6 ms·
Let me be the first one to say it - anyone who drives a large pick-up truck for non-commercial reasons is a grade A asshole. SUV drivers aren't that far off, th
by misun78 2y ago
Let me be the first one to say it - anyone who drives a large pick-up truck for non-commercial reasons is a grade A asshole. SUV drivers aren't that far off, though I sympathize with the game theory element of buying SUVs to protect against other larger cars -- but I would expect you to take accountability and drive slower and safer than smaller cars.
These monstrosities are environmentally unfriendly, pedestrian unfriendly, kid unfriendly, biker unfriendly, small car unfriendly, and are antithetical to the type of walkable and bikable cities that point to healthier and happier living. I wish we could tax the crap out of these things and drive them out of our towns.
- danielschonfeld 2y agoThoughts and prayers are all we have in this country. Nothing will be done about that just as nothing is done about guns or healthcare. Just more thoughts and more prayers.
- Slava_Propanei 2y ago[dead]
- misun78 2y agoUnfortunately agree, especially given how much of an influence the auto industry has on our government. My goal is hence to make enough money to allow my family and I to live in an urban walkable environment. The venn diagram overlap of areas that have a high proportion of large trucks and how livable they are is quite small anyways.
- aikinai 2y agoYou mean in another country? Where would that actually be in the US?
- misun78 2y agoNYC, Boston, and SF if SF can get its act together. There are a plethora of small livable cities as well such as Boulder, CO.
- trog 2y agoAre there any cities where you don't need to be very wealthy to live there? The four you mentioned do not strike me as the kind of places you can live in without significant resources (I'm an Australian; I've been to all those cities except Boulder and wouldn't fancy living somewhere in them that was walkable without a lot of money, but I don't know them extremely well).
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- autoexec 2y agoThere are valid non-commercial reasons for having trucks and SUVs, but most of the people I know who have them just like big vehicles. They'll say that when they are driving regular cars it's hard to see what's going on around them because of all the SUVs and trucks on the road and the higher headlights of trucks and cars are blinding. It doesn't seem to bother them that they create those same problems for everyone else.
- Spivak 2y agoWe're in a prisoner's dilemma situation and folks are acting rationally within it. Trying to blame the individual isn't likely to go anywhere. You can't control other people, only your response and this is what you can do. Without a law that forces coordination so we get back to the good outcome it will keep happening. Sadly it's politically untenable in most (all?) the US not least of which because people will just buy trucks in other states that allow them.
- aziaziazi 2y ago> Sadly it's politically untenable in most (all?) the US not least of which because people will just buy trucks in other states that allow them. Couldn’t a state law decide what vehicle one can use on their road, instead of what one can buy?
- Spivak 2y agoThis is what Cali does with their emissions standards but it also seems like people who care worked around it by just registering their cars in other states. And I say this with all the love in the world, if there's any group of people who will massively inconvenience themselves to spite the government it's truck owners.
- mc32 2y agoAnd... heavy electric batteries can add up to 40% more weight to a BEV vehicle compared to the ICE version. So not only are cars getting bigger in size, but they are also getting heavier due to electrification of the powertrain. A 3000lb car becomes a 4200lb car, a 4000lb SUV becomes a 5,600lb SUV. I believe the Ford Motor Company CEO predicts that cars will get smaller but due to electrification, they will not lose weight.
- renewiltord 2y agoSomeone on Hacker News pointed out that "right of way doesn't mean you won't die" and "Yield to Gross Tonnage" and I was convinced to trade out my smaller car for a large one. I told my friends about it and we're all buying bigger SUVs. We didn't grow up in America and didn't realize that the culture was an explicit arms race. But now we are appropriately armored! Glad for HN advice. A friend is going to get a Hummer EV 3x but I don't know about that big. GMC Sierra should do.
- mc32 2y agoAh, the good old hausfrauenpanzer
- renewiltord 2y agoLOL great name. I am going to fix up this sticker and put it on the car. Haha https://i.imgur.com/jQtRdoy.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/jQtRdoy.jpeg Der Panzer für Die Hausfrauen indeed.
