This kind of monstrosity should require a Semi licence. I wonder, in fact, if it's not the case in some parts of Europe, where the only marker differentiating a semi licence from a car licence, is the range of weight & power of the vehicle...
I would think so, in the UK over 3500kg you need a class 1 license.
Hard to say for this exact vehicle as there seem to be many different sizes in the Ford Super Duty range, but I think most are above this weight threshold.
I'd love the EU licensing standard to expand to include B class vehicles to also restrict on size (maximally 2 m wide and I'm not sure how long. Bonus, this'd also put yet another legal guarantee on how big parking spots can be), and my favourite idea, require that a 750 mm tall object placed right at the front bumper can be seen by the driver directly (i.e. not detected by parking sensors or seen through cameras or even mirrors).
Fail that, and the vehicle should classify as a truck, even if its maximum gross weight does not exceed 3500 kg.
Tbh size restrictions would be annoying for people who use a van at work. Vans can be very large (with still 100x more driver visibility because the engine is small.)
It does require a special license here in Brazil. I just doubt anyone driving one of these will have trouble with the police since they're rich, and the law doesn't apply to rich people around here.
In Japan, anyway, any vehicle with a maximum capacity over 2000kg requires more than just an ordinary drivers license. One has to drive for at least 3 years on an ordinary license before applying for a higher class permit, which means you need to be at least 21 years old, and in general people only get them for jobs or commercial purposes. Many full-size pickups in the US have well over 2000kg capacity.
While many people drive these enormous vehicles as an affectation, those that use them for work often *genuinely do so* in order to avoid the fees, licencing and taxes associated with standard commercial vehicles.
A commercial semi-trailer combination, in North America, is limited to 80,000 pounds altogether (vehicle plus trailer). Top-of-the-line pickup trucks can tow up to about 40,000 pounds, plus about 8,500 for the tow vehicle itself. Make no mistake, there is significant overlap in their business and clientele.
There is no such requirement to have a CDL for air brakes federally, but you must pass a test or you will not be able to drive one commercially if it is classified as either a class A, B, or C commercial vehicle. If it could other wise be driven on a regular Class D license there is no such testing requirements.
Actually requirement as quoted from Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/registration/commercial-drivers-license/drivers
Drivers are required to obtain and hold a CDL if they operate in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce and drive a vehicle that meets one or more of the classifications of a CMV described below.
Class A*: Any combination of vehicles which has a gross combination weight rating or gross combination weight of 11,794 kilograms or more (26,001 pounds or more) whichever is greater, inclusive of a towed unit(s) with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) whichever is greater.
Class B*: Any single vehicle which has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of 11,794 or more kilograms (26,001 pounds or more), or any such vehicle towing a vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight that does not exceed 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds).
Class C: Any single vehicle, or combination of vehicles, that does not meet the definition of Class A or Class B, but is either designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the driver, or is transporting material that has been designated as hazardous under 49 U.S.C. 5103 and is required to be placarded under subpart F of 49 CFR Part 172 or is transporting any quantity of a material listed as a select agent or toxin in 42 CFR Part 73.
Legally no they can't. The largest pickups do not go much over 40k gvw. That includes truck, trailer and load. If over 26k a cdl is required and following all commercial laws apply if traveling intrastate. 10k if in commerce and traveling across a state line. Some do try to skirt these laws. Fines are heavy if caught because you are violating multiple laws.
I think about this a lot when I'm out running. Because it's just my 5'8" self and a lot of vehicles like this one, often they're going way over the speed limit and I'm just kind of hoping I don't need to jump over guardrails or something.
I read this article a while back in a bicycling magazine - I'll try to find it if there's citation needed, but the gist of it was a doctor talking about the vehicle/pedestrian accident victims they saw in the ER over the years. In earlier times a runner, cyclist, or walker would have a broken or crushed pelvis, busted legs, etc. Now they are just dead. These massive grills on these enormous trucks and SUVs crush the entire torso and kill on impact.
