It has been many decades since the first steps of vehicle ergonomics and more than twenty years since the comprehensive work of pioneers such as Prof Christine Haslegrave at MIRA in the United Kingdom, and Prof Brian Peacock, first in Hong Kong and then with General Motors in the United States. Works that documented the foundations of automotive ergonomics and human factors, such as the volume “Automotive Ergonomics” (Peacock & Karwoski, 1993), are nearly two decades old. The early nineties witnessed a booming automotive ergonomics literature, addressing topics in both physical ergonomics (occupant packaging/interior design; see Porter & Porter, 2001) and cognitive ergonomics (In-Vehicle Information Systems-IVIS, nomadic devices and distraction, Advanced Driver Assistance Systems-ADAS and driver control; see Noy, 1997). Automotive ergonomists, having already established anthropometric standards in vehicle design (e.g. H-point mannequin; SAE, 1979), set the foundations for the cognitive ergonomic standards that are in place today (e.g. ISO 15005:2004). Within such plethora of ergonomic knowledge, and with a decade in-between to allow for maturity, one would expect the majority of modern vehicles to comply with all the basic ergonomic standards. To challenge that assumption, the secondary controls and displays of seven modern premium-class vehicles were assessed. The class of vehicles tested arguably represents the most advanced mass-production cars available in the market. Their price tag is at the top end of the market (typically around £60,000), and they subsequently impose relatively few limitations to designers, ergonomists and engineers during the vehicle-development stage.