- defrost 2y agoYield to Gross Tonnage is very much an actual enforced regulation in this part of the world, sadly a little weiner vehicle like a Hummer won't save you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TskUzmg6Sk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TskUzmg6Sk
- renewiltord 2y agoHaha, no need to repeat yourself https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38945230 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38945230 I'll definitely yield to my neighbourhood Komatsu 900-series. I already have to yield to the Hummer since I don't have one.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoI wish I had the link, but what I read is that big vehicles do make the occupants safer, but not much safer. For every life saved by driving a big vehicle, 12X as many pedestrian, cyclist and small vehicle occupant lives are lost due to those larger vehicles.
- fakename 2y agohttps://www.economist.com/interactive/united-states/2024/08/31/americans-love-affair-with-big-cars-is-killing-them https://www.economist.com/interactive/united-states/2024/08/...
- mikesickler 2y agoThis is a really out of touch take.
- misun78 2y agoYou haven't explained why but I can preemptively say it isn't. Go outside the confines of American suburbia/countryside and you will see how out of touch these vehicles are to sustainable and healthy living.
- rootusrootus 2y agoSure, but that applies just as well to driving any car, eating any meat, etc. Very little of modern human living is particularly sustainable or healthy.
- paulmd 2y ago“if you don’t like trucks having 8-foot-tall grilles maybe you should just go back to living in the woods!” what a thought-provoking and non-inflammatory prompt you provided us
- rootusrootus 2y agoIt's difficult to convey nuance in a simple text post on the Internet, but in good faith I will assume you are intending to be ironic.
- consteval 2y agoIt doesn't apply just as well because there's unique challenges. For example, SUVs and trucks being over an order of magnitude more dangerous for pedestrians. We have got to stop hand-waving things as "well other stuff!" You're 100% right, car dependency as a whole is a big problem. One that we need to move away from and towards more sustainable modes of transportation. However, that is a big task. One part of that task is deconstructing the American obsession with ego-boosting via motor vehicle. That means you, trucks and SUVs.
- causality0 2y agoBlame the EPA for forcing vehicles larger and larger using a nonsensical method of calculating efficiency requirements. Companies would be happy to sell compact pickup trucks that got 30mpg but they aren't allowed.
- avidiax 2y ago> Companies would be happy to sell compact pickup trucks that got 30mpg but they aren't allowed. It seems quite possible to take a sedan and replace the back seat and trunk with a bed and still meet requirements. I'm sure that configuration is a bit less aerodynamic, but it shouldn't be a deal breaker. Meanwhile companies like Ford are not selling any sedans at all. It seems they think it's more profitable to sell only light trucks and SUVs. That makes me doubt that the manufacturers "can't" produce compact trucks.
- qball 2y ago>It seems quite possible to take a sedan and replace the back seat and trunk with a bed and still meet requirements. These already exist, they're called "utes". Modern compact utility vehicles are simply the North American equivalent of this concept; we simply prefer a carpeted, covered bed.
- consteval 2y agoNot true, the reason trucks and SUVs are made and pushed so much is they are high-margin vehicles. You make WAY more money per unit of work selling a truck or SUV. Sedans, in comparison, make much less money. Hence, all the ads you'll see are aimed at big vehicles. The manufacturers can make smaller vehicles but it's a stupid idea to do so. You leave money on the table - and for what? Just make the ride higher and you can automatically mark up another 20%.
- mcmcmc 2y agoYeah, and fuck everyone who lives in the country and has large animals, or anyone who wants to haul a camper or trailer. A subcompact can fit like two bales of hay, surely that’s enough right?
- screye 2y agoWhat sort of large animals need a pick up truck ? Anyone who owns horses or cows surely doesn't live in cities. The original comment appears to be talking about urban areas in particular.
- mcmcmc 2y agoMost of them… How do you haul hay? How do you haul a stock trailer to move animals around or take them to the vet? Move fence panels around or haul water? The comment very clearly says anyone who has a truck for non commercial purposes is an asshole. No qualifiers on where you live. Even non profits are assholes. If OP meant something else maybe they shouldn’t use broad generalizations.
- consteval 2y agoShould be obvious he's referring to the city. Don't know why people do this thing where they make up an argument nobody has made, and then proceed to get mad over it. It's very weird, stop doing that. At this point y'all are rage baiting yourselves.
- lumb63 2y agoIf your goal is to reduce the amount of pickup trucks and SUVs on the road, then you’re going to have to convince people who drive those vehicles to stop. Opening by calling that audience “grade A assholes” is probably not winning anyone over toward your cause. You’d probably have better luck telling them how beneficial it would be for them, those they care about, their community, etc., rather than taking an adversarial tone.
