5 ms·

A small pickup, at least with any kind of ICE, is literally illegal to sell here due to CAFE regulations, which are strangely based on the footprint of the car.

A small pickup, at least with any kind of ICE, is literally illegal to sell here due to CAFE regulations, which are strangely based on the footprint of the car. An actually small pickup would have to be as fuel-efficient as sedans and small SUVs, which isn't going to work out. EVs will work, but not at that sub-$20k price point.

nathanaldensr 3y ago
People don't even realize that the government agencies responsible for saving us from "climate change" are the same ones causing absolutely stupid issues like this.
- gsk22 3y ago
  Why the scare quotes? Are we still pretending climate change isn't real? The rest of your point is totally valid (CAFE is a textbook example of well-intentioned regulations backfiring spectacularly). But the climate denier nonsense kinda spoils the message.
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    > Are we still pretending climate change isn't real? We are pretending that what the government is interested in isn't climate change.
    - roelschroeven 3y ago
      I guess it would be clearer if the scare quotes where around the whole "saving us from climate change".
jstarfish 3y ago
This can't be right. Maybe it is, but it makes no sense. The 90s Frontier is a tiny little thing, almost what a Kei truck is today. Same with the Ranger. An El Camino is bigger. I bought a base Frontier in 2017, wanting that tiny truck but ended up with something the size of a 90s F150. Literally the smallest option on the market, whose weak-ass v4 struggles to haul its own weight (and has the turning radius of an aircraft carrier). Tacomas? I like Toyota but the used market for those is worse than MSRP. And Ford stopped making the Ranger; the Maverick ain't it. It's basically what I have already. How is this the result of new efficiency standards? We still have small cars on the road. Cutting the roof off and appending a flatbed doesn't require a monster footprint.
- aidenn0 3y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM TL;DW: In 2008 CAFE introduced a formula that calculates the required MPG based off of the track times the wheelbase (basically the rectangle formed by the tires). Trucks are less aerodynamic than sedans, so small trucks can't be made that get sufficiently low MPG to meet this standard, and thus even though a smaller truck would use less fuel than a larger truck that meets the standard.
  - rurp 3y ago
    Am I missing something or is this regulation as dumb as I think it is? It seems to have the effect of replacing a bunch of small trucks on the road with giant trucks that get much worse mileage overall.
    - aidenn0 3y ago
      It's dumb, but also don't forget that any law that will disproportionately hurt Ford is going to be a non-starter; over 650k F-150s sold in a year. [edit] Ford existing necessitates allowing pickups, it doesn't necessitate forcing them to be large. I'm just pointing out that any regulation that makes pickups unsaleable altogether is not going to work.
    - tim333 3y ago
      I think it is which results not only in huge trucks using much fuel but also killing people more than small ones would. Many things in US politics move in mysterious ways.
    - mwint 3y ago
      Ding ding ding. These laws are written by the same people who think you shouldn’t be in charge of your own life.
    - reason-mr 3y ago
      It's beyond dumb and currently all stick and no carrot. By that I mean - at least in CA - a huge state bureaucracy including visual inspections that essentially precludes any real modifications to vehicles - unless you see a referee in which case it is a crapshoot on approval. We would IMO be better served by larger tax incentives on electric, and reduce the CARB bureaucracy enormously - insist on a simple tailpipe test "as it blows". Ridiculous standards have effectively forced small, high compression, often turbo charged, engines on consumers which run extremely hot (observe the heat shielding on newer subarus intended to prevent the engine mounts from burning out). Such engines, while fuel efficient, will never last the 300k miles we saw previously, without extensive messing with - by that I mean engine pulling, gasket full gasket and ring replacement type operations. If you want longevity, the older style toyota, lower compression, engines - which run cool and are marginally less fuel efficient (available in most other places in the world) will last in the 1m mile range.

nathanaldensr 3y ago

People don't even realize that the government agencies responsible for saving us from "climate change" are the same ones causing absolutely stupid issues like this.

gsk22 3y ago
Why the scare quotes? Are we still pretending climate change isn't real? The rest of your point is totally valid (CAFE is a textbook example of well-intentioned regulations backfiring spectacularly). But the climate denier nonsense kinda spoils the message.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  > Are we still pretending climate change isn't real? We are pretending that what the government is interested in isn't climate change.
  - roelschroeven 3y ago
    I guess it would be clearer if the scare quotes where around the whole "saving us from climate change".

jstarfish 3y ago

This can't be right. Maybe it is, but it makes no sense. The 90s Frontier is a tiny little thing, almost what a Kei truck is today. Same with the Ranger. An El Camino is bigger. I bought a base Frontier in 2017, wanting that tiny truck but ended up with something the size of a 90s F150. Literally the smallest option on the market, whose weak-ass v4 struggles to haul its own weight (and has the turning radius of an aircraft carrier). Tacomas? I like Toyota but the used market for those is worse than MSRP. And Ford stopped making the Ranger; the Maverick ain't it. It's basically what I have already. How is this the result of new efficiency standards? We still have small cars on the road. Cutting the roof off and appending a flatbed doesn't require a monster footprint.

aidenn0 3y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM TL;DW: In 2008 CAFE introduced a formula that calculates the required MPG based off of the track times the wheelbase (basically the rectangle formed by the tires). Trucks are less aerodynamic than sedans, so small trucks can't be made that get sufficiently low MPG to meet this standard, and thus even though a smaller truck would use less fuel than a larger truck that meets the standard.
- rurp 3y ago
  Am I missing something or is this regulation as dumb as I think it is? It seems to have the effect of replacing a bunch of small trucks on the road with giant trucks that get much worse mileage overall.
  - aidenn0 3y ago
    It's dumb, but also don't forget that any law that will disproportionately hurt Ford is going to be a non-starter; over 650k F-150s sold in a year. [edit] Ford existing necessitates allowing pickups, it doesn't necessitate forcing them to be large. I'm just pointing out that any regulation that makes pickups unsaleable altogether is not going to work.
  - tim333 3y ago
    I think it is which results not only in huge trucks using much fuel but also killing people more than small ones would. Many things in US politics move in mysterious ways.
  - mwint 3y ago
    Ding ding ding. These laws are written by the same people who think you shouldn’t be in charge of your own life.
  - reason-mr 3y ago
    It's beyond dumb and currently all stick and no carrot. By that I mean - at least in CA - a huge state bureaucracy including visual inspections that essentially precludes any real modifications to vehicles - unless you see a referee in which case it is a crapshoot on approval. We would IMO be better served by larger tax incentives on electric, and reduce the CARB bureaucracy enormously - insist on a simple tailpipe test "as it blows". Ridiculous standards have effectively forced small, high compression, often turbo charged, engines on consumers which run extremely hot (observe the heat shielding on newer subarus intended to prevent the engine mounts from burning out). Such engines, while fuel efficient, will never last the 300k miles we saw previously, without extensive messing with - by that I mean engine pulling, gasket full gasket and ring replacement type operations. If you want longevity, the older style toyota, lower compression, engines - which run cool and are marginally less fuel efficient (available in most other places in the world) will last in the 1m mile range.