6 ms·

I don’t mean this rudely — have you been around many trucks recently? They’re fucking massive. The newer F-150s, while maybe not 6ft tall at the front, easily o

by ketzo 5y ago

I don’t mean this rudely — have you been around many trucks recently? They’re fucking massive. The newer F-150s, while maybe not 6ft tall at the front, easily obscure a child or a short person. I have personally seen extremely close calls at gas stations/grocery store parking lots multiple times because of this.

giantg2 5y ago
"The newer F-150s, while maybe not 6ft tall at the front, easily obscure a child or a short person." Which is not what the parent is claiming. Edit: people are really downvoting factual statements now?
- ketzo 5y ago
  Okay, so new trucks don’t exclusively have a hood height of 5’9”+. I still think the broader point of “it’s really hard to see people, even adults, right in front of you” is 1) demonstrably true 2) extremely scary.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    “it’s really hard to see people, even adults, right in front of you” Then they should say that instead of sensationalizing it. "1) demonstrably true" Do you have some evidence of this? 1) If you have awareness, you should see objects before they move into any blind spot. 2) Driver height in relation to the hood height plays an important role in visibility, which means that you can see things shorter than the hood height depending on the distance from the vehicle. 3) Many new larger trucks come with 360 degree cameras now, so the blind spots are not an issue.
    - jkelleyrtp 5y ago
      I own a Dodge Ram 2500 and I can say that it's much harder to see things in front of you simply because the vehicle is so large. It's tough to park, tough to take through a small town, and hard to see out of in short-sight conditions. But it hauls a trailer, so it has a purpose.
      - throwawaysea 5y ago
        But do you really need to see things immediately in front of you? How would they even get there if they didn’t approach you from the front or sides, where you can see them? Most new vehicles also have sensors warning you of objects behind or in front of you, that beep loudly and warn you.
        jkelleyrtp 5y ago
        My truck does not have those sensors, and it is still large. When driving through downtown, kids and people like to jump out from between parked cars. That’s hard enough to catch in a sedan. I could definitely see myself accidentally hitting a pedestrian and not even noticing it. I would say yes, you need to see things immediately in front of you. I’m not sure how that’s even a question. Beeps and sensors don’t save you in busy pedestrian environments, and being aware of your surroundings is absolutely crucial.
        giantg2 5y ago
        "I could definitely see myself accidentally hitting a pedestrian and not even noticing it." Is this more hyperbole? I don't know how you could not notice hitting someone. You should feel/hear it, even for animals or objects way smaller than a person. "I would say yes, you need to see things immediately in front of you. I’m not sure how that’s even a question." How do you handle the normal blind spots in all cars? You handle this the same way - mental object tracking and awareness. It doesn't matter what car you're in, you can't see the pavement immediately in front of the tires, yet you can still avoid potholes. Edit: why downvote?
        jkelleyrtp 5y ago
        Failure to check blind spots is the cause of many accidents on the road. They’re called blindspots for a reason. Large trucks, like mine, have blindspots closer and lower. I can mentally track as much as possible, but if a small person leaps out from between a parked car, they’re likely ending up getting squished. In a smaller car, lower to the ground, you can see small people without having to peer over the sides of the vehicle. Even after years of driving it, I still have issues time to time with the size of the truck and curbs. The reality is: the larger the vehicle, the more space you have to watch out for, and the greater the chance that you mess up and hit something. I’m glad you feel confident driving your truck, but you can’t deny the reality that bigger trucks are more challenging to manage in pedestrian environments.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >Edit: people are really downvoting factual statements now? Only when they are both factual and ideologically inconvenient. You're free to state all the popular facts you want. If you want to argue the minority position on any given topic around here you have to craft logic traps so that people can't downvote you without downvoting something that would be ideologically indefensible to downvote.
igetspam 5y ago
Except they have front, rear and side cameras. Our new F150 has 360° of visibility at low speeds. There are also proximity sensors that tell me if something outside the field of vision is coming my way from behind. It's also very liberal with the automatic braking, trying to stop in situations I'd barely slow for. And the automatic cruise changes based on GPS and stored speed limit data. It's by far the safest car I've ever driven, for both my family and those around us. My friend's new Chevy 3500 has twice as many cameras as our F150. We both tow heavy things (I move large pets and rescue animals in various trailers.) and my bed is often filled with dirt or rocks. What are you driving and how many pedestrian detection and collision avoidance systems does it have?
- ineedasername 5y ago
  If there was going to be a regulatory move in this space, it's proximity & awareness systems and better visibility that seem to make more sense, than a tax of some kind. These will actually contribute to safety, while a tax would at best be a very minor and indirect influence on market forces.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Generally, trucks do get taxed more through higher registration fees, and indirectly through fuel taxes.
    - ineedasername 5y ago
      That's all pretty irrelevant because most of that ends up going to various sorts of highway maintenance or general operating budgets for states, not making cares safer. Regardless, let's see how that plays out in actual taxes: Where I'm at the difference between registering an F150 and a Honda Accord is about $20. (personal, non commercial) Looking at California it's not much different. In Texas they're the same cost, but let's say the average is $20 and do some back-of-the-envelope math: Registration Fees: --About 11M vehicles sold each year classified as a light truck (pickup/SUV) = $220M in reg. fees. --About 40M used cars sold each year. About 50% of Carvana use cars are pickups or SUVs, so that's another $400M. --Total: $640M Fuel taxes: --Average tax of $0.35/gallon --average of 13,500 mile/year driven --MPG for Honda Accord = 38, 26 for an F150 for a difference of about 164 gallons/year. --About 230M eligible drivers in the US. About 88% own a car. About 30% of all vehicles on the road are SUVs/light truck = 61M on the road. --61M * 164 gallons * $0.35/gallon = $3.5B Total taxes: $4.15B in taxes extra collected on larger vehicles across the entire country, but none of it goes towards making large vehicles safer. Even if that was doubled, what would the government spend it on to make cars safer? I can't think of much. Meanwhile it's becoming harder & harder to find cars that don't have various automatic sensors & safety features, and all manufacturers have agreed to add AEB by 2022. Browsing manufacturer site & dealer inventory, a very large # also have rear-park-assist (which detects pedestrian) either by default, or as an upgrade that is already included on most vehicles in dealer inventory. If we combined these trends with requirements for greater visibility as well, the combination would do a lot more than an increased tax .
silisili 5y ago
Just keep getting bigger. My first truck was an 88 ranger. That thing is smaller than most new sedans today. I have a newish 'midsize' truck that is as large as or larger than fullsizes of the 90s.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
You're not wrong, they're massive. But the person he was replying to was being over the top sensationalist.

