- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Tax by weight
No excuses
No exceptions
You trying to kill EVs?
Yes. EVs shouldn’t exist, just like all vehicles.
EVs have plenty of advantages that it wouldn’t kill them. No gas tax, for example. They should still pay for the damage they do to the road. Drivers have had far too long ignoring the costs they put onto society by driving massive vehicles.
Also, if this kills EVs along with other heavy vehicles, I don’t care. EVs are better than ICEs, but they aren’t good.
Edit: Also, taxing by weight effectively taxes pollution due to tires, which we should have. Ideally this would be a tax on the tire by weight, but that’s another tax that would need to pass. Negative externalities need to have a cost associated to them. Ignoring them for convenience is how we got into these issues to start with.
The rules announced this week would update the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), the government’s bible for everything that’s required in a new vehicle before it’s sold — from steering wheels to rearview mirrors — to set testing procedures to simulate head-to-hood impact, with the aim of reducing head injuries. If enacted, automakers will have to test their vehicles using crash test dummies representing adult and child pedestrians for the first time. NHTSA says the changes could save up to 67 lives every year.
And they expect people to stop making trucks because of pedestrian crash testing? Seems unlikely.
At least this isn’t relying on sensors or some other nonsense. Though it might be nice to require things like visibility requirements so people driving Rams could actually see the children they’re flattening.
It’s a start, there’s obviously a long way to go for road safety in the US, but every little step helps.
I swear the number of car-brained people who have told me (when discussing a pedestrian or child death in a car):
Well what were they doing in the road???
Why the FUCK does it matter what they were doing in the road. I don’t care where the parents were. I don’t care what they were doing there. There is no excuse, I don’t care if it’s the freaking freeway, if you see someone you stop. But these people can’t even see over their hoods so they have no clue there’s even someone there, so they’ve shifted all blame to the other person. It couldn’t be my fault, it must be there’s!
Fuck I’m so mad at them, and the auto industry is also to blame for promoting that way of thinking. "If you’re in an auto accident, your family will be safe. Just fuck those other people right?)
It’s America’s selfishness, just blatantly on display.
Eh. The road is for driving. Plenty of idiots also drive. Whaddyagonnado.
Improve the situation in the many, many, many, many proven ways that many, many, many, many countries and cities already do?
I watch Berm Peak (formerly seths bike hacks) and he recently did a video on a large expensive cargo bike intended for commuting with two kids.
He commented on the high price and safety features, and the large amount of time and resources spent on design to make it safe for anyone you might run into (as it’s large, unwieldy, and heavy as hell compared to normal bikes) and he in passing comments “but no-one wants to spend on keeping anyone else safe” and my jaw just dropped.
Everyone. Everyone wants to spend on that. Everyone who isn’t a goddamn psychopath who ignores the fact that you or someone you care about is just as likely to be on either end of such an accident.
Is that really just the default way to think in the states? I’ll spend on my survival, but no-one elses?
Welcome to the soul rot that has infected American culture
I used to be more optimistic and would have said no before, but Trump really embodies the collective selfishness and fear that half of my country has. Half of our country really is “I got mine” thinkers.
Yes that is the default mindset. My rights and liberties first before anyone elses, anyone who can’t afford their rights and liberties doesn’t deserve them.
The 93 ford ranger was perfect. I hate these fucking abominations we have now and I think industry grossly underestimated the demand for a sensible pickup
Yep, first gen Tacoma is perfect in my mind. The new tacos are bigger than the F150 was! Why!? It’s ridiculous.
Why!?
Because bigger vehicles can simply ignore various regulatory and efficiency requirements.
And no modern truck owners remember those little trucks. They think being a truck owner means you have to have the biggest most ridiculous truck out there. Personally, I’d love it there was a smaller ranger sized EV truck. I’d buy one of those tomorrow if they gave up on massive monsteosities
I’d buy the shit out of a plugin hybrid the size of a 93 ranger
Sorry, in America they tell you what you want, and they’re telling us you don’t actually want that. (And don’t you dare try to import one from Europe or somewhere else, they made that illegal)
Someone in my city drives one of those tiny little Japanese pickups and I’d kill for one of those honestly.
Look up the Kei trucks. There are a lot of them available if you’re willing to figure out transportation/pickup/delivery after import.
Take something the size of an original Ford Ranger, throw in a two-cylinder diesel generator and a battery pack and make it a series plugin hybrid.
