30 Years Ago 65%

By Jerry Perez36%

7/8/2026, 2:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 32 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Hasty Generalization, and False Dilemma, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 40.7% saturation with 302 hits. Analysis detected 1,678 faulty-reasoning hits from 742 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 59.4% and a BS Rank of 65% (7,690 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 64.90% of the article peer group.

As I near four decades on this earth, I’ve learned that if you wait long enough, you see all things—good and bad—make a comeback. 
I remember back in 1997, when Ferrari transplanted its semi-automatic, paddle-shifter transmission from its Formula 1 cars to a street-going model. 
That car was the F355 F1, easily one of its most handsome cavallinos of the modern era, but also one that represented an enormous leap in performance. 
Ferrari is now bringing back the manual to Maranello, specifically, to its flagship V12 model, with the new 12Cilinidri Manuale . 
As you may have read , it’s not a traditional manual, but a manuale-by-wire , as Ferrari calls it. 
In a nutshell, there’s a physical, and traditionally sprung clutch pedal, and a six-speed gate with a quintessentially Ferrari shift lever. 
However, these two components aren’t mechanically linked to the transmission, only electronically. 
It’s roughly the same thing we’ve had for many years, but instead of paddle shifters, there’s a shift lever and a clutch. 
Ferrari 
Interestingly enough, when the 355 was introduced with the semi-automatic transmission, there wasn’t much pushback from enthusiasts, likely because Ferrari still offered it with a traditional manual transmission, too. 
That’s not to say the paddle shifters didn’t get any hate when they were introduced in F1, as racing legend Allan McNish told me earlier this year: “Now cars have paddle shifters, but when I had my first F1 test, it was an H-pattern, eight-speed gearbox with a foot clutch. 
When paddle shifters came in, people complained about it not being racing, and the driver not being in control with the new gearbox.” 
Similarly to the Luce EV , the internet has reacted negatively to Ferrari’s “fake manual,” and frankly, I don’t really get it. 
I understand people not liking the EV and believing it doesn’t fit Ferrari’s ethos. 
But offering what’s essentially a manual experience in a front-engine Ferrari with a naturally aspirated V12 that revs to nearly 10,000 RPM—what’s there not to like? 
I’ve logged many miles in the 12Cilindri Spider , and if you gave me the option to wheel it with a stick shift (by-wire or not), you bet your mother’s chicken pot pie recipe that I would say, “hell yes.” 
Could Ferrari have built a completely new transmission with a traditional manual linkage for the 12Cilindri Manuale? 
Yes, I suppose. 
It certainly has the know-how and the manufacturing capacity. 
Would it have made sense to? 
Absolutely not. 
Only 1,499 units will be built, all via Maranello’s Tailor Made program, and that’s just too few cars to justify developing an entirely new transmission. 
And while many will feel that’s what should’ve been done, the financial case for it isn’t there. 
So, it comes down to manuale-by-wire or nothing? 
And if most people are already used to, and enjoy, using paddle shifters in modern supercars, then why is it so hard to accept the stick shift instead? 
Ferrari 
Thirty years ago, Ferrari was the first to automate the manual transmission, giving its cars a performance advantage. 
It did it to be on the bleeding edge of technology, and to liken its street cars to its racing cars, knowing that many of its clients would love to “play” F1 driver in their rosso corsa machines. 
It worked. 
Nowadays, this is the only transmission in high-caliber performance cars and in basically all race cars. 
Today, when “playing F1 driver” is the default in any new supercar because they all come with paddle shifters, Ferrari is figuratively throwing performance out the window for the sake of driving enjoyment. 
It knows that a lap around the racetrack might be a tiny bit slower in the manual, but it doesn’t care. 
It knows that some customers are looking for that nostalgic connection regardless of whether they lose a tenth or two in some performance metric. 
When I asked if Ferrari would keep this in mind for future models, it said this would be the only car to have such a system for now. 
Call it a fake manual all you want, it’s partially true. 
However, if the options are this or nothing, I think we should applaud the effort, even if most of us will not be one of the 1,499 recipients of a 12Cilindri Manuale. 
Got a tip? 
Email us at tips@thedrive.com 
The post 30 Years Ago, Ferrari Automated the Manual Transmission. 
