Vehicles have many “easily” quantifiable, and distinguishable attributes. They have distinct components, and those components have attributes too. Type of material they’re made, size, weight, etc. etc. You need to compile a significant set of characters and do the actual work of determining which vehicles have these characters or not, and then you can try working out whether there is any significant amount of nesting hierarchical structure in that dataset.
Randomly pick ten extant and historical cars across manufacturers, ten vans, ten trucks, ten motorcycles, ten bikes, ten trains, ten airplanes, ten boats and ships, and so on. Then decide on a substantial set of attributes, for example:
Wheels? Yes/No
How many? (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.)
Inflatable Tires? Yes/No.
Rubber tires? Yes/No.
Reinforced with metal wires? Yes/No.
Spoked? Yes/No.
Made of what? Wood(what type?), metal(what type?), plastic(what type?), etc.
Rear wheel drive? Yes/No.
Front wheel drive? Yes/No.
Steering on all wheels? Yes/No.
Steering on no wheels? Yes/No.
Windows? Yes/No.
How many?
Material of which it is made? (Type of glass, plastic, etc).
Windshield? Yes/No.
One big? Yes/No.
Segmented? Yes/No.
Material of which it is made? (Type of glass, plastic, etc).
Number of engines? (0,1,2,3 etc.).
Combustion engine? Yes/No.
Attributes of the engine(s) such as type of fuel used? (Coal, wood, oil(what type?), gasoline, jet fuel(what type?)
Electrical engine? Yes/No.
Fuel cells? Batteries? Solar powered?
Number of cylinders? And all the rest related to engines and propulsion.
Manufacturers of the individual components?
Who made the tires?
Who made the spokes?
The gears, chassis, engine, plates, what are they made of? How many are there?). And so on.
The more characters you use, the more significant the result you get, the more convincing it will be if you are actually right.
Something you have still not done, and you have shown no sign of even comprehending what means. Until you have actually done this, all you have done is blindly asserted that vehicles fall into an objective nested hierarchy. A claim for which you have shown zero actual evidence.
Nobody should believe you when you repeat the claim, including yourself. The number of characters to choose from, and the sheer number of different types of vehicles over time and from different manufacturers, are so incredibly numerous that you simply cannot claim to know that any significant, unbiased sub-sample of them sort into an objective nesting hierarchy. You need to write stuff down, analyze countless actual real specimens for their attributes, compile lists and so on. It would require a type of work and effort that just can’t be done in your head. And you’re clearly not at all prepared or even interested in doing.
So you still have all the work ahead of you. You have not even begun.
You have to do the actual work of demonstrating the truth of what you are claiming, otherwise you are simply demonstrating that you are not interested in finding out whether your claim is true.
You seem to believe it without having ever really tested it, and you show no sign of wanting to find out whether it is actually true. You seem more interested in advertising for what you believe, than in finding out whether you should.