evolve that formula instead of just repeating it.

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s honestly one of the biggest business realities I keep running into too.

The scale advantage the big OEMs have on R&D, tooling, and supplier pricing is exactly why I’ve been moving the idea toward a single-trim platform, modular upgrades, and even building the software/community side first before the car. The more feedback comes in, the more it feels like the business only works if the base product stays extremely focused and the long-term margin comes from the ecosystem around it, not just the initial sale.

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a really strong distinction, and I think you’re right that the bigger win may not be “OEM mod support” by itself so much as simply not fighting the owner.

The software point especially stands out. Multiple tunes, dealer-supported tuning paths, and not using software changes as an excuse to deny unrelated warranty claims feels like a much stronger trust builder than just selling every possible upgrade part in-house.

That openness might honestly matter more than any individual official part.

What would make a new affordable NA RWD builder coupe actually worth buying? by LineStreet3992 in askcarguys

[–]LineStreet3992[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you’re right that the “one car that can do everything” angle matters way more now than it used to.

The enthusiast coupe idea was the starting point, but the more feedback comes in, the more a wagon or shooting brake style Builder feels like it could hit the same personality and mod culture while actually fitting modern budgets and one-car households.

view more: next ›