That’s pretty homophobic
It’s hard to let people know you’re looking if they can’t see/hear you
What is “homophobic”? Or are you just looking for reasons to use that word?
They think being a truck owner means you have to have the biggest most ridiculous truck out there.
The old Ranger wasn’t a sensible pickup though. Those things are for people that want a pickup shaped object but don’t want a full size.
If a 4x8 sheet won’t fit flat in the bed it’s just a toy designed to carry other toys around.
What percentage of F150s have the maximum bed size for that vehicle which is 8 ft?
How much drywall do you think has been moved with a pickup with a box shorter than 8 ft?
What percentage of pickup trucks do you see without a single paint scuff in the box?
It’s not the size of a truck that makes it a toy.
No clue.
Sheets fit in the bed of a 6.75’ bed with the tailgate down. I prefer the old short beds for city work because they are far easier to park.
I have a Maverick. Sheet goods fit perfectly well in the short bed with the tailgate in the halfway down position. The guys at the lumberyard are always skeptical when I pull up and then really impressed when I drive off with a load of drywall in my “toy truck”.
On top of the wheelwells? So no tools on top? Toy truck.
You know most modern trucks have a smaller bed than that little truck? Modern trucks are just minivans for insecure men.
I had a 93 Ranger and I miss it a lot. It had an aftermarket moonroof that also leaked like a sieve, but man I loved that little truck. Good size for actual utility.
I rolled it years ago, unfortunately.
I have a 95 driving it til the wheels fall off
@Windex007 @scrubbles
My dad had a white '68 Ford Ranger. I loved that truck. He later put a camper on it and drove us all around the contiguous Western U.S.Not sure why you’d lie about something like this? Not exactly obscure knowledge that the Rangers first model year was 1983. Before that it was a trim package, if that’s what you mean that’s still a full size F-series.
The 93 Ranger had a bigger cargo bed than most large pickups today, too.
The full size pickups today have horrible sight lines. I own two pickups, one is a '95 F150 and one is a '05 Super Duty. Even the 10 years between the two of those trucks brought a huge difference in sight lines, but surprisingly the situational awareness is better in the '05. Harder to see a child in front of the truck but much easier to see anything to the sides and rear. Camera and backup sensors on the '05, in addition to MUCH better mirrors.
I’ve driven a modern pickup and it “feels” as big as it is. I think the hood height was
nearlyover 4ft. Situational awareness is OK in them because of good mirrors and a camera but that front profile is insane.
I just went and measured the front of my F250 and was surprised it was 49in tall. That’s 1.2m+. The '22 I drove is only a few inches taller but it sure seemed bigger. Maybe it had a lift in the front, I don’t know.
quick edit: that drawing seems a little off though, the LOS drawn assumes the driver sights directly down the hood and being almost 6’ tall my eyes view the side window about 3in below the top frame of the door. I can’t go check how far out my first view of the ground is because my driveway is sloped.
If there isn’t a weight limit, nothing else matters. Limit truck to <3500lbs, ban cameras and require ~130 degree unobstructed view for all mirrors.
But that also mean truck can’t electrify. Tesla Model 3 weight around 3500lbs, a Ford F150 Lightning weight 6500lbs. That’s mean a “small” pickup truck like Nissan Navara/Frontier, which weight around 3500lbs, when turned into electric vehicle it will be around 4900lbs. A toyota Hilux 1998 also weight around 3600lbs.
It can electrify, it just can’t be carrying around batteries that will give it 300miles of range. A ford Ranger from 1990 weighs <3000lbs.
Yeah, but it would be pointless without the range considering these thing are made for off-road.
“Pointless” god I wish we lived in that society.
Off-road vehicles don’t need to be registered or conform to any safety standards so if you are designing something for off-road use, none of this stuff matters, you just can’t ALSO drive it on-road.
I get the hate on trucks because they’ve become a luxury item/status symbol instead of a vehicle used for its utility. Arbitrary weight limits are probably not the best way to handle it though. Cars are heavier than I think you realize. Safety requirements and other government mandates have driven the average vehicle weight up over time too.
