4 ms·

Car makers are making this the default. Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings. The problem is that even within the class of SUVs and t

Car makers are making this the default. Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings. The problem is that even within the class of SUVs and trucks, those vehicles have gotten larger and faster over time. The analogy of the hot and cold person assumes the hot person is wearing a t-shirt and sweater, when in reality when you compare it to vehicles, it's more like they are wearing that gortex jacket from Seinfeld + 3 layers of sweaters. People don't need to cater to somebody unreasonable. People don't need SUVs. They provide like no advantage compared to a wagon to most people and endanger everybody else.

giantg2 5y ago
"Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings." What? Do you have a source? "People don't need SUVs. They provide like no advantage compared to a wagon to most people and endanger everybody else." Can you pull a livestock trailer with a wagon? Anytime you get in any vehicle there is the potential that you endanger other people. Should we ban EVs? A Tesla S can weigh more than an F150... "The analogy of the hot and cold person assumes the hot person is wearing a t-shirt and sweater, when in reality when you compare it to vehicles, it's more like they are wearing that gortex jacket from Seinfeld + 3 layers of sweaters." Then the analogy still works well because the hot person still has clothes to remove. It's when people complain about being cold in the summer and don't wear heavier clothes while the warm people are already wearing the socially acceptable minimum. It's about approaching constraints.
- jbigelow76 5y ago
  "Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings." What? Do you have a source? Doubling down on the livestock angle? I thought you were trolling. Can you pull a livestock trailer with a wagon? I see now that domestic livestock logistics is a passion of yours. Surely you have sources to tell us how many F-150s it takes to get our bacon to the local Wal-Mart.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Please read the comment chain. If you ban SUVs and trucks, there is a segment of the population that will be negatively affected by not having the ability to perform their tasks. The question was way ban SUVs and not cars - that eliminates the energy mismatch and allows the most people the utility they need. I'm asking that person if they've thought of these details when they made their comment.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- ironman1478 5y ago
  https://www.google.com/amp/s/fordauthority.com/2020/10/executive-explains-decision-to-discontinue-ford-sedans-in-north-america/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/fordauthority.com/2020/10/execu... Not everybody needs to do those things. I have lived 28 years without owning a truck and will never need one. My father knows how to drive many sized trucks for work, but he never needed to own one. Trucks provide utility and to be clear, I singled out SUVs because they have basically no value for people buying them, except that it makes them feel safe because they aren't the smallest vehicle on the road anymore. Most are terrible off-roaders and if people need to carry more people they can buy wagons and vans. Also, the EV remark. The issue is that SUVs are correlated with more deaths, including hitting peds at higher rates. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_sport_utility_vehicles https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_sport_utility_v... If an EV car was correlated with higher deaths than other vehicles, that should be examined and we need to consider it.
  - vmladenov 5y ago
    > Most are terrible off-roaders I always love revisiting the Canada episode of The Grand Tour where they tested 3 midsize SUVs and concluded that they’re neither sporty nor provide much utility.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    "Not everybody needs to do those things. I have lived 28 years without owning a truck and will never need one." But in a proposed world of no SUVs or trucks (read comment chain), there are some people who would not be able to perform their tasks. If we have to ban something, why not leave the most capable vehicle that provide coverage to the most people. I'm trying to get the original commenter to explain. Also, aren't vans the worst pedestrian offenders? And for EVs... https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/axa-insurance-claims-high-end-evs-crash-more/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/axa-insurance-claims-high... https://frankellawfirm.com/are-electric-vehicles-leading-to-more-pedestrian-accidents/ https://frankellawfirm.com/are-electric-vehicles-leading-to-...
    - Svip 5y ago
      > But in a proposed world of no SUVs or trucks (read comment chain) I think you've misinterpreted something. No one is suggesting banning trucks or lorries; only SUVs. They are not the same. Trucks, lorries, vans, buses, coaches, all provide meaningful utility. SUVs do not.
- vlan0 5y ago
  > What? Do you have a source? Ford.com Car options include mustang and The GT. So no more focus, fiesta, fusion, Taurus or others. IMO, that’s basically no car options. Plus, the Mustang is basically not driveable for many month in WNY.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Why is it not drivable? If an option does exist, then perhaps the comment should have said they elimited cars from their offerings.
    - vlan0 5y ago
      >Why is it not drivable? Long winters with heavy snow fall and icy road conditions. Sure, some folks drive them year round. But the number of rwd cars on the road when snow is on the ground is nearly zero. Also, the mustang is a 2dr coupe. Whether or not it is capable, most folk do not want to deal with car seats/strollers in a coupe. It's also not a car marketed towards families. I just find it hard to believe there is much demographic overlap between folks that purchase a mustang vs a corolla or accord. tl;dr - Due to targeted marketing and preconceived notions, the only people buying mustangs are those that want them. It's an entry level sports car.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        "Long winters with heavy snow fall and icy road conditions. Sure, some folks drive them year round. But the number of rwd cars on the road when snow is on the ground is nearly zero." Eh, I grew up driving an old caprice in the mountains of PA - no anti-lock, no traction control, not even posi-trac. My current truck is RWD only, although I don't live in the mountains anymore. While FWD can offer a slight advantage, I don't think it makes much of a difference as long as you have the proper tires and make smart choices. So it is drivable. I think it's more that the people who own the nicer trims of those cars try to save them from the salt or people who can't drive. Not to mention that RWD cars are already a minority of the vehicles on the road, except for 99% of the time the trucks you see will be in RWD. Yeah, it's definitely more of a single person's car, or a second car for a family without small kids.

