3 ms·

> Pickup truck expansion, Itself triggered by poorly thought out public policy. > embracing poor driver controls and visibility, Appears to somehow be driven

> Pickup truck expansion, Itself triggered by poorly thought out public policy. > embracing poor driver controls and visibility, Appears to somehow be driven by profit motives. I remain perplexed that it works though.

potato3732842 2y ago
Poor visibility is partly regulatory driven partly consumer driven. Gotta have those fat A pillars and high beltline with low seating position to max out that crash test rating.
- nickff 2y ago
  Window area also adds a lot of weight, which decreases fuel economy.
mrguyorama 2y ago
>Itself triggered by poorly thought out public policy. No. There was no policy that required Ford and Chevy marketing to encourage customers to associate "8 ft high front end" with "better truck". Pedestrian deaths are related to vehicle grill height, not weight. We could have the same modern monster trucks with a lower grille and have fewer pedestrian deaths.
- fc417fc802 2y ago
  Have the trucks in that weight class been noticably different historically? It's not something I've ever followed. My understanding was that people were forced to purchase what was available as the smaller trucks were disincentived by regulations.
  - paddy_m 2y ago
    Absolutely the height of truck's hoods has increased dramatically over time. I say this as the owner of a pickup truck (and a cargo bike). My 2000 2500 has a hood approximately at my belly button. Most current 1/2 tons have a hood height at my nipple (I'm 5'8). A Pillars have gotten significantly thicker too, making it harder to see pedestrians at corners. Then there is the expanding cab and shrinking bed. The visibility in a standard cab truck is phenomenal, you are surrounded by glass. Higher beds are also harder to use, which doesn't matter for most truck buyers because they buy them as a statement, not for utility.

3 ms·

> Pickup truck expansion, Itself triggered by poorly thought out public policy. > embracing poor driver controls and visibility, Appears to somehow be driven

by fc417fc802 2y ago

potato3732842 2y ago
Poor visibility is partly regulatory driven partly consumer driven. Gotta have those fat A pillars and high beltline with low seating position to max out that crash test rating.
- nickff 2y ago
  Window area also adds a lot of weight, which decreases fuel economy.
mrguyorama 2y ago
>Itself triggered by poorly thought out public policy. No. There was no policy that required Ford and Chevy marketing to encourage customers to associate "8 ft high front end" with "better truck". Pedestrian deaths are related to vehicle grill height, not weight. We could have the same modern monster trucks with a lower grille and have fewer pedestrian deaths.
- fc417fc802 2y ago
  Have the trucks in that weight class been noticably different historically? It's not something I've ever followed. My understanding was that people were forced to purchase what was available as the smaller trucks were disincentived by regulations.
  - paddy_m 2y ago
    Absolutely the height of truck's hoods has increased dramatically over time. I say this as the owner of a pickup truck (and a cargo bike). My 2000 2500 has a hood approximately at my belly button. Most current 1/2 tons have a hood height at my nipple (I'm 5'8). A Pillars have gotten significantly thicker too, making it harder to see pedestrians at corners. Then there is the expanding cab and shrinking bed. The visibility in a standard cab truck is phenomenal, you are surrounded by glass. Higher beds are also harder to use, which doesn't matter for most truck buyers because they buy them as a statement, not for utility.