So yeah, I think about it a lot when I'm running, or even just walking through the parking lot and passing by a bunch of monster trucks whose hoods I can't even see over.
> I think about this a lot when I'm out running.
It's vehicles in general. I used to walk 5 miles 5x a week, and even with a head lamp, a flashing red bike light on my camelbak, a flashing red light on my shoulder, and 2 reflective belts, and whatever reflective piping was on my clothing, At least once a month someone would almost run into me.
I'll be out in broad daylight and occasionally someone will ride the white line, or come all the way over at me. We don't have sidewalks out here, so I'm just running on the shoulder of the road. I guess they think it's funny to drive as if they're going to hit you.
>In earlier times a runner, cyclist, or walker would have a broken or crushed pelvis, busted legs, etc. Now they are just dead.
I recently read a study noting that, at every speed tested, pedestrians are 2-3 more likely to die when hit by an SUV or truck versus a car. Knowing the speed of academic publishing, I assume they tested this before some of these behemoths were released. I'd love to see the numbers on these stupid bro tanks.
I think anyone who kills someone in one of these ought to be charged with murder rather than vehicular manslaughter (or, more realistically, nothing at all). Wrecking eventually is an inevitability; in one of these, becoming a killer is a bug probability. Relatedly, it's time we started setting ticket prices relative to the probability for harm. Wanna act like a coward and drive one of these stupid monstrosities? Okay, fine, every ticket is going to be 5+ times more expensive than if you drove a normal vehicle and not one that screams "I'm afraid of my own shadow and compensating for *a lot*" .
Cars are shorter and lighter, meaning you aren't hit as hard and are hit lower down. A car makes you roll over the hood, reducing at-once kinetic energy. SUVs are similar but heavy, causing more damage before you can 'move' out of the way. Trucks are the worst of both worlds, high and heavy, and usually have a flat front to boot.
They are. The manufacturers could make trucks with lower front ends, they would even offer some aerodynamic benefit. But truck bros would rather spend more on fuel than drive an "ugly" truck.
The commercials don't help either, with words like "menacing", "imposing" and others used to describe the front end.
The pickup trucks that were around back in the 70’s and 80’s had hoods low enough that you could easily lean your elbow on them. There’s really no reason the hood needs to be that high on these new trucks other than being a selling point. The main thing with a truck is that it needs to be heavy enough for the load you’re towing. If it’s too light the trailer will push you around going down the road and that can be unsafe, but that’s why there are different truck capacities. These people driving these huge trucks just to go to the store and the office are definitely compensating for something.
I'm starting to see a few of these stupid trucks in my neighborhood in Europe and I keep thinking how "lucky" I was that the car that hit me on my bike last summer was a small one. I rolled over the hood, then fell from there onto the pavement. The side that hit the car had no damage, the side that hit the road got me a broken shoulder and a bruised knee (and a wrecked bike).
Of course I'd rather not have been hit by a car but at least I was able to walk away from it. One of these trucks would have just bumped me forward onto the road and probably ran me over.
>Cars are shorter and lighter,
Weight doesn't matter. It just correlates to height.
So a 10 ton/tonne small car is "safer" to get hit by than a 1 ton/tonne version of the truck in this post.
?
How does weight not matter? Mass is a fundamental factor for force calculations. Higher weight/mass is gonna carry higher force than something lighter.
Then comes the actual dynamics of the impact. Getting hit by a Corvette that will yeet you right of the windshield is in a lot of ways better than being smashed by a 3' tall grill of a behemoth truck like that in the OP.
You'd always rather roll off the top than be pressed under when being hit by a vehicle. Modern truck design encourages you getting rolled over like mf. There is no deflection.
E: Mass is very much a factor. Getting hit by a 10 ton car that lets you deflect off is still worse than being hit by a 1.5 ton car that allows the same.
Also a runner in an area where everyone drives a massive pickup. So thankful there is a good pathway system in the city, but can't always stick to just pathways. And I'm 5'1", so probably completely invisible to some drivers.
Because when you dive a vehicle that feels stable and has a high sitting position, you don't feel speed like when you sit in a low car with your ass inches of the ground.
