Aplaintiff, who was 20 years old, purchased a new, high-powered sports car that was marketed with an intended and recognized appeal to youthful drivers. the car was designed with the capability to attain speeds in excess of 100 miles per hour. it was equipped with tires designed and tested only for a maximum safe speed of 85 miles per hour. the owner's manual that came with the car stated that "continuous driving over 90 miles per hour requires high-speed-capability tires," but the manual did not describe the speed capability of the tires sold with the car. the plaintiff took her new car out for a spin on a straight, smooth country road where the posted speed limit was 55 miles per hour. intending to test the car's power, she drove for a considerable distance at over 100 miles per hour. while she was doing so, the tread separated from the left rear tire, causing the car to leave the road and hit a tree. the plaintiff sustained severe injuries. the plaintiff has brought a strict product liability action in tort against the manufacturer of the car. you should assume that pure comparative fault principles apply to this case. will the plaintiff prevail? a. no, because the plaintiff's driving at an excessive speed constituted a misuse of the car. b. no, because the car was not defective. c. yes, because the statement in the manual concerning the tires did not adequately warn of the danger of high-speed driving on the tires mounted on the car. d. no, because the plaintiff's driving at a speed in excess of the posted speed limit was negligence per se that was not excusable.