by ketzo 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago

"The newer F-150s, while maybe not 6ft tall at the front, easily obscure a child or a short person." Which is not what the parent is claiming. Edit: people are really downvoting factual statements now?

ketzo 5y ago
Okay, so new trucks don’t exclusively have a hood height of 5’9”+. I still think the broader point of “it’s really hard to see people, even adults, right in front of you” is 1) demonstrably true 2) extremely scary.
- giantg2 5y ago
  “it’s really hard to see people, even adults, right in front of you” Then they should say that instead of sensationalizing it. "1) demonstrably true" Do you have some evidence of this? 1) If you have awareness, you should see objects before they move into any blind spot. 2) Driver height in relation to the hood height plays an important role in visibility, which means that you can see things shorter than the hood height depending on the distance from the vehicle. 3) Many new larger trucks come with 360 degree cameras now, so the blind spots are not an issue.
  - jkelleyrtp 5y ago
    I own a Dodge Ram 2500 and I can say that it's much harder to see things in front of you simply because the vehicle is so large. It's tough to park, tough to take through a small town, and hard to see out of in short-sight conditions. But it hauls a trailer, so it has a purpose.
    - throwawaysea 5y ago
      But do you really need to see things immediately in front of you? How would they even get there if they didn’t approach you from the front or sides, where you can see them? Most new vehicles also have sensors warning you of objects behind or in front of you, that beep loudly and warn you.
      - jkelleyrtp 5y ago
        My truck does not have those sensors, and it is still large. When driving through downtown, kids and people like to jump out from between parked cars. That’s hard enough to catch in a sedan. I could definitely see myself accidentally hitting a pedestrian and not even noticing it. I would say yes, you need to see things immediately in front of you. I’m not sure how that’s even a question. Beeps and sensors don’t save you in busy pedestrian environments, and being aware of your surroundings is absolutely crucial.
        giantg2 5y ago
        "I could definitely see myself accidentally hitting a pedestrian and not even noticing it." Is this more hyperbole? I don't know how you could not notice hitting someone. You should feel/hear it, even for animals or objects way smaller than a person. "I would say yes, you need to see things immediately in front of you. I’m not sure how that’s even a question." How do you handle the normal blind spots in all cars? You handle this the same way - mental object tracking and awareness. It doesn't matter what car you're in, you can't see the pavement immediately in front of the tires, yet you can still avoid potholes. Edit: why downvote?
        jkelleyrtp 5y ago
        Failure to check blind spots is the cause of many accidents on the road. They’re called blindspots for a reason. Large trucks, like mine, have blindspots closer and lower. I can mentally track as much as possible, but if a small person leaps out from between a parked car, they’re likely ending up getting squished. In a smaller car, lower to the ground, you can see small people without having to peer over the sides of the vehicle. Even after years of driving it, I still have issues time to time with the size of the truck and curbs. The reality is: the larger the vehicle, the more space you have to watch out for, and the greater the chance that you mess up and hit something. I’m glad you feel confident driving your truck, but you can’t deny the reality that bigger trucks are more challenging to manage in pedestrian environments.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>Edit: people are really downvoting factual statements now? Only when they are both factual and ideologically inconvenient. You're free to state all the popular facts you want. If you want to argue the minority position on any given topic around here you have to craft logic traps so that people can't downvote you without downvoting something that would be ideologically indefensible to downvote.

