That’s still a car.

You could own a race car that cannot legally be driven on any public roads and it’s still a car.

I agree with brookst that this sort of redefinition is a poor rhetorical tool.

Well it's still a vehicle but once something sufficiently deviates in form or function or the like it will no longer primarily be called that. People usually say they took a taxi for example rather saying they came by car even when every taxi is a car. Once that happens they start taking up different mental spots and comparisons between them start to make less and less sense. (saying you don't see the value of self driving capabilities because you can just get a taxi for example.)