Every mini van on the market is over 4000 some pushing 5000. Most mid-sized sedans are over 3500 and probably all full sized. Mazda 3 is a compact sedan and tops out at ~3400. My mother’s 2019 Lincoln Continental is admittedly on the larger side and weighs in at ~4500 and the entire car is under 5 feet tall. Doing a quick search on a 2024 Tesla model 3 is 3862-4054 pounds. Ram Promaster 1500(think plumber van) start at about 4500 and go up. That doesn’t account for all the stuff those ultimately end up holding too. The sight lines in front of you on those vans are impeccable though.
Cars didn’t used to weigh that much and the safety regulations can still exist, it just requires car manufactures to fix their safety issues without adding more weight ultimately making everyone less safe.
A 1990 Ford Ranger weighed <3000 lbs.
A 90’s Ranger didn’t even have airbags let alone side curtain airbags. One of my 2012 cars had seven airbags just for the driver. Also ridiculous stuff like backup cameras being mandatory since May 1, 2018 which is why every car has a screen in it now. All that stuff has just been slowly adding weight a bit at a time.
NHTSA keeps changing/adding crash tests. So if manufacturers want to keep those 5 star ratings then they need to reinforce or redesign the chassis to obtain it which can add a non trivial amount of weight as well.
One of my vehicles they welded in ‘crash bars’ in front of and behind the front tires to improve its crash testing.
I’m of the opinion that vehicle registration should be by mass. I think that adding extra for use case and for expected hauling is also reasonable. We can allow the gas tax to slowly fade into a carbon tax while making registration be both the way we fund roads and a progressive tax on those who do more damage to them. We can even have different vehicle categories with different weight costs for incentives.
@PowerCrazy @return2ozma I like where you are heading. Probably better to define being able to see a set of targets around the vehicle. Easier to define, harder to game.
I wouldn’t ban cameras, but I would require the visibility be obtained without them. Cameras can give vision that is useful and implausible without them.
I wouldn’t ban cameras, but I would require the visibility be obtained without them. Cameras can give vision that is useful and implausible without them.
Yea this is probably the better play. But too often with modern cars they use the existence of the camera’s to make the sight lines impossibly dangerous (the infamous front facing camera on the f150 for example).
Ban cameras? Like, back up cameras?
I like the title, I like the framing, but unfortunately it’s a nothing burger. They need to close the SUV/truck loophole and regulate vehicle size directly.
Why are trucks so popular in the us? What do you guys need to often put in the back?
Nothing. But you never know…
Meanwhile in Europe:
How am I ever going to carry a couch on my bicycle? Haha, silly me. I don’t carry couches. (Or I’d just spend a whooping 80 euros to rent a van for a few hours)
There is a lot of ego to it as well. You aren’t a “real man” if you don’t drive a truck. People assume they see a truck, thats a hard working real man right there, even if it is just some guy driving to his desk job that doesn’t need 500+ hp and 4000lbs towing capacity. I can’t remember which company but a truck manufactuer surveyed people with pictures of men next to cars or trucks and the truck scored higher in things like resourcefulness, trust, reliability. And when the exact same guy is pictured next to cars, he scored lower in the same categories. Even some women get trapped in this ego thinking they are tough with stickers like “silly boys, trucks are for girls”. Trucks aren’t for a specific gender, they are for hauling bulky loads or towing. .
Which is funny because if you need an accessory of some sort to establish your identity, that feels less real to me than someone who is comfortable with themselves without any accessories.
I really hate how many people see insecurity and think, “that’s what strength looks like!”
There are many reasons: marketing propaganda, sexism, insecurity, politics, and selfishness. Americans are seemingly very susceptible to propaganda and marketing has convinced people that the type of products and brands we consume define who we are.
Sexusm. They have tricked us into believing that small cars are feminine and that huge trucks are for manly, rugged, outdoorsy types.
Insecurity. Even if someone realizes that judging people based on what vehicle they drive is stupid, lots of people are very insecure and are worried other people will judge them for driving a small car.
Politics. Leftists advocated for smaller cars because they care about urbanism, pedestrian fatalities, and the environment. In response, conservatives have turned large tank sized vehicles in a conservative political statement.
Selfishness. Engineering can only do so much to cheap physics so bigger / heavier vehicles are a little safer for the passengers of the larger vehicle when crashing into smaller cars but at the cost of the safety of the smaller car. It is far from a 1 to 1 exchange, large vehicles greatly increase the traffic fatality rates, but large pickup owners don’t give a shit about the safety of others. They have no love for their fellow countrymen which means they have no love for their country.
