6 ms·

I get the sense that the pickup truck market in the U.S. particularly in suburbs is driven by brand marketing rather than consumer needs. People are paying a pr

I get the sense that the pickup truck market in the U.S. particularly in suburbs is driven by brand marketing rather than consumer needs. People are paying a premium, in the cost of purchasing as well as in the cost of insuring, maintaining, and fueling, for the image of the rugged individualistic American ready for any terrain, weather, or load that needs hauling, and maximally armored to "win" should they ever hit a person or vehicle in their path. There's a subset of contexts where they make sense although I think for _most_ people they're infrequent enough that it's way more sensible to use a cargo van or a sedan and then just rent a truck during the minority of times when you actually need one.

kurthr 4y ago
The giant king cab luxury seating is the only thing available on the larger and more expensive models unless you have access to fleet purchasing. They definitely have a market and they've tuned product lines for it. There are even supersport models. Personally, I hate the short-beds cuz you can't easily transport lumber or plywood sheets.
- EricE 4y ago
  Both the Hyundai Santa Cruz and Ford Ranger have tail gates that will partially lower to the same level as the tops of the wheel wells, providing a perfect platform for 4x8 sheets of plywood. I have a friend with a Ranger and we have hauled plywood and other larger objects with no issues. Would I want to do it routinely? Probably not - but for casual hauling they work well enough. I would expect the Scout to be designed in a very similar way. I've owned trucks with 8 foot beds in the past - I'd rather have a second row of seats and a smaller bed as well as a vehicle that's overall smaller than the 8 foot bed trucks of old. These newer designs are a great compromise of functionality and convenience, which is why you are seeing them take over the lower end. What I really want is the return of true micro pickups like the original Nissan hard body :(
  - EricE 4y ago
    And if you are as frustrated by the lack of true mini-pickups as I am, search the 'net and read about the chicken tax. Which was aimed at locking VW out of the US market quite a while ago, has lingered on way past it's prime and has bit even American manufacturers in the butt as more manufacturing has shifted outside of the US. Gotta love unintended consequences - ha!
    - dieselgate 4y ago
      Ya it’s insane and unfortunate how the chicken tax wrecked trucks. Was it really directed towards VW though? I thought it was more against Japanese auto makes.
      - EricE 4y ago
        Nope, VW around WWII (I think just before - need to go re-read) EDIT: It was post WWII. And VW Type 2 is profiled in the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax
        dieselgate 4y ago
        Nice thanks for the follow up!
  - kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
    The other problem with the short beds is that they are "compensated" for by raising the belt line to make the bed deeper. This compromises rear visibility. Then the long beds suffer because they also get a deep bed to integrate with the cab. On old Rangers you used to be able to walk up and just reach into the bed to get stuff. That isn't possible on any current midsize and up pickups.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - 4y ago
- dieselgate 4y ago
  I’ve been curious with the functionality of short beds - the only advantage I can think of is a shorter wheel base for towing/maneuvering a trailer. Otherwise they make no sense to me
corrral 4y ago
> There's a subset of contexts where they make sense although I think for _most_ people they're infrequent enough that it's way more sensible to use a cargo van or a sedan and then just rent a truck during the minority of times when you actually need one. Even a minivan can tow a small trailer for occasional lumber store runs or towing a jet ski or two. Or just use the roof rack and some tie-downs. Or take the seats out, many of them will fit some plywood inside without trouble. For a larger boat, you can often rent a slip at your usual lake or whatever cheaper than the difference in annual TCO between a truck and a smaller car. Not helpful if you move your boat from one body of water to another a lot, but the only folks I know who do that have small fishing boats that a van could probably tow just fine. Besides, you can pay for several construction deliveries and probably pay to have your boat moved a couple times a year for the difference in annual cost. No sense paying all that extra gas, insurance, and up-front cost for something with features you only use every other month or less, when you can just pay less money to do a daily truck rental periodically, for a delivery service, et c. But no, people need their immaculate $50,000+ trucks in the 'burbs just to show that they could blow $50,000+ on a truck they don't need, and so they fit in with their buds who also own trucks. Quite a few are purchased for good reasons, but a lot are mostly purchased for social signaling.
- bluGill 4y ago
  If you need a truck even 5% of the time it is overall cheapest to just own a truck. Insurance, car payments, and other fixed costs are too high to make a second car worth it, and renting a car is not cheap, not to mention rental rules often mean you can't use the truck as a truck. (I've been looking for a place to rent a truck so I can replace mine, a couple times a year I do something that no rental truck will let me do) Sure a truck uses a lot more fuel, but fuel is a small part of the cost of a car. Though I don't get families with more than one truck/suv. One will do the job for all of those things, and a EV (even a limited range one like the older leaf) will take care of all the other. Only rarely do you have to tell your spouse that you need the truck so drive "my" car.
  - corrral 4y ago
    I expect using a truck as a truck, for a situation in which a roof rack or a small trailer towed by a lesser vehicle wouldn't have sufficed, 18-19 days a year would put you way above average for non-business truck owners in my area.
decafninja 4y ago
That probably applies for many vehicle classes in general. I live in the NYC area, and I see many specialized "lifestyle" vehicles such as offroaders like Jeep Wrangler Rubicons or sports cars like Porsches. I would bet the majority of Rubicons I see rarely see terrain tougher than an unpaved driveway. The majority of Porsches I see will rarely experience a more thrilling drive than the owner flooring it from a stoplight. Rather, it's to convey status or a lifestyle image. While we're on the subject of pickup trucks - the Cybertruck. I have many friends who would never have thought of owning a truck before placing preorders for Cybertrucks. They are all white collar office workers, I've never seen them do any kind of hauling of cargo or offroading or other "rugged" or "adventurous" activities. But they are madly in love with the Cybertruck. It's purely a "look at me" lifestyle thing. Trucks like the F-150 (including the Lightning EV), Silverado, Tacoma, etc. don't even enter their radar. Meanwhile I do have a handful of friends that work the trades, work in construction, etc. These guys all dismiss the Cybertruck as a toy and are interested in the F-150 Lightning, etc.
rascul 4y ago
> it's way more sensible to use a cargo van If I could have gotten a cargo van for an equivalent price when I bought the (used) truck I have now, I would have. But they were starting at 4x the price. I use it to haul tools and materials and a cargo van would have been so much easier.

