4 ms·

Toyota can't import trucks with such a small footprint. That would screw up their fuel efficiency metric. That could lead to fines from the US government. That

Toyota can't import trucks with such a small footprint. That would screw up their fuel efficiency metric. That could lead to fines from the US government. That is the primary issue here that prevents the sale of small trucks in the US. With the current regulations, it makes the most sense to sell trucks with the longest wheelbase and largest width.

derefr 4y ago
I wouldn't mind driving a car composed of a narrow kei-car chassis resting atop a wide but low-riding platform. It'd be like a bumper car!
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
worthless-trash 4y ago
Can you explain this a little more (I dont live in the US and a preliminary search is failing me). It sounds as though the 'regulations' are preventing US consumers from having a choice in trucks, which.. kinda makes no sense from what I've seen in the wide range of oversized trucks in the US.
- ChoGGi 4y ago
  Larger vehicles have less stringent emissions regulations. Or something along those lines.
  - worthless-trash 4y ago
    I would have assumed larger vehicles had more stringent emission regulations, TIL!
    - zzzbra 4y ago
      sadly this is the consequence of green emissions standards legislation passed in 2009. thanks Obama
      - TingPing 4y ago
        The law is from the 70s, but reaffirmed and expanded https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_econo...
- HWR_14 4y ago
  Bigger vehicles are "trucks" and smaller vehicles are "cars". They have different standards. So while a small Japanese truck may have more efficient than a larger truck, it is legally a very inefficient car. This is also why SUVs exist, they are legally trucks for fuel efficiency/etc.
  - m000 4y ago
    These Stupid Trucks are Literally Killing Us [1] explains in detail how "trucks" overtook "cars" as the most popular vehicle in the US, and legislation that lead to that. (Quotes because the words refer to the legal definition of trucks/cars.) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo
  - mcv 4y ago
    Is this why American cars keep getting so ridiculously large? Because bad rules make them count as efficient even if they are woefully inefficient?
    - xboxnolifes 4y ago
      Yes. The US has decent cars, but terrible SUVs/trucks, because the SUVs and trucks have more lenient emissions regulations.
  - daemin 4y ago
    I read an article recently about the growth in sales of such "trucks" in Australia. In there people were complaining that the existing parking spaces aren't big enough for these vehicles, so there should be a review into parking regulations to make spots bigger to accommodate them. In my mind I would like to see the opposite happen, and instead have a review into these "trucks" to see if they are actually what we want for the road. There's been diagrams produced that through the ages these vehicles have been getting bigger but with less actual cargo space in them. While some in the country might want them I don't believe for a moment they are as necessary nor as useful for the cities and suburbs where parking space sizes would matter.
- upofadown 4y ago
  Putting the truck vs cars issue aside, there is still an incentive to make large wide trucks. The fuel efficiency allowance is based on the vehicle's "footprint" which is the distance between the wheels side to side times the distance between the wheels front to back. This metric comes out to some number of square feet. The fuel efficiency allowance is proportional to the number of square feet. Larger trucks are allowed to consume more fuel without penalty. Now it turns out that making a truck, say, longer by 10% does not increase the fuel consumption by 10%. If you are a manufacturer, you want to maximize the ratio of the allowance based on the square footage divided by the actual measured fuel consumption of the vehicle. The sweet spot comes out on the large side. So the fuel efficiency regulation, ironically, is causing a trend that leads to more total fuel consumption.

derefr 4y ago

I wouldn't mind driving a car composed of a narrow kei-car chassis resting atop a wide but low-riding platform. It'd be like a bumper car!

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

worthless-trash 4y ago

Can you explain this a little more (I dont live in the US and a preliminary search is failing me). It sounds as though the 'regulations' are preventing US consumers from having a choice in trucks, which.. kinda makes no sense from what I've seen in the wide range of oversized trucks in the US.

ChoGGi 4y ago
Larger vehicles have less stringent emissions regulations. Or something along those lines.
- worthless-trash 4y ago
  I would have assumed larger vehicles had more stringent emission regulations, TIL!
  - zzzbra 4y ago
    sadly this is the consequence of green emissions standards legislation passed in 2009. thanks Obama
    - TingPing 4y ago
      The law is from the 70s, but reaffirmed and expanded https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_econo...
HWR_14 4y ago
Bigger vehicles are "trucks" and smaller vehicles are "cars". They have different standards. So while a small Japanese truck may have more efficient than a larger truck, it is legally a very inefficient car. This is also why SUVs exist, they are legally trucks for fuel efficiency/etc.
- m000 4y ago
  These Stupid Trucks are Literally Killing Us [1] explains in detail how "trucks" overtook "cars" as the most popular vehicle in the US, and legislation that lead to that. (Quotes because the words refer to the legal definition of trucks/cars.) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo
- mcv 4y ago
  Is this why American cars keep getting so ridiculously large? Because bad rules make them count as efficient even if they are woefully inefficient?
  - xboxnolifes 4y ago
    Yes. The US has decent cars, but terrible SUVs/trucks, because the SUVs and trucks have more lenient emissions regulations.
- daemin 4y ago
  I read an article recently about the growth in sales of such "trucks" in Australia. In there people were complaining that the existing parking spaces aren't big enough for these vehicles, so there should be a review into parking regulations to make spots bigger to accommodate them. In my mind I would like to see the opposite happen, and instead have a review into these "trucks" to see if they are actually what we want for the road. There's been diagrams produced that through the ages these vehicles have been getting bigger but with less actual cargo space in them. While some in the country might want them I don't believe for a moment they are as necessary nor as useful for the cities and suburbs where parking space sizes would matter.
upofadown 4y ago
Putting the truck vs cars issue aside, there is still an incentive to make large wide trucks. The fuel efficiency allowance is based on the vehicle's "footprint" which is the distance between the wheels side to side times the distance between the wheels front to back. This metric comes out to some number of square feet. The fuel efficiency allowance is proportional to the number of square feet. Larger trucks are allowed to consume more fuel without penalty. Now it turns out that making a truck, say, longer by 10% does not increase the fuel consumption by 10%. If you are a manufacturer, you want to maximize the ratio of the allowance based on the square footage divided by the actual measured fuel consumption of the vehicle. The sweet spot comes out on the large side. So the fuel efficiency regulation, ironically, is causing a trend that leads to more total fuel consumption.