giantg2 5y ago

"Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings." What? Do you have a source? "People don't need SUVs. They provide like no advantage compared to a wagon to most people and endanger everybody else." Can you pull a livestock trailer with a wagon? Anytime you get in any vehicle there is the potential that you endanger other people. Should we ban EVs? A Tesla S can weigh more than an F150... "The analogy of the hot and cold person assumes the hot person is wearing a t-shirt and sweater, when in reality when you compare it to vehicles, it's more like they are wearing that gortex jacket from Seinfeld + 3 layers of sweaters." Then the analogy still works well because the hot person still has clothes to remove. It's when people complain about being cold in the summer and don't wear heavier clothes while the warm people are already wearing the socially acceptable minimum. It's about approaching constraints.

jbigelow76 5y ago
"Ford is (or has?) eliminated cars from their American offerings." What? Do you have a source? Doubling down on the livestock angle? I thought you were trolling. Can you pull a livestock trailer with a wagon? I see now that domestic livestock logistics is a passion of yours. Surely you have sources to tell us how many F-150s it takes to get our bacon to the local Wal-Mart.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Please read the comment chain. If you ban SUVs and trucks, there is a segment of the population that will be negatively affected by not having the ability to perform their tasks. The question was way ban SUVs and not cars - that eliminates the energy mismatch and allows the most people the utility they need. I'm asking that person if they've thought of these details when they made their comment.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
ironman1478 5y ago
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fordauthority.com/2020/10/executive-explains-decision-to-discontinue-ford-sedans-in-north-america/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/fordauthority.com/2020/10/execu... Not everybody needs to do those things. I have lived 28 years without owning a truck and will never need one. My father knows how to drive many sized trucks for work, but he never needed to own one. Trucks provide utility and to be clear, I singled out SUVs because they have basically no value for people buying them, except that it makes them feel safe because they aren't the smallest vehicle on the road anymore. Most are terrible off-roaders and if people need to carry more people they can buy wagons and vans. Also, the EV remark. The issue is that SUVs are correlated with more deaths, including hitting peds at higher rates. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_sport_utility_vehicles https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_sport_utility_v... If an EV car was correlated with higher deaths than other vehicles, that should be examined and we need to consider it.
- vmladenov 5y ago
  > Most are terrible off-roaders I always love revisiting the Canada episode of The Grand Tour where they tested 3 midsize SUVs and concluded that they’re neither sporty nor provide much utility.
- giantg2 5y ago
  "Not everybody needs to do those things. I have lived 28 years without owning a truck and will never need one." But in a proposed world of no SUVs or trucks (read comment chain), there are some people who would not be able to perform their tasks. If we have to ban something, why not leave the most capable vehicle that provide coverage to the most people. I'm trying to get the original commenter to explain. Also, aren't vans the worst pedestrian offenders? And for EVs... https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/axa-insurance-claims-high-end-evs-crash-more/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/axa-insurance-claims-high... https://frankellawfirm.com/are-electric-vehicles-leading-to-more-pedestrian-accidents/ https://frankellawfirm.com/are-electric-vehicles-leading-to-...
  - Svip 5y ago
    > But in a proposed world of no SUVs or trucks (read comment chain) I think you've misinterpreted something. No one is suggesting banning trucks or lorries; only SUVs. They are not the same. Trucks, lorries, vans, buses, coaches, all provide meaningful utility. SUVs do not.
vlan0 5y ago
> What? Do you have a source? Ford.com Car options include mustang and The GT. So no more focus, fiesta, fusion, Taurus or others. IMO, that’s basically no car options. Plus, the Mustang is basically not driveable for many month in WNY.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Why is it not drivable? If an option does exist, then perhaps the comment should have said they elimited cars from their offerings.
  - vlan0 5y ago
    >Why is it not drivable? Long winters with heavy snow fall and icy road conditions. Sure, some folks drive them year round. But the number of rwd cars on the road when snow is on the ground is nearly zero. Also, the mustang is a 2dr coupe. Whether or not it is capable, most folk do not want to deal with car seats/strollers in a coupe. It's also not a car marketed towards families. I just find it hard to believe there is much demographic overlap between folks that purchase a mustang vs a corolla or accord. tl;dr - Due to targeted marketing and preconceived notions, the only people buying mustangs are those that want them. It's an entry level sports car.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      "Long winters with heavy snow fall and icy road conditions. Sure, some folks drive them year round. But the number of rwd cars on the road when snow is on the ground is nearly zero." Eh, I grew up driving an old caprice in the mountains of PA - no anti-lock, no traction control, not even posi-trac. My current truck is RWD only, although I don't live in the mountains anymore. While FWD can offer a slight advantage, I don't think it makes much of a difference as long as you have the proper tires and make smart choices. So it is drivable. I think it's more that the people who own the nicer trims of those cars try to save them from the salt or people who can't drive. Not to mention that RWD cars are already a minority of the vehicles on the road, except for 99% of the time the trucks you see will be in RWD. Yeah, it's definitely more of a single person's car, or a second car for a family without small kids.