kurthr 4y ago

The giant king cab luxury seating is the only thing available on the larger and more expensive models unless you have access to fleet purchasing. They definitely have a market and they've tuned product lines for it. There are even supersport models. Personally, I hate the short-beds cuz you can't easily transport lumber or plywood sheets.

EricE 4y ago
Both the Hyundai Santa Cruz and Ford Ranger have tail gates that will partially lower to the same level as the tops of the wheel wells, providing a perfect platform for 4x8 sheets of plywood. I have a friend with a Ranger and we have hauled plywood and other larger objects with no issues. Would I want to do it routinely? Probably not - but for casual hauling they work well enough. I would expect the Scout to be designed in a very similar way. I've owned trucks with 8 foot beds in the past - I'd rather have a second row of seats and a smaller bed as well as a vehicle that's overall smaller than the 8 foot bed trucks of old. These newer designs are a great compromise of functionality and convenience, which is why you are seeing them take over the lower end. What I really want is the return of true micro pickups like the original Nissan hard body :(
- EricE 4y ago
  And if you are as frustrated by the lack of true mini-pickups as I am, search the 'net and read about the chicken tax. Which was aimed at locking VW out of the US market quite a while ago, has lingered on way past it's prime and has bit even American manufacturers in the butt as more manufacturing has shifted outside of the US. Gotta love unintended consequences - ha!
  - dieselgate 4y ago
    Ya it’s insane and unfortunate how the chicken tax wrecked trucks. Was it really directed towards VW though? I thought it was more against Japanese auto makes.
    - EricE 4y ago
      Nope, VW around WWII (I think just before - need to go re-read) EDIT: It was post WWII. And VW Type 2 is profiled in the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax
      - dieselgate 4y ago
        Nice thanks for the follow up!
- kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
  The other problem with the short beds is that they are "compensated" for by raising the belt line to make the bed deeper. This compromises rear visibility. Then the long beds suffer because they also get a deep bed to integrate with the cab. On old Rangers you used to be able to walk up and just reach into the bed to get stuff. That isn't possible on any current midsize and up pickups.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - 4y ago
dieselgate 4y ago
I’ve been curious with the functionality of short beds - the only advantage I can think of is a shorter wheel base for towing/maneuvering a trailer. Otherwise they make no sense to me