igetspam 5y ago

Except they have front, rear and side cameras. Our new F150 has 360° of visibility at low speeds. There are also proximity sensors that tell me if something outside the field of vision is coming my way from behind. It's also very liberal with the automatic braking, trying to stop in situations I'd barely slow for. And the automatic cruise changes based on GPS and stored speed limit data. It's by far the safest car I've ever driven, for both my family and those around us. My friend's new Chevy 3500 has twice as many cameras as our F150. We both tow heavy things (I move large pets and rescue animals in various trailers.) and my bed is often filled with dirt or rocks. What are you driving and how many pedestrian detection and collision avoidance systems does it have?

ineedasername 5y ago
If there was going to be a regulatory move in this space, it's proximity & awareness systems and better visibility that seem to make more sense, than a tax of some kind. These will actually contribute to safety, while a tax would at best be a very minor and indirect influence on market forces.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Generally, trucks do get taxed more through higher registration fees, and indirectly through fuel taxes.
  - ineedasername 5y ago
    That's all pretty irrelevant because most of that ends up going to various sorts of highway maintenance or general operating budgets for states, not making cares safer. Regardless, let's see how that plays out in actual taxes: Where I'm at the difference between registering an F150 and a Honda Accord is about $20. (personal, non commercial) Looking at California it's not much different. In Texas they're the same cost, but let's say the average is $20 and do some back-of-the-envelope math: Registration Fees: --About 11M vehicles sold each year classified as a light truck (pickup/SUV) = $220M in reg. fees. --About 40M used cars sold each year. About 50% of Carvana use cars are pickups or SUVs, so that's another $400M. --Total: $640M Fuel taxes: --Average tax of $0.35/gallon --average of 13,500 mile/year driven --MPG for Honda Accord = 38, 26 for an F150 for a difference of about 164 gallons/year. --About 230M eligible drivers in the US. About 88% own a car. About 30% of all vehicles on the road are SUVs/light truck = 61M on the road. --61M * 164 gallons * $0.35/gallon = $3.5B Total taxes: $4.15B in taxes extra collected on larger vehicles across the entire country, but none of it goes towards making large vehicles safer. Even if that was doubled, what would the government spend it on to make cars safer? I can't think of much. Meanwhile it's becoming harder & harder to find cars that don't have various automatic sensors & safety features, and all manufacturers have agreed to add AEB by 2022. Browsing manufacturer site & dealer inventory, a very large # also have rear-park-assist (which detects pedestrian) either by default, or as an upgrade that is already included on most vehicles in dealer inventory. If we combined these trends with requirements for greater visibility as well, the combination would do a lot more than an increased tax .

silisili 5y ago

Just keep getting bigger. My first truck was an 88 ranger. That thing is smaller than most new sedans today. I have a newish 'midsize' truck that is as large as or larger than fullsizes of the 90s.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

You're not wrong, they're massive. But the person he was replying to was being over the top sensationalist.