I agree with you and I would like to add a couple points:
Safety: a lot of people buy big vehicles to feel like they have a chance of surviving a crash with another big vehicle. Not saying this is good, but it is a thing that happens and it feeds the vicious cycle.
Regulation: I know these types of threads tend to lean into “regulation good” but let’s not forget that regulation caused (or a big part of it) this whole mess in the first place. Actually a couple of them: the chicken tax is a big one (a 25% tariff on imported light trucks), and the other one is the way the minimum fuel mileage requirements are calculated. Basically, you can break the math of the EPA fuel mileage requirement by making the vehicle longer. Unfortunately this looks aesthetically stupid, so it makes the proportions correct they have to be bigger in every other direction too. This mileage math is effectively what killed the mini trucks that used to be so popular like the S10, and smaller versions of the Tacoma and Ranger.
@Elkenders @return2ozma their egos
It’s the ultimate result of Society being nothing more than Consumer Society: weak minded individuals after a lifetime of being made to feel inadequate by Adverts are led by Adverts into feeling (all car adverts nowadays use techniques from Psychology to manipulate people at a subconscious level, not logic to convince them, so the push to buy comes via what people feel about certain products) that an oversized car will make them look important and irresistible to the opposite sex.
In places were people feel that Society (the part that exists beyond just the Consumer bit) frowns on people running around with big trucks it’s harder for Adverts to induce such feelings.
Mind you, living in the Europ I’m pretty happy that at this point in time the impression that people here have of America is pretty low, so people don’t have as much the “I want to be like an American” effect that would otherwise push “American practices” (what people think they are from what they see on TV) here.
Mind you, living in the Europ I’m pretty happy that at this point in time the impression that people here have of America is pretty low, so people don’t have as much the “I want to be like an American” effect that would otherwise push “American practices” (what people think they are from what they see on TV) here.
For now. Right wing politicians are working tirelessly to make Europe like the US and every election they win will slowly ratchet Europe close to becoming a brain washed consumerist society
Honestly, I think station was wagons could make a big come back if they designed them right. Make them super practical and utilitarian, I could see younger generations going for them instead of SUVs.
@SuperCub @Elkenders To most the size of an SUV is the point.
Traditional station wagons just can’t compete. Being classified as a car instead of a light truck means they have to adhere to stricter fuel economy and safety standards. They end up costing more, and ultimately that’s what killed them.
With that said, the newer crop of low-roofed crossovers are essentially station wagons now, but they are still truck-like enough with their big tires and jacked up suspensions to classify as light trucks.
I don’t remember exactly but it’s something to do with new
safety and emissionsfuel efficiency regulations brought about in the 90s(?) that would fine manufacturers who didn’t meet the new standards. “Light trucks” such as the F150 were exempt so manufacturers started pushing those hard as the fashionable choice.Fast forward 30 years, the regulations haven’t changed, and here we are. There’s a good video about it somewhere…
Yeah here we go: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo
Ah very interesting thanks!
Since the 1950’s, particularly in rural america, it’s been common for a family to have 1 truck and 1 car. Cars have become less desirable in these areas over time. Everyone wants a truck. There’s more to it in rural areas like where i live. Our roads suck. It rains a lot. The closest town is an hr away. I use my truck every day to haul, tow, and get to where i need to be. Couple that with i’m a big guy. And i’m not young. Getting in and out of an average car is a challenge. Riding in an average car for more than a short time is torture. I never asked for trucks to get huge. I never asked for 400+ hp. I would gladly trade these big, tall trucks for trucks the size they were in the 80’s with enough power to pull my trailer and get decent economy. But for some reason that’s not an option. I just bought a new Ram with the base 3.0 turbo. It’s very impressive. We took a 1k mile trip and averaged 22mpg. That’s impressive as well. But i remember an Isuzu Pup diesel in the 80’s getting 38mpg. It was slow. It smelled like diesel. But it ran for 300k miles needing nothing but a clutch. There were some futile attempts recently at putting diesels back in 1/2 ton trucks, but come on. Toe nail clippings for engines that had zero reliability across the board. I guess for me, the summary is I have to have a truck. I can’t afford 2 vehicles. There are many people in this country in the same situation. I do think there’s a market for economical trucks over these modern monsters but until manufacturers start listening, we’re stuck with what we have. On the other hand, all vehicles are doing better with their safety systems. From a pedestrian perspective, that is going to be a bigger help than anything. It doesn’t matter what a person is driving if they are not paying attention.