corrral 4y ago

> There's a subset of contexts where they make sense although I think for _most_ people they're infrequent enough that it's way more sensible to use a cargo van or a sedan and then just rent a truck during the minority of times when you actually need one. Even a minivan can tow a small trailer for occasional lumber store runs or towing a jet ski or two. Or just use the roof rack and some tie-downs. Or take the seats out, many of them will fit some plywood inside without trouble. For a larger boat, you can often rent a slip at your usual lake or whatever cheaper than the difference in annual TCO between a truck and a smaller car. Not helpful if you move your boat from one body of water to another a lot, but the only folks I know who do that have small fishing boats that a van could probably tow just fine. Besides, you can pay for several construction deliveries and probably pay to have your boat moved a couple times a year for the difference in annual cost. No sense paying all that extra gas, insurance, and up-front cost for something with features you only use every other month or less, when you can just pay less money to do a daily truck rental periodically, for a delivery service, et c. But no, people need their immaculate $50,000+ trucks in the 'burbs just to show that they could blow $50,000+ on a truck they don't need, and so they fit in with their buds who also own trucks. Quite a few are purchased for good reasons, but a lot are mostly purchased for social signaling.

bluGill 4y ago
If you need a truck even 5% of the time it is overall cheapest to just own a truck. Insurance, car payments, and other fixed costs are too high to make a second car worth it, and renting a car is not cheap, not to mention rental rules often mean you can't use the truck as a truck. (I've been looking for a place to rent a truck so I can replace mine, a couple times a year I do something that no rental truck will let me do) Sure a truck uses a lot more fuel, but fuel is a small part of the cost of a car. Though I don't get families with more than one truck/suv. One will do the job for all of those things, and a EV (even a limited range one like the older leaf) will take care of all the other. Only rarely do you have to tell your spouse that you need the truck so drive "my" car.
- corrral 4y ago
  I expect using a truck as a truck, for a situation in which a roof rack or a small trailer towed by a lesser vehicle wouldn't have sufficed, 18-19 days a year would put you way above average for non-business truck owners in my area.

decafninja 4y ago

That probably applies for many vehicle classes in general. I live in the NYC area, and I see many specialized "lifestyle" vehicles such as offroaders like Jeep Wrangler Rubicons or sports cars like Porsches. I would bet the majority of Rubicons I see rarely see terrain tougher than an unpaved driveway. The majority of Porsches I see will rarely experience a more thrilling drive than the owner flooring it from a stoplight. Rather, it's to convey status or a lifestyle image. While we're on the subject of pickup trucks - the Cybertruck. I have many friends who would never have thought of owning a truck before placing preorders for Cybertrucks. They are all white collar office workers, I've never seen them do any kind of hauling of cargo or offroading or other "rugged" or "adventurous" activities. But they are madly in love with the Cybertruck. It's purely a "look at me" lifestyle thing. Trucks like the F-150 (including the Lightning EV), Silverado, Tacoma, etc. don't even enter their radar. Meanwhile I do have a handful of friends that work the trades, work in construction, etc. These guys all dismiss the Cybertruck as a toy and are interested in the F-150 Lightning, etc.

rascul 4y ago

> it's way more sensible to use a cargo van If I could have gotten a cargo van for an equivalent price when I bought the (used) truck I have now, I would have. But they were starting at 4x the price. I use it to haul tools and materials and a cargo van would have been so much easier.