- blooalien 2y agoAt this point it's pretty clear that they don't actually care about any of those things. You can tell them all about benefits, but the only "benefit" those people are shooting for is "Pwn the Libs!" and if they have to sacrifice their descendants' futures to do it, well... "Sorry, kids... No future for you. Blame the Democrats."
- consteval 2y agoThe only way to do this is by: 1. Forcing those cars to stop being made, or made differently 2. Require special requirements, like a new license 3. Have a special tax It's all money and politics. Mean words mean nothing, you can't convince people to do stuff that way.
- rootusrootus 2y ago> anyone who drives a large pick-up truck for non-commercial reasons is a grade A asshole Well damn, I guess I'm a grade A asshole. I thought about getting a smaller truck, but frankly it's safer to tow my travel trailer with a superduty, since the tongue weight is over what a half-ton is typically rated for, so I kinda figured it made me -less- of a grade A asshole. Fortunately I only drive it a few thousand miles a year, the rest of the time I drive my Tesla, so maybe on most days you won't call me an asshole.
- _yb2s 2y agoThis is pretty absurd… there are plenty of non commercial reasons to use a truck- towing trailers, hauling wood, etc. they’re pretty essential for people that live in the country, do subsistence farming, or build/maintain their own house. I grew up in the country in a house my dad built, and we got much of our food from plants and animals we raised- we needed a truck. Ultimately all motor vehicles are pretty dangerous and negatively impact the environment- it makes no sense to have a problem with people that need trucks using them for their purpose, but being fine with people doing the same with a small car.
- fragmede 2y agoI agree it's absurd, but bigger vehicles are, well, bigger, and thus more dangerous and negatively impact the environment more.
- uneekname 2y agoI can't speak for OP but their take sounded pretty city-focused. I live in a downtown that feels so overrun with these monstrous SUVs and what-have-you for no reason. I know they're useless because they're always empty and they park on my street (or better, in the bike lane I use every day). I agree with your sentiment. Large vehicles have a lot of utility for a lot of people. I don't want to tax rural folk out of owning an important tool. But in the densest zip code in my state? I'm tired of reading about pedestrian murders in my neighborhood.
- misun78 2y agoYou're spot on with that explanation, thanks.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- SoftTalker 2y agoYes but a farmer's pickup truck used to look like this... https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6c/a8/29/6ca8299cb79d89b811da682e49fed7ff.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6c/a8/29/6ca8299cb79d89b811da... ... and now it looks like this... https://i.ytimg.com/vi/LDHolYeplpg/maxresdefault.jpg https://i.ytimg.com/vi/LDHolYeplpg/maxresdefault.jpg
- kortilla 2y agoAnyone who thinks large pickup trucks are only for “commercial use” is a knuckle-dragging city-dweller. Now that we both have the name calling out of the way, how would you suggest I tow my utility trailer without a truck?
- trog 2y agoThis misses the point and it's why talking about cars is so annoying if you're a person who doesn't give a shit about cars. How often do you tow your utility trailer? If you do it every day because you need it for work, then having a big truck probably makes sense. But if you're like many people who have trucks, you probably do this once a year, if ever, but still feel like you "need" a truck for these occasions. It's like the people in Australia who live in the outback and need to drive 800km every few weeks to drive to a town to buy supplies. Yeh, sure, maybe a diesel ute with a 200L tank is the right choice for you. But it doesn't mean EVs are a complete waste of time for the 90 percent of Australians that live in cities. Most people aren't hauling around a trailer every minute.
- defrost 2y ago> How often do you tow your utility trailer? If you do it every day because you need it for work, then having a big truck probably makes sense. Nope. We're in Australia, we have a 35 year old home over built double axle heavy steel frame trailer built to handle off road conditions in the north west; it's got heavy duty leaf springs, slaved brakes, can take some serious load tonnage and gets used weekly (still, and has dome for 35+ years). It gets pulled by a six cylinder sedan car with a Hayman-Reese tow point and tracking anti sway bars. It's done well in excess of 3 million km now (been stripped down to frame and rebuilt twice now (new wiring, new brakes, refurb'd springs, etc)). Don't need a big "truck" (oversized Toorak Tractor). Well, save for hauling wheat and cattle etc. but we have prime movers + semi trailers for that .. and for fire fighting we have an ex military heavy chassis truck modified to carry 5 tonne of water off road .. but that's a bigger beast than US SUV "trucks".