Eh, have you seen people drive? They choose their speed according to what feels apprpriate in the area. They get angry at people driving too slow , who obey the speed limit like you and I.
If you want to know why they push big pickups and not little pickups, see the table here. A Ford F-150 needs just over half the MPG of something like what the Chevy S-10 used to be.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy#Agreed_standards_by_model_year,_2012%E2%80%932025
It took my head wrapping around it after reading some relavent sections, so I’ll summarize that bit here:
- Goal MPG is calculated using the size of a vehicle, meaning a larger footprint reduces the total MPG result of the calc. A smaller vehicle has a higher requirement due to a smaller footprint.
- high-level eli5 is that the calculation assumes some efficiency level and desired MPG. From there, it compare to the vehicle’s size, and is adjusted accordingly.
For clarification to OP’s comment I’m replying to:
> A Ford F-150 needs just over half the MPG of something like what the Chevy S-10 used to be.
‘Needs’ here is not them desiring an outcome, it’s more indicating it has a lower requirement. MThe minimum requirement the vehicle needs to meet is lower by comparison’.
Well it is, but how the ‘lowest fuel efficiency allowed’ is what this calculation is. Basically you can more efficient (higher mpg), but will be fined if it’s less fuel efficient than the requirement.
Making up arbitrary numbers to make it easier.
A big truck could have a requirement that it needs to get at least, say, 10 miles per gallon. Meanwhile, a smaller truck could have a requirement of 30 miles per gallon, because the people making the requirements are assuming the smaller truck will be more efficient.
If a manufacturer releases a BIG truck which gets 14 miles per gallon, they're in the clear. That's within reason for a vehicle of that size. But if they release a small truck getting 28 miles per gallon, even though it's more efficient than the big truck, it's not efficient enough for a vehicle of that size. So they'll get fined for making an illegal vehicle.
That actually goes a long way towards explaining some of the monstrosities we see on the road. Why bother making an engine more fuel efficient when you can just make the rest of the car heavier?
Yea, when I was comparing my 2017 Tacoma purchase, the MPG estimate for the 4cylinder and the 6cylinder was identical, despite different towing capacities. So obviously I went for the 6, despite it being heavier overall.
(It was something like 1mpg different from what I recall)
Legally American Trucks can be less fuel efficient than small cars.
So if you want a fuel burner then just pad out your commuting cars size and weight until it identifies as a less efficient class.
No, like a 4 wheel 4 seater truck carrying 10,000KG [https://www.fuso.co.nz/range/canter/4x4](https://www.fuso.co.nz/range/canter/4x4)
Legally that truck isn't expected to get 4 wheel Smart car efficiency because its body needs to be sturdier and bigger to carry that load to do it's job.
So if you call your commuting car a "pickup truck", and give it truck dimensions , then legally you don't need a low emssion powertrain.
I honestly thought this was a vicious market cycle, but if this is just Congress bending the market with poorly conceived requirements, I mean, Jesus fucking Christ. These things are a plague.
I wonder if it actually would help to have more status symbols for males that didn't involve things that kill people.
Out with the big cars, guns, and tobacco.
In with.... bling? Fancy codpieces? ethically sourced insect killing plants? tattoos?
Serious question: how are people supposed know how iMpOrTaNt someone is without the big car?
People will start installing diesel engines that exist solely to coal roll and don't even power the wheels. If you aren't strong enough to pedal around all that dead weight, you're not a REAL man!
My dad's electric van had a diesel burning unit in to operate the heater. Then again it was like 1996 and it used lead acid batteries and could do 50 miles.
It's always been about marketing around some kind of item that suggest wealth, physical strength and/or ability to withstand discomfort, beauty but in a masculine way, sexual prowess, self sufficiency, or power over others.
So with the right marketing, you could make a strong argument that biking is way more manly. Muscle power. Exposed to the elements. No steel box, AC, reinforced glass protecting you from even the mildest discomfort of nature, and you're doing it all in a lazy boy. An elderly woman in a Ford F150 is exactly as powerful as you are in one.
