BTW the tank has a better forward view than the truck
Never seen a scaled picture like this before and it is shocking tbh, what a waste of fuel and danger to the community.
It’s not exhaustive but a good indicator: https://www.carsized.com/en/
No tanks in selection, I am unsatisfied
When an IFV is a sensible vehicle in comparison…
We literally have Hummers as street legal vehicles…
A Hummer is much smaller then the truck or the tank shown.
IFVs generally carry a full load, making them more fuel efficient per pax than the vast majority of vehicles on the road.
I don’t get it.
“Wank tank” is a derogatory term for lifted, oversized pickup trucks, implying they’re as big as a tank, but with the only purpose of serving as wank material for the owner.
In these pictures, the pickup truck has a longer wheelbase than the tank, and is overall of comparable size, confirming that the moniker is appropriate.
The bicycle in both pictures with the parallel lines proves that both pictures are at the exact same scale.
I can’t understand why someone would want that large of a car
It’s not even good for truck stuff. All that lift kit is extra weight and puts the bed too high to load stuff into it without a crane.
It’s also really expensive so you’re not gonna fuck it up when off-roading, though those wheels and tires aren’t off-road ready.
It’s an entirely useless vehicle that isn’t good for anything and I hate it.
It’s good for making the owner forget they have a micropenis for a short while.
Could we stop using “micropenis” and the likes as insults? There are many men with small dicks who aren’t insecure assholes.
Agreed. Moving away from body shaming, here are a couple of names for such a huge vehicle: Pavement Princess, Emotional Support Vehicle.
Pavement Princess is my go-to
deleted by creator
That’s… Actually a good point.
I’ll probably not stop using it, for the moment at least… But it’s something to consider…
Good point, I’ll stick with ESV instead.
“Smart people listen to smart people and are open to change.”
short while
lift kit = extra weight, bed too high
The weight added by a lift kit is a rounding error on the weight of the vehicle
Beds are too high from the factory so this doesnt actually matterOffroading
This style is not built to go offroading
Not artisitic
Not up to you. People are allowed to like things.
Get better, defendable arguments.
These trucks suck to drive, ride like shit, get poor fuel economy, pollute the planet (especially after emissions equipment is deleted), but most importantly are unsafe to be on the road: they barely fit in the lanes, the view out of them is abysmal, and are extremely heavy which makes them unsafe in a collision.
Aaaand block
Not to mention the borderline useless low profile tires. The bead would probably slip off the rim on a bumpy cottage road, i can’t even imagine how poorly they’d perform in real offroad conditions.
It’s also really expensive
This is the reason. Conspicuous consumption is a pox on us all.
Conspicuous consumption has been a thing for a really, really long time. But at least in previous time periods the things they were consuming at least were interesting to look at. Now it’s just mass-produced bullshit that doesn’t even look good. For fuck’s sake: They’re selling stained and ripped jeans for hundreds of dollars!
Bring back codpieces and fancy frilled collars! Bring back ornate brocade and gold detailing! Bring back ornate architecture! If you’re going to exploit us for our labor at least make things that look good!
The reason is “mine is bigger than yours”, almost entirely.
And expense, but the size and power numbers are most of what these people care about, like it makes them better than other people in smaller cars in their mind.
I’m pretty sure a lot of them think everyone driving something smaller is jealous and if they say they aren’t jealous they’re just lying to cover up that they can’t be as awesome as big truck drivers
They’re like the Ood except they’ve just got their egos on the outside
This is not where I was expecting Doctor Who references, but I like it
Otherwise it wouldn’t fit the owner’s inflated ego.
Insecure little boys generally
I know right?
The tank is obviously better for the commuter.
Right? If I’m going to get a vehicle that big it better have a 120mm cannon at least.
And come up to traffic ahead? What traffic? You just keep going!
They have cameras in front so that’s no longer an issue.
Yeah, modern tanks are amazing /s
FTR I hate this pickup and agree with the sentiment of this photo, but I feel like there’s some skewed perspective tricks going on based on this manually photoshopped drag to relocate (no resizing of anything in photo) to demonstrate.
Why’d you shrink the wank tank down in your collage?
I can clearly see the bike wheels are different sizes.
Also, I don’t think perspective does much here. The bike stands flat against the object in both photos.
It hasn’t been resized. You’re seeing things.
I think the perspective issue is that the person you’ve dragged down is further back than the bicycle. Try dragging them just in front of the bicycle by the tank and I think they’ll still look tiny.
That’s kind of the point. If you compare where the camera is in both pictures:
In the tank photo, based on that you can slightly see the top of the Tank Hull, and are looking down at the 2 service members right side that the camera is roughly in line with where the tank barrel joins with the turret. Photographer is likely standing on something, or using a tall tripod.
In the truck photo, you can see the top of the bike seat and the underside of the side mirror so the camera is roughly in line with the gas cap. Photographer is crouched.
Combine that change in height with the use of a shorter lens which quickly distorts the size (service members close and huge vs. dragged person on top of turret looks tiny) and you can see that it isn’t a truly fair comparison.
Idk what tank this is, but the M1 Abrams is 26 ft long and the F350 is ~21 with the extra seats, I don’t think the comparison is unreasonable. There might be some perspective distorting things (doesn’t look like a 20-25% difference there) but… Not all that much really.
Just gonna keep on posting this
it bothers me a little that it’s not in order
It’s in an order: height of the front of the vehicle from the ground.
It’s only in that order for the first half of the chart then it gets a little jumbled
Kinda, yeah. Looks like it’s mostly typical household cars, and then 3 examples of taller vehicles with actually better angles of vision.
Not jumbled, it’s the distance to seeing the kid after that
It’s grill height until the first kid shows up, then it’s the distance away from the vehicle at which the kid becomes visible.
Ahh, nice clarification!
oh hey it is. dunno how I didn’t notice that
i know this is anecdotal but i’ve sat up front in the bajaj re tuktuk. one can almost see the single front wheel from that position – visibility for that one vehicle is definitely closer than the 2 meters shown in this graphic.
10 meter visibility is fucking insane. How is that not illegal.
Because when laws and policies are first made with the assumption people aren’t assholes. We literally believed people will do the right thing.
All the addendums were to fix asshole behaviors.
Yeah you really gotta design your laws with the assumption that someone will try to abuse it in one way or another. You need to red-team your bills.
There really should be legal requirements for sightlines like this for most vehicles on the road.
That’s a good temporary fix but the long term solution is to get rid of stroads and get back to proper separation between streets (which are narrow, one way, and walkable) and roads (which have a high speed limit, very few intersections, and no driveways). This would dramatically cut down on the number of encounters between pedestrians and cars, while also making suburbs much more walkable and livable.
Streetcar suburbs, the most desirable neighbourhoods to live in, are illegal to build in most cities!
We could do both. I don’t see how increasing visibility is a “temporary fix”, I see that as a safety improvement regardless of how well designed a street is. Even the safest designed street is even safer by increasing the visibility a driver has. It also just makes driving easier in general.
I don’t get the problem here.
We just need some big ass bikes!
Go go gadget cargo bike
The year is 2050, Trump’s dessicated husk is dictator-for-life due to Elon Musk’s life extending technology.
Vehicles have steadily gotten larger to meet supposed consumer demand. The smallest “compact” sedans require a 4 foot step ladder to enter.
Bicycles are now at least 500 pounds of solid steel. The tires cost $250 each due to their enormous size and thickness.
It is illegal to spend less than $1000 dollars on gas per month, and all homes are required to have a minimum of three garages.
a minimum of three garages.
Which are filled with useless crap because because the vehicles are too large to fit in them.
Imagine the gearing on a half tonne bicycle hahaha.
I like to think in this future, vehicles have also become wide enough they take up multiple of our current lanes as to not tip over by being tall as a house.
America's new best selling vehicle:
Bonus, the compact car of next century:
The infrastructure would be comical.
I can’t go with the compact. What if I need to move?
This type of anxiety seems to be exclusive to north America. I live in Canada and never think about that because when i live somewhere i plan to stay there for a very long time, but i have heard people around me say they have a truck because “what if i need to move?” I don’t hear that much from people in other parts of the world.
Also, the answer is that you take all the money you saved on gas by driving a reasonable car and use it to rent a moving van for the day. You’ll still have money left over. Guarantee it.
yes exactly. When your looking for a car, it should be the best mileage you can get with your budget. I used to bike alot, but i dont anymore as i gained alot of weight and i cant find a bike that supports it. Once i loose weight ill get back to biking, i enjoy it alot.
The infrastructure would be comical.
The infrastructure would be gone
For more than a hundred centuries the Emperor of Mankind has sat immobile on the Golden Throne of Earth. He is the master of mankind by the will of the gods and master of a million worlds by the might of his inexhaustible armies. He is a rotting carcass writhing invisibly with power from the Dark Age of Technology. He is the Carrion Lord of the vast Imperium of Man for whom a thousand souls are sacrificed every day so that he may never truly die.
The tank also legally requires a crew commander with functioning communications with the driver to help alleviate the blind spots if it is to be driven on public roads during peace time. At least in Canada anyway.
Why are tanks allowed to be driven on road during peace time?
Training.
Should be laws against that
How do you even park that monster?
Dude, I wouldn’t drive that truck if it was free. 100% would sell and get something actually usable.
They look so small when they climb out I have to laugh. They think they make them look big and tough when they really make them look small, insecure, and silly.
The issue is the tank too small, and bicycles shouldn’t exist. /s
A tank does not have better forward view than a truck
Lol modern day tanks are insane, they probably have the same top speed
Tank has a better turning radius too
Bad for the asphalt though.
‘Where we’re going, we don’t need any roads Marty’
Invades the middle east
To be fair, the tank has better turning radius than everything, besides a bike if you count lifting it and rotating it. A tank can turn in place.
The view of a tank is fairly bad though, which is why it’s impressive the truck is worse.