Here in the USA I call driving DWTS, no not Dancing With The Stars, Driving With The Stupids, I shudder to think they could be airborne, BAD IDEA. They would be landing on a house near you.

And it's still bigger than some F-series 12th generations, yet has a piddly 2 seats, and virtually no luggage space.

Flying cars or drivable planes just don't look nice in either mode although I would say this is the best of the bunch so far. A bit of commentary accompanying the video would have been nice, and some detail re take off and landing speeds, cruise and max speeds, fuel usage/endurance, MAUW and so on. Ah well, we shall see...

I agree, some specs would be nice.
On the dreaming side, what if the wings could be partially swept back in flight for a high speed mode? It worked well for the F-14 and the B-1.

Given that it is designed to use automotive grade gasoline, what would it operating ceiling be?

That's pretty cool, but how would it ever pass car safety tests such as the front bumper impact test when it doesn't appear to have a bumper? Still, the look on other people's faces would be priceless as you tool down the road in this thing.
I smiled at the statement that it is certified by "the Slovak Federation of Ultra-Light Flying". Sounds like something along the lines of Dilbert's Elbonia connection...

James Smith, the two aircraft to which you refer use high speed designs that are a compromise between lift and aerodynamic efficiency. At the low speeds the convert-a-cars will operate, lift is more important. and fixed wings Swept wings and their operating machinery are heavier and more complex giving fixed wings the advantage in general aviation.

I prefer the Pal-V One. http://pal-v.com/the-pal-v-one/

This is utterly impressive. Orville, Wilbur and Henry (Ford) would be pleased.

I like the technology but fear the consequences. We have so many nuts on the roads - imagine in the air too. *shudder*