Old Henry had it right when he offered this car in any color you want as long as it’s Black… The only Boost you’ll need with this car is if you have problems climbing in… 
Not necessarily. AI agents are trained on massive amounts of data. And, the inner workings of these systems are ‘black boxes’. Once a subset of data has been fed into the algorithm, it can be difficult to isolate and extract it. There’s an article about this on the Atlantic’s newsfeed right now about a verbal ‘tic’ LLMs have developed that is very hard to undo because each bot reinforces the others and it keeps getting reintroduced into the training data.
Turbos are a gimmick. Party whistles at each place setting round the birthday table.
Nothing beats pure displacement and some low-end torque.
I guess you want old-school technology and worse fuel economy
Stick with your drum brakes front and rear, throttle cables, 1-barrel carburetor and 5 miles of vacuum hoses
Ask AI how to make Hyundai motors self destruct less. Or ask gm why their 6.2 motors blow up in 2200 miles? Is it bad design? Lousy manufacturing? Poor maintenance?
A new car usually does not have all these issues combined.
Well I am one of those old school guys that say there is no replacement for displacement…
However, with the new school (modern day) turbos, they can and most are tuned for massive low end torque and can make way more power that a NA engine ever will… About the most HP you can get out of an engine is the Pat Musi (for example) 959cid, yes that is a 15.7L engine built for Pro Mod, Pro Nitrous Outlaw stuff, it produces 1850HP NA, a 500cid Pro Stock (NA) engine makes around 1500HP… Big cubic inch engines, but you can take a much smaller LSX platform 400 to 450cid engine and add twin turbos making 50-60+psi of boost and crank out over 3000hp…
Modern day turbos are not your fathers turbo lagging, high rpm HP with little to no low end torque turbos…
A few examples, the 2nd gen (2005-2015) Tacoma 4.0L V6 makes 236 hp @ 5,200 RPM and 266 lb-ft @ 4,000 RPM…
The 3rd gen (2016-2023) Tacoma 3.5L makes 278 hp @ 6,000 RPM and 265 lb-ft @ 4,600 RPM…
HOWEVER the 4th gen (2024^) Tacoma 2.7L (no more v6) SR5^ trim TURBO makes the same 278 hp @ 6,000 RPM, but with a massive (for Tacoma) 317 lb-ft @ 1,700 RPM… YES you read that right, the little cid 4cyl make it’s max torque at a very useable 1,700 RPM’s, not the bigger v6’s almost non useable 4,000+ RPM’s… That is real world useable low end torque brought to by an I4 Turbo engine…
Now my tune does lower my usable torque down about 1,000 RPM’s…
Now only time will tell if they will go the distance as the V6’s…
BTW the hybrid makes 326 hp @ 6,000 RPM and 465 lb-ft @ 1,700 RPM… People don’t buy the Tacoma hybrid for the better MPG, they are buying them for the massive low end torque they are making…
So the new saying should be, their is no replacement for boost… 
I for one hate drive by wire… 
I did not say that real AI does not exist, only that the situation described in the OP seemed to me to be a less capable subset of AI. As Mike duly noted, the masses have grabbed onto the latest buzz-word and now use it to describe just about anything related to computer programming…
… or for the incredible low-end torque of an EV or a PHEV.
I’m old school too and that saying came from the days with 2 and 3 speed transmissions. Speaking strictly toward the evolution of turbos, I have no argument- you said it well. One thing I would add to the discussion is what I have called the great equalizer- gearing. The screaming small blocks at the track still got passed by the thumping big block because of gearing superiority…at least until they wised up 
Now you see combinations of all these mechanical advantages to get the absolute best performance possible with great efficiency. The issue I have is taking it too far with AFM and other mechanisms being used to eek out marginal gains that result in lower long term reliability for these engines…
This old stereotype is really not applicable today. You could just delete the word Chinese and it would be more correct and relevant. Junk parts can originate in any country. Poor designs that lead to unreliable parts can come from any country. You get what you pay for- that adage applies everywhere.
The standards and rigor of manufacturing in China matches any country in the world today. Its evolution is not unlike what happened with Japan 50 years ago. But perceptions persist.
For those who yearn for the Good Old Days, along with natural aspiration and large-displacement V8s, I decided to take a look at the stats for the Chrysler 300D (the last of the 300s with a 6.4 liter hemi). This model was Detroit’s hottest car of the late '50s, just in case the younger forum members are not familiar with it.
The 300D’s zero-60 time was 8.4 seconds–which was very good for its day.
By comparison, a Rav-4 PHEV can do that 0-60 run in 5.3 seconds.
No, the Rav isn’t turbocharged, but the combination of the naturally-aspirated 2.5 liter 4-cylinder and its electric motors makes it an extremely fast vehicle.
Buddies new Merc 2.0 turbo 4 hybrid has 295 lbs torque @1800 rpm
My Chrysler 3.6 has 260lbs @ 4300 rpm
I have never gone over 4000 rpm, haha
Yes, the introduction of adding electric drivetrain motors was a game changer… I am VERY impressed with the power output numbers of EV’s, hybrid’s and the PHEV’s (my fav)…
Sadly, no more than I drive anymore, a PHEV would be perfect for me if I didn’t want my Tacoma so much… I would never need the ICE engine other than it running just to run it… If my rich uncle ever gets out of the poor house, I would buy the PHEV Rav4 for the wifey…
Since you could not be bothered to ask AI yourself, out of curiosity, I did…
It said…
“To stop a Hyundai engine (especially the notorious 2.0L and 2.4L Theta II or Nu engines) from “self-destructing,” Cavell needs to aggressively combat three factory flaws: severe oil consumption, manufacturing metal debris, and heavy carbon buildup.”
Now, if you want a more complete answer ask it yourself… 
I’d paid for all 6,000 RPM’s, I am gonna use all 6K RPM’s… 
So, did he have it wrong from 1908 to 1913, when the Model T was not available in black, and the only available paint colors were gray, green, blue, and red? (In 1912, Ford used only midnight blue, with black fenders.)
Then, from 1914 to 1925 the “black only” policy was enacted due to the lower cost and (allegedly) the faster drying time of black paint in that era.
For 1926 &1927, the Model T was again offered in a choice of gray, green, blue, and red.
Yeah I think that statement by Henry has been exaggerated over time. I agree with your comments and seem to recall the lower cost of the lamp black being a prime consideration. Seems to me it took something like seven coatings applied by brush and rubbed down for the final finish. I don’t know when they started spaying paint.
I found it interesting reading about when McNamara came in in 1946 that their cost accounting system was so bad they didn’t know what anything cost. I think maybe Henry had all this in his head or his notebook. He was interested in every penny spent so maybe didn’t share it with the accountants. Businesses rise and fall just like generational wealth. One generation earns it, the next spends it, and the next recovers it if lucky.
