5 ms·

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 out

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 .
anigbrowl 5y ago
That's all great but it's of little help with a driver that is zoned out looking out the window in the wrong direction. About once a week I have a close call stepping into a crosswalk while a driver is in a hurry to make a right turn but is looking out to the left at the (stopped) traffic and ignoring people trying to cross the street. I live near a freeway on-ramp and as soon as the light goes green many drivers seem in such a rush to take off that I wonder if they are already mentally imagining themselves pulling onto the freeway.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago
  > That's all great but it's of little help with a driver that is zoned out looking out the window in the wrong direction. That will be the case with any vehicle, no matter the size. All the visibility in the world won’t help if the driver is looking in the wrong direction.
  - wpietri 5y ago
    Thanks to peripheral vision, that's not true. If I'm riding a bicycle, I am unlikely to hit a person coming up on my right no matter how focused I am on the traffic from the left. The bigger the vehicle, though, the easier it gets because there's less and less visibility of the pedestrian to pull my attention back.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      If it's a visibility issue, then this really has nothing to do specifically with larger vehicles. Many small cars have less visibility than older ones due to smaller windows, larger pillars, and even lower perspectives. Take the newer mustangs, camaros, etc.
      - wpietri 5y ago
        That's definitely not my experience. Maybe I'm just used to smaller cars, but when I am above it all, I feel more above it all. But familiarity aside, a higher nose objectively hides a lot more of a pedestrian, making them harder to spot.

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 .

anigbrowl 5y ago

That's all great but it's of little help with a driver that is zoned out looking out the window in the wrong direction. About once a week I have a close call stepping into a crosswalk while a driver is in a hurry to make a right turn but is looking out to the left at the (stopped) traffic and ignoring people trying to cross the street. I live near a freeway on-ramp and as soon as the light goes green many drivers seem in such a rush to take off that I wonder if they are already mentally imagining themselves pulling onto the freeway.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago
> That's all great but it's of little help with a driver that is zoned out looking out the window in the wrong direction. That will be the case with any vehicle, no matter the size. All the visibility in the world won’t help if the driver is looking in the wrong direction.
- wpietri 5y ago
  Thanks to peripheral vision, that's not true. If I'm riding a bicycle, I am unlikely to hit a person coming up on my right no matter how focused I am on the traffic from the left. The bigger the vehicle, though, the easier it gets because there's less and less visibility of the pedestrian to pull my attention back.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    If it's a visibility issue, then this really has nothing to do specifically with larger vehicles. Many small cars have less visibility than older ones due to smaller windows, larger pillars, and even lower perspectives. Take the newer mustangs, camaros, etc.
    - wpietri 5y ago
      That's definitely not my experience. Maybe I'm just used to smaller cars, but when I am above it all, I feel more above it all. But familiarity aside, a higher nose objectively hides a lot more of a pedestrian, making them harder to spot.