Now It’s Manualized the Automatic appeared first on The Drive . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.6%Jerry Perez: 2.2%The Drive: 3.0%Confirmation Bias6.6%This article: 3.9%Jerry Perez: 1.2%The Drive: 1.1%Anchoring Bias3.9%This article: 8.1%Jerry Perez: 4.8%The Drive: 4.0%Availability Heuristic8.1%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 2.1%The Drive: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.4%The Drive: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.4%Jerry Perez: 1.2%The Drive: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.4%This article: 10.1%Jerry Perez: 3.3%The Drive: 4.6%Framing Effect10.1%This article: 4.3%Jerry Perez: 1.4%The Drive: 0.8%Loss Aversion4.3%This article: 3.8%Jerry Perez: 0.8%The Drive: 0.7%Status Quo Bias3.8%This article: 7.7%Jerry Perez: 0.8%The Drive: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect7.7%This article: 6.7%Jerry Perez: 4.1%The Drive: 3.6%Optimism Bias6.7%This article: 0.3%Jerry Perez: 2.0%The Drive: 2.0%Pessimism Bias0.3%This article: 9.8%Jerry Perez: 4.1%The Drive: 6.7%Negativity Bias9.8%This article: 5.4%Jerry Perez: 2.1%The Drive: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias5.4%This article: 1.9%Jerry Perez: 1.7%The Drive: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error1.9%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.1%The Drive: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 1.0%The Drive: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.7%Jerry Perez: 3.7%The Drive: 2.6%Halo Effect7.7%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.1%The Drive: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.1%The Drive: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.4%Jerry Perez: 1.3%The Drive: 1.3%Recency Bias0.4%This article: 5.3%Jerry Perez: 0.6%The Drive: 0.4%Primacy Effect5.3%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.3%The Drive: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.2%The Drive: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.0%Jerry Perez: 2.6%The Drive: 3.4%Appeal to Authority8.0%This article: 12.1%Jerry Perez: 2.4%The Drive: 1.9%False Dilemma12.1%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 19.3%Jerry Perez: 8.0%The Drive: 6.6%Hasty Generalization19.3%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.1%The Drive: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 5.3%Jerry Perez: 0.7%The Drive: 0.9%Bandwagon5.3%This article: 10.2%Jerry Perez: 3.5%The Drive: 3.9%Appeal to Emotion10.2%This article: 0.3%Jerry Perez: 0.2%The Drive: 0.7%Begging the Question0.3%This article: 6.3%Jerry Perez: 1.4%The Drive: 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.3%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.3%Jerry Perez: 0.4%The Drive: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.3%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.4%The Drive: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 5.4%Jerry Perez: 3.5%The Drive: 3.5%Anecdotal5.4%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.4%The Drive: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.6%Jerry Perez: 0.9%The Drive: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.6%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.5%Jerry Perez: 0.1%The Drive: 0.2%Middle Ground1.5%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.8%The Drive: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.4%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 22.2%Jerry Perez: 1.7%The Drive: 2.1%Unattributed Quote22.2%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.3%The Drive: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 40.7%Jerry Perez: 13.9%The Drive: 11.3%Biased Writer Voice40.7%This article: 4.3%Jerry Perez: 1.0%The Drive: 1.4%Indoctrination4.3%This article: 3.0%Jerry Perez: 0.1%The Drive: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.0%This article: 0.0%Jerry Perez: 0.1%The Drive: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Jerry Perez: 2.7%The Drive: 2.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.4%

742 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers13%attributed speech646writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageFerrari • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageFerrari • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageAllan McNish • 50 words • 0.0% coverageAllan McNish • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageFerrari • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Allan McNish

100%flagged-word coverage
73 attributed words76% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Biased Writer Voice-46.7 ptsWriter: 46.7%Allan McNish: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+9.5 ptsWriter: 22.0%Allan McNish: 31.5%31.5%Indoctrination-5.0 ptsWriter: 5.0%Allan McNish: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-3.4 ptsWriter: 3.4%Allan McNish: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.8 ptsWriter: 2.8%Allan McNish: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.