I’m a compact sedan kind of guy, but man a truck would be nice during particularly snowy days trying to get where I’m going before it gets too much that the car gets stuck.
Get snow tires. It makes a HUGE difference. There have been so many times that a large pickup was spinning out on a hill of ice while my tiny compact car went past them.
I am probably going to break down and get truck again. Most uses people give are bs. A tarp and car will let you haul 90% of what you want. Chicken, dog, cat, pig feed. Car is fine. All of those animals too (though 300 lb pot belly pushes the limits).
If you stick it out the back of the trunk you can haul long lumber. You can load a surprising amount of rocks and concrete too.
You are probably loading and unloading appliances that often. Or furniture.
If it wasn’t for the travel trailer I would suffer through it, but its the straw that broke the cammals back. Renting is just such a pain in the dick too. I would rather have a piece of junk desiel that I am tinkering with the schedule a day to pick up a truck to race around trying to use it before I run out time.
If I need to clear brush. I just want to go do it. If I need rocks I just to get a load. Friend or family moving I can just bring the truck.
Don’t get me wrong I hate a lot of the truck out there. I don’t need a new house worth of truck to move junk around.
I just want a god damn little single cab S10 style truck with a full size bed. I don’t need passenger space, I don’t need crazy ground clearance, I don’t need huge tires. I need room for furniture and lumber that my 5’3 ass can get in and out of without having to climb. Bonus points if it’s electric. And no a Maverick is not just as good.
My literal dream. I’ve actually been looking at Edison Motors retrofit kit for hybrid diesel electric to try and revive a junker rather then selling two kidneys for the down payment on a truck I couldn’t afford to get scratched.
Maybe the size of the country has an impact. Does the average person need to buy a lot of animal feed?
Its about a third of the people I know. Stuff like Chewy help but then we can’t buy it from the farmers co-op.
Farmers owning a truck makes sense (although I hate how blocky and dangerous the hoods are), but what about all the tech bros and finance bros who drive giant pickups? I swear half of the men who work white collar jobs and live in the suburbs drive giant pickups and SUVs these days
I didn’t see the community and was already primed to say no half measures! abolish cars! and instead have functioning public transport (and if elon musk sabotages it like he did with california high speed rail he gets launched into the mars on his own garbage shuttle). Then there can also be housing layouts that aren’t atomizing and reactionary social-engineering projects to facilitate white flight and capital extraction from cities like the hellscape that is the suburbs; where people are conditioned to give money to the chemical/chemical-weapons companies who invented the concept of “lawn weed” and to fossil fuel industries to pollutively wastefully mow and always forever re-mow their sterile mediocre lawns so theyre ‘too busy [with pointless busywork] to be a communist’
Lawns are the one of the most watered crop in america, and we don’t even eat them. Lawns should be completely banned from places with water shortages as a start and replaced with drought resistant native plants.
Yes! go off!
Pedestrians: “can you please make your cars a little safer for us?”
US carmakers:
When you snort so much iron oxide that the only notes you have on car design is "bigger! BIGGER! ADD SPIKES! "
Too low to the ground, they might be able see a child in front of them.
Good point, how about this?
Much better
“Just walk away and we will spare your lives. Just walk away”
The easy way would be to repeal the chicken tax.
new culture war just dropped: them femocrats is going to take away your truck…
God I wish.
Why Americans always complain about gas prices, then go ahead and choose the most inefficient vehicles?
Like with so many things, especially in the US, it seems to me the people complaining most loudly about it are the ones doing everything they can to make the problem worse for themselves.
We like to believe our societies are a calm, rational place of logical decision makers.
We’re actually a rowdy bunch of anachronistic apes, with a chronic case of the hypocrititis.
There’s like 340 million of us. Lots of us are idiots. Some aren’t.
Finally some sense in the regulators. Something like the Hummer EV and Cybertruck shouldn’t be legal.
Personally, I have to haul heavy loads across the whole country.
You know what would work better for that though?
Trains. High speed electric trains.
I do not like having to pay off this expensive ass truck.
Never in its 50-plus years in existence has the regulator issued new rules for automakers requiring them to change their vehicle designs to better prevent pedestrian fatalities.
Found the problem
Truck / SUV drivers like : “What pedestrians???”
I walked past a fcking ram the other day and i could barely see over the bonnet.
I’m a grown fucking woman at 170cm, well above the average.
