Fuck Cars
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
Which one holds more cargo?
In the bed? It's nearly the same size. New trucks are just jacked up with larger tires and an inflated plastic shell. Size sells even if it's all fat. Yeah- the newer model added the passenger space so you can preserve your manhood when driving the kids around... but bed space hasn't changed much.
It's not necessarily even consumer demand. Truck size and the EPA standards are linked for some reason. Essentially bigger trucks are allowed to have worse mileage.
This story talks about it. There are probably but better sources, but the point remains.
I would actually argue that many truck drivers don't want a bigger vehicle. Mid size trucks came back on the market after a long hiatus. There are even a number of compact trucks available now, like the Maverick, Santa Cruz, etc.
The reason should be obvious, large trucks are going to always have worse mileage because they are meant to move large loads. That requires large, stronger engines, and the power needed will always have a similar fuel ratio.
The problem is that there is no good method of making rules about who needs a large truck vs a car for commuting, which is where feul efficiency actually matters. Someone could be doing home landscaping that means a personal truck makes sense, or could have a large trailer they tow that requires a large truck. Does someone need a business to have horses and a horse trailer that requires a large truck?
So unless they want to ban large trucks altogether, there does need to be lower mpg standards for large trucks. The problem with random people using them to commute can't be solved by fuel standards. Honestly, the best way to reduce fuel consumption would be improving public transportation.
What about making these massive trucks require a CDL to drive? Sure some would be dedicated enough to do it, but im sure most people would see that requirement and just get something more reasonable.
I think a CDL would be overkill, but having a separate license like with motorcycles wouldn't be too bad and could be based of curb weight + hauling and towing capacity so that it covers ridiculously oversized SUVs.
Size could play a factor too, which would encourage the companies to build for target sizes and weights instead of just going bigger constantly.
No, the problem is that nobody should need either vehicle for commuting because the real issue is ending car dependency as a whole, but anti-big-truck circlejerk posts like this one are exceedingly effective at distracting the community from that point.
Why do people only talk about bed size, payload and towing capacities are far more important when it comes to trucks. Yeah the trucks are larger than needed, but they haul and tow more as well. They are for different things.
That's great but I simply do not believe most truck owners with these massive trucks are even thinking about towing or load capacity. Anecdotally, most of the people I know just want enough bedspace to be able to move thier couch when they switch apartments. I think most trucks could be a lot smaller and most people wouldn't be affected
Can also just rent a truck from HD for like $40 as well…
Preaching to the choir, man
Duallies with caps. Just fucking why? You can't hitch a gooseneck. Are you hauling lead block?
Also, weekend warriors need to learn to just rent trucks from home depot or uhaul.
Part of the problem people have with these large trucks is many of them rarely carry more cargo than the cargo capacity of a sedan. Is the extra fuel, maintaince, bigger tires and upfront cost really worth it to move 2 or 3 over sized items a year?
We get if you are hauling trailers, equipment or tools frequently but many people buy these trucks just so they can commute to an office job or other job that doesn't require that power or capacity.
Neither of them seem to be holding cargo
From what I've heard they're the same bed size, but the newer one has a back seat area too
Those monster-truck wheels have to take a lot of usable space.
The small one has a lower bed, but it's higher over the wheels. It all depends on how the bed is arranged around those. I'm really curious about those, just not enough to do some research...
The Taco can't carry 4ft wide goods between the wheel wells, that SD can. Bed length is about the same on these two trucks (too small). The 5ft beds were for toys on mini trucks and they haven't changed any. Real work gets done in 6.75 and 8ft beds.
Well now I want an airplane to park next to them.
The thing that did it for me is the picture making the rounds of the truck sight lines showing the M1 as safer than an F250 in terms of blind spot. These things are really ridiculous.
Like an M1A1 Abrams tank?! Source?
Warning, Reddit link: https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fkftiwovba73b1.jpg
There is one, right behind the larger truck.
People pussy foot around the answer and give you the wrong answer of the same, but the f-150 can haul up to 1000kg and tow 6300kg while the ranger can haul 850kg and tow a whooping 3,400kg.
The superduty, and it's not even close.
2001 Tacoma: 1,600lb in the bed or 5,000lb towed 22/25 mpg EPA
2018 F250: 3130lb in the bed or 17,600lb towed (not EPA tested, real world 16mpg, Lie-O-Meter usually shows 18mpg)
I really don't understand the fetish for small pickup trucks. They aren't coming back, if only due to safety standards. Plus, you can't get in them while wearing a hard hat.
quick edit: my old '95 F150 is a 6cyl. It carries about 800lb of tools and materials every day and gets a real 17mpg on the highway if I keep it at 65mpg. Since it's that old wheezy I6 motor it'll drop to about 14mpg if I push it to 75mph. 15mpg on my normal days staying in town and not driving long distances on those fast highways.
The smaller trucks are primarily for non-business uses like hauling smaller amounts of lumber or mulch, possibly with a smaller trailer in tow. You know, situations where nobody is wearing a hard hat.
Do people really get into trucks with hard hats on?
No, they do not.
Every day.
Why not use a regular pickup truck for the smaller amounts? They have them for rent at every Home Depot. I've never understood keeping a toy pickup around to haul some bags of mulch, minivan does the same thing.
Minivan is enclosed and you can't hose it out.
A minvan is just an enclosed truck anyway.
Tye fullsize has more payload and towing