The Drive37%

What’s the Point of Concept Cars Anymore? We Asked the People Who Design Them 83%

By Caleb Jacobs57%

7/17/2026, 11:30:21 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Anecdotal, and Recency Bias, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 30.7% saturation with 141 hits. Analysis detected 1,348 faulty-reasoning hits from 459 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 74.9% and a BS Rank of 83% (3,740 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.90% of the article peer group.

As someone who aspired to write about cars for a living largely because of the cool concept cars from my youth, I'm sorry to report that today's moonshot design projects no longer get me goin'. 
At least, very few of them do. 
Have I grown jaded over the years? 
Or are concept cars not what they used to be? 
What if both are true? 
Or neither? 
I know I'm not alone in feeling like this. 
It's a conversation we have fairly often in The Drive's Slack. 
And when a topic is discussed so much in our group chats, we invoke Slack Law and write about it. 
(The idea here is that if we find it interesting enough to talk about time and again, then other people may find it interesting, too.) 
Well, our Editor-in-Chief Kyle Cheromcha took it a step further and made a 30-minute film on concept cars, featuring five of automotive's most influential designers. 
From first to last: Alex Shen (Toyota CALTY), Jon Ikeda (Acura), Tom Peters (General Motors), Ralph Gilles (Stellantis), and Sangyup Lee (Hyundai and Genesis) 
The latest video on The Drive's YouTube channel features Alex Shen from Toyota's CALTY Design Research Lab, who penned the FT-1 concept that became the new Supra; Jon Ikeda, former head of Acura design who styled the front-engine NSX concept; Tom Peters, the former head of performance car design at GM who designed the Indy Corvette, the 2007 Camaro concept, and more; Ralph Gilles, global head of design for Stellantis; and Sangyup Lee, the head of design for Hyundai and Genesis. 
Droves of internet commenters lament that concept cars are "uninspired," but spend time around the folks who draw, sculpt, and build them, and your opinion may change. 
Kyle's hunch that something else has caused this vibe shift is the thrust of the video, and having watched the clip in its entirety, I agree. 
(And no, I'm not brown-nosing. 
Promise!) 
I encourage you to hear from these design pros directly, not so you can buy into some corporate apologetic that blames less exciting concepts on shrunken budgets, but so you can get a glimpse into the process from people who devote their life's work to creative expression. 
As you can probably guess, it's not easy for said creativity to live in the same world as engineering constraints and safety regulations. 
But designers—at least, the ones we spoke with—make it work because they love cars like you and me. 
And after listening to Kyle's full chat with Jon Ikeda on The Drivecast, I'm inclined to believe he loves cars even more than I do. 
Got a tip or question for the author? 
Contact them directly: caleb@thedrive.com 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.1%Caleb Jacobs: 3.0%The Drive: 3.0%Confirmation Bias11.1%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 1.4%The Drive: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 30.7%Caleb Jacobs: 6.5%The Drive: 4.0%Availability Heuristic30.7%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 2.1%The Drive: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.8%The Drive: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 3.5%The Drive: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 11.8%Caleb Jacobs: 3.5%The Drive: 4.6%Framing Effect11.8%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.8%The Drive: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.2%Caleb Jacobs: 1.0%The Drive: 0.7%Status Quo Bias2.2%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.0%Caleb Jacobs: 4.6%The Drive: 3.6%Optimism Bias5.0%This article: 9.2%Caleb Jacobs: 1.9%The Drive: 2.0%Pessimism Bias9.2%This article: 17.2%Caleb Jacobs: 7.5%The Drive: 6.7%Negativity Bias17.2%This article: 1.5%Caleb Jacobs: 2.1%The Drive: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias1.5%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.7%The Drive: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 11.3%Caleb Jacobs: 1.6%The Drive: 0.7%In-Group Bias11.3%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.6%The Drive: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 19.6%Caleb Jacobs: 4.6%The Drive: 2.6%Halo Effect19.6%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 23.3%Caleb Jacobs: 1.9%The Drive: 1.3%Recency Bias23.3%This article: 5.4%Caleb Jacobs: 0.8%The Drive: 0.4%Primacy Effect5.4%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.4%The Drive: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.4%The Drive: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 10.2%Caleb Jacobs: 0.5%The Drive: 0.2%Straw Man10.2%This article: 24.6%Caleb Jacobs: 4.7%The Drive: 3.4%Appeal to Authority24.6%This article: 3.7%Caleb Jacobs: 1.8%The Drive: 1.9%False Dilemma3.7%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.3%The Drive: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 4.4%Caleb Jacobs: 0.3%The Drive: 0.1%Circular Reasoning4.4%This article: 9.8%Caleb Jacobs: 10.2%The Drive: 6.6%Hasty Generalization9.8%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.1%The Drive: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.0%Caleb Jacobs: 1.5%The Drive: 0.9%Bandwagon2.0%This article: 14.2%Caleb Jacobs: 4.8%The Drive: 3.9%Appeal to Emotion14.2%This article: 5.0%Caleb Jacobs: 1.3%The Drive: 0.7%Begging the Question5.0%This article: 5.7%Caleb Jacobs: 2.0%The Drive: 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.7%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 10.2%Caleb Jacobs: 0.7%The Drive: 0.4%Burden of Proof10.2%This article: 5.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.3%The Drive: 0.2%Appeal to Nature5.0%This article: 5.4%Caleb Jacobs: 0.6%The Drive: 0.3%Composition/Division5.4%This article: 23.5%Caleb Jacobs: 4.8%The Drive: 3.5%Anecdotal23.5%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.2%The Drive: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.9%The Drive: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.1%Caleb Jacobs: 0.2%The Drive: 0.2%Middle Ground1.1%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.1%The Drive: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.7%The Drive: 0.4%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 1.7%The Drive: 2.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.8%The Drive: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 7.6%Caleb Jacobs: 23.9%The Drive: 11.3%Biased Writer Voice7.6%This article: 10.2%Caleb Jacobs: 2.1%The Drive: 1.4%Indoctrination10.2%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caleb Jacobs: 0.0%The Drive: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Caleb Jacobs: 5.2%The Drive: 2.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.6%

459 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers31%attributed speech318writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageThe Drive • 11 words • 0.0% coverageThe Drive • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageKyle Cheromcha • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageThe Drive • 81 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 47 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageThe Drive • 4 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

The Drive

100%flagged-word coverage
116 attributed words82% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination-14.8 ptsWriter: 14.8%The Drive: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-11.0 ptsWriter: 11.0%The Drive: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +0.9 ptsWriter: 2.5%The Drive: 3.4%3.4%

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.