- trog 2y ago
- lindsaywaterman 2y agoHigh point of my life was getting a new stove and toilet into my Honda fit while a guy parked next to me had no way to lift his new potted plant into his pickup flatbed.
- toast0 2y agoI've got a small pick-up truck, and it's great for me, but nobody makes a good small pick-up for the US market anymore, because of how CAFE standards work. Currently available small trucks aren't very small and aren't very truck. To get a 6 foot bed, you need to buy a big truck, and a 6 foot bed is IMHO an essential quality of a truck.
- cameldrv 2y agoThe CAFE standards have definitely caused problems. There is the Ford Maverick and the Hyundai Santa Fe now though that are more like what a Ranger or an S10 or a Tacoma used to be 20 years ago, except they're unibody.
- toast0 2y agoI don't mind the unibody, but the very short bed length doesn't work for me. I think you meant Hyundai Santa Cruz?
- Gimpei 2y agoIf you have a large family, it’s hard to get by without an SUV. Four kids and all their car seats do not fit into a regular sized car. While it would be great if we could all just get my on public transportation and shank’s pony like in Europe, the ship left the port a hundred years ago on that one. Like it or not the majority of US cities are designed for the car.
- mitthrowaway2 2y agoDidn't a minivan or a station wagon used to fill this role?
- paulmd 2y agoBoth of those are SUV-class vehicles and a minivan is pretty much the quintessential SUV. Other than styling there really isn’t a difference between a traverse and a windstar or whatever.
- mitthrowaway2 2y agoOne big difference, from a "killer cars" perspective, is the height of the front hood: https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/honda-odyssey-2014-minivan-us-vs-chevrolet-traverse-2017-suv/ https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/honda-odyssey-2014-... (Sorry they don't seem to have the Windstar on carsized, but the honda odyssey is a pretty close match). Station wagons and SUVs are different vehicles. SUVs are basically extended-cab sedans, whereas SUVs are built with higher ground clearance and a higher-center of gravity, many on a truck frame.
- paulmd 2y agono need to apologize, I was just using a windstar as an example of a generic 90s minivan, not as some super specific example. :) that's an interesting comparison tool! but yeah my point is more related to size and capacity than things like chassis. the fact that the windstar is comparably sized is the point I was trying to make. it's a fair point that the hood is significantly different though, and I think that seems to be one of the biggest takeaways from the discussion here, that's specifically problematic and dangerous as a design element. and if your point is that a truck chassis overall increases the weight and so on, and just makes it a heavier, more dangerous vehicle... that's probably true to some extent too, although a van chassis was never exactly "light". I still don’t fully agree with the implication that there’s a meaningful difference between a windstar or Astro van and a traverse as far as vehicle classification. They’re all utes really.
- hedora 2y agoI think the bigger problem is that cars keep getting taller for no reason. Other than the cybertruck, larger vehicles have been trending more and more towards adding pedestrian safety features. However, the same vehicles are taller than they used to be, making them less safe, and generally worse. Who wants to lift crap an extra foot into their pickup truck bed, and need a frigging step to get into the side door? The days of “reach into the side of the truck” are long gone, except maybe for basketball players. Recently I heard some new cars detect imminent collisions, and emergency lift themselves a few inches so they win the game of “who gets to be in the other driver’s lap after the crush zone is exhausted”. Speaking of the cybertruck, I realized it’s the same height as our aging 1500 class truck (which barely meets clearance in some parking garages). Current year models are even taller.
- cameldrv 2y agoIt's a combination of getting taller, the hood getting longer, and the hood not sloping down. The Ridgeline has much more of a sloping hood, and the visibility is better. Most trucks have the flatter hood and big flat grille presumably because it looks more aggressive. I don't understand why the hoods are getting so long though. Just as an example I've noticed, the Tacoma has about a foot between the bumper and the radiator that's completely dead space. The truck would be more useful if it were a foot shorter (easier to park), a foot more legroom, or a foot longer bed, so I don't know what the reason is. Maybe a crumple zone or something.
- pasttense01 2y agoThink about going off-roading in your new $100,000 vehicle [although something I wouldn't do if I had such a vehicle]. Suppose there is a big boulder or you want to cross some water: you need the height!