1630
Compare american vs japanese craftsmen-cars (feddit.de)
submitted 3 years ago* by to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world
366 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Comparison left vs right for a craftsman who doesnt know which one he should buy:

  • l/r same bed size

  • r lower bed for way easier loading/unloading

  • r less likely to crash

  • r less fuel consumption and costs

  • r less expensive to repair

  • r easy to park

  • r easy to get around in narrow places like crowded construction sites or towns

  • r not participating in road arms race

  • l You get taken serious by your fellow carbrained americans because ""trucks"" are normalized and small handy cars are ridiculed.

So unless you are a fragile piece of human, choose the right one.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 21 points 3 years ago (1 child)

You're mostly right. The main problem is that manufacturers chose to ignore the spirit of the US CAFE fuel economy regulations, and instead build everything bigger and bigger. That's why quarter-ton trucks grew to the size of the F150 in the year 2000 when they were quite a bit smaller before.

It's not the fault of the regulation. It is the fault of the manufacturers and to an equal extent, of consumers for preferring gigantic vehicles.

And let's not let GM off the hook for the 1990s Suburban, which began to, quite literally, dominate the roads. Those fuckers were the original huge grocery getter, and they had truly awful turning radius and blind spots. You just couldn't drive them safely or courteously if you tried. So of course everyone wanted more powerful and bigger vehicles to compete.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)

    I'm actually going to fault regulations on this one. The EPA bases fuel economy requirements on the wheelbase of the vehicle. They used to publish a range of values based every other year or so, but then changed it to a formula. The formula is non-linear, making it neigh impossible to build anything with a small wheelbase anymore. In theory, they could design a small hybrid truck, but would need an obnoxiously long bed to compensate.

    I watched a YouTube video on it not terribly long ago, and iirc, a 95 Ford Ranger, if held to the current formula-based regulations, would need 60+ mpg to be produced without major penalties to the company.

    The EPA either needs to reevaluate the formula, or start manually publishing the numbers with values that are actually achievable by the industry at scale. Basically, by publishing the formula, manufacturers are able to min-max their designs in all the wrong ways.

    EDIT: Updated for clarity and fixed some typos

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    Really, the fault of the regulations is that the penalties for the number of vehicles in the heavy polluting category weren't nearly stiff enough. That's a big part of why the automakers went the opposite direction and just made bigger and heavier vehicles - they could.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent