The Drive37%

Stellantis Is Giving Away 10 Years of Remote Start and Everyone Else Should Too 85%

By Adam Ismail58%

7/17/2026, 3:44:05 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Framing Effect, and Appeal to Authority, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 33.6% saturation with 143 hits. Analysis detected 1,208 faulty-reasoning hits from 426 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 76.1% and a BS Rank of 85% (3,474 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 84.10% of the article peer group.

Many automakers provide a limited free trial of connected features on new models that would normally require a paid subscription. 
In many cases, these freebies last for a year, and the rationale for offering them is simple: Live with a convenience for 12 whole months, and it becomes hard to live without it. 
That’s why I pay $15 a month for remote locks on my GR Corolla. 
Stellantis has been on a roll as of late , though, and evidently wants to continue that trajectory, so it’s promising to grant buyers of most 2027 models across all brands a full decade of features like remote start, locks, and automatic SOS calls before they’re required to pay up. 
It’s all a part of a revitalized “Connect One” plan, which includes the following features : 
Remote engine start/stop 
Remote lock/unlock doors 
Over-the-air (OTA) software updates 
Monthly vehicle health reports 
Vehicle health and recall alerts 
Remotely clear personal data 
In-vehicle games via the App Market 
Connect One does not offer remote horn/flashing lights, stolen vehicle assistance, or connected navigation—those are available in the upgraded Connect Plus tier. 
However, anyone who buys a 2027 Jeep Grand Wagoneer, Wagoneer S, or Alfa Romeo gets three years of that, too. 
At that point, the only feature you’d have to add, if you wanted to, is a Wi-Fi hotspot for $13 per month. 
But, back to the Connect One stuff. 
For the life of me, I don’t understand why more automakers don’t try this. 
These conveniences cost nothing to run, and while obviously giving them away for 10 years means losing out on some profit, it’s an easy freebie to throw in particularly if you’re not selling as many cars as you’d like, or when prices of vehicles themselves rise to deal-breaking levels for many consumers. 
Now, when I shared this recent announcement with my colleagues, The Drive’s Joel Feder stipulated that Stellantis’ app for connected-car features—particularly in the Wagoneer S, as it turns out—wasn’t the most consistent or reliable in his experience . 
You know what they say about getting what you pay for, though, and considering the price for 2027 model-year vehicles is “free,” if I were eyeing a Stellantis model, I’d be enthusiastic to take a punt on these luxuries. 
And hey—perhaps having an even larger group of customers using this stuff will spur the company to address lingering issues. 
Have any experience with Stellantis’ connected-car app features? 
Drop a comment or reach out to tips@thedrive.com 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.7%Adam Ismail: 4.9%The Drive: 3.0%Confirmation Bias7.7%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 1.8%The Drive: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 9.2%Adam Ismail: 4.0%The Drive: 4.0%Availability Heuristic9.2%This article: 4.7%Adam Ismail: 1.6%The Drive: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic4.7%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.9%The Drive: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 20.0%Adam Ismail: 2.3%The Drive: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias20.0%This article: 21.4%Adam Ismail: 5.8%The Drive: 4.6%Framing Effect21.4%This article: 5.2%Adam Ismail: 1.2%The Drive: 0.8%Loss Aversion5.2%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.6%The Drive: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 12.2%Adam Ismail: 0.2%The Drive: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect12.2%This article: 33.6%Adam Ismail: 4.7%The Drive: 3.6%Optimism Bias33.6%This article: 3.3%Adam Ismail: 2.8%The Drive: 2.0%Pessimism Bias3.3%This article: 8.9%Adam Ismail: 9.1%The Drive: 6.7%Negativity Bias8.9%This article: 3.3%Adam Ismail: 2.5%The Drive: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.4%The Drive: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.3%The Drive: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.5%The Drive: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.1%The Drive: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 3.4%The Drive: 2.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.1%The Drive: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.7%Adam Ismail: 2.2%The Drive: 1.3%Recency Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.4%The Drive: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.3%The Drive: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.2%The Drive: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.3%The Drive: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 20.7%Adam Ismail: 4.9%The Drive: 3.4%Appeal to Authority20.7%This article: 12.2%Adam Ismail: 2.2%The Drive: 1.9%False Dilemma12.2%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 1.1%The Drive: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.2%The Drive: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.4%Adam Ismail: 8.1%The Drive: 6.6%Hasty Generalization16.4%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.2%The Drive: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.3%Adam Ismail: 1.7%The Drive: 0.9%Bandwagon3.3%This article: 12.4%Adam Ismail: 6.4%The Drive: 3.9%Appeal to Emotion12.4%This article: 9.2%Adam Ismail: 1.3%The Drive: 0.7%Begging the Question9.2%This article: 24.2%Adam Ismail: 2.0%The Drive: 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)24.2%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.5%The Drive: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.4%The Drive: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.2%The Drive: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 16.9%Adam Ismail: 3.9%The Drive: 3.5%Anecdotal16.9%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.1%The Drive: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.7%Adam Ismail: 2.6%The Drive: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.7%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.3%The Drive: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 3.3%Adam Ismail: 0.3%The Drive: 0.3%Personal Incredulity3.3%This article: 5.2%Adam Ismail: 1.0%The Drive: 0.4%Special Pleading5.2%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.9%Adam Ismail: 2.4%The Drive: 2.1%Unattributed Quote8.9%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 1.2%The Drive: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 15.0%The Drive: 11.3%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 3.3%Adam Ismail: 1.5%The Drive: 1.4%Indoctrination3.3%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.2%The Drive: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Adam Ismail: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Adam Ismail: 2.0%The Drive: 2.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.9%

426 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.9%attributed speech388writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 50 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 52 words • 0.0% coverageJoel Feder • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Joel Feder

100%flagged-word coverage
38 attributed words100% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Joel Feder: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Joel Feder: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.1 ptsWriter: 2.1%Joel Feder: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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