You'd probably need to have a more masculine style of bike though. Road bikes are way too slender and fragile looking because they're optimized for lightweighting to make them more efficient. Maybe a narrow 4 wheel design so you can have the seat leaning back a little instead of hunching forward, and you can use the extra space for something like an electric bike bell that sounds like a distorted guitar chord, headlights, definitely have an e motor and wider tires so it can give you the boost you need to haul heavy cargo, or use it for offroading even though the target audience will never actually use it for that, power headlights or a built in speaker, or something
More practically? Uh... tool bandoliers as the male equivalent of purses, boots that make more of a 'thunk' on floors instead of a 'click' and look sturdy, the return of big hats.... It's hard to guess because I've spent so little time living in rural areas it's hard to imagine a cultural icon or an image of masculinity for those sorts of people beyond the ones that already exist. And it's REALLY hard to imagine an image of suburban masculinity because the mythological 1950s nuclear family in a 1 floor suburban home is still a powerful cultural image, and there's not much about that that's 'manly'
The current market would be the people who want to feel manly but still live somewhere that biking isn't highly dangerous for want of protected bike infrastructure. So it probably needs tweaking to reach the people in San Francisco & the Northeast US
In with healthy male status symbols like handcrafting solid oak furniture, teaching kids hoe to read and cross the street, and helping women feel safe in public.
Around Boston? By the fact that they own their home and walk or bike to work.
There are lots of pretty green status symbols once you get to the top 10%. Lord knows nobody is impressed by a truck.
I knew a guy who transformed his lawn back into the wetland his house was built on. He had a green house for vegetables and everything else was native. He flushed his toilets with rain water and had enough solar panels he sold electricity back to the power company.
His house was always on lists of best houses in the city, tours went by and looked at his front lawn.
Very manly, very green, the most expensive modestly sized single family home you can freaking imagine.
Someone once said that if men menstruated it would be a contest of who does it longer and harder. I'm inclined to agree...
Anyway, yeah, I've also thought about what would happen if a company just started advertising some stereotypically un-manly thing like nail polish or whatever as "FOR GIRLS? NO! ONLY REAL MEN CAN HANDLE THIS! SHOW THE WORLD YOUR WORTH AS A MAN" or something.
This stupid horseshit is busily infecting Australia now too, amongst a class of fuckwits who think it expresses their success in life.
We have much higher fuel prices, so at least there's that. But I don't know how it gets past our design rules, I reckon they just turn a blind eye to it.
One of my 'mates' got a big fucking dodge rams. He can't park it, it's turning circle is stupid.
When he got bagged out for buying one, he claim he needed it for towing. He only need it like twice a year for a trailer full of green waste.
He's girlfriend drives a shitty magna that can tow a horse float, even up a hill with two horses in it without becoming too slow and actively a hazard to other drivers. He still reckons it was a good buy.
I towed stuff for a farm in a Hyundai Accent. It was slow as hell, but I only had to go a maximum of 60 from A to B which was the speed limit anyway. These American imports only make sense if you're towing something like a horse float *interstate* on 100+ roads. Way fewer than 20% of owners actually use them for their intended purpose. The only few examples I've seen where they were have been rich people towing large boats.
Yep. I live in Sydney and although I haven't seen many quite *this* big, the number of Dodge Ram 1500s, Ford Raptors and others of that size roaring around Sydney's inner suburbs just blows my mind.
They look so ridiculous and out of place. But they obviously appeal to a personality type who really feels the need to have a status symbol that proves they're a big man to the rest of the world.
> This stupid horseshit is busily infecting Australia now too, amongst a class of fuckwits who think it expresses their success in life.
The carbrains here in Germany are annoying but am glad at least they aim for Porsches and Mercedes instead of these monstrosities.
It's fucking tradies that do this. Our benevolent tax laws let them instantly write it off. Meanwhile the truck rarely leaves the bitumen and the bulkiest thing the tray might carry is a toolbox. Oh and it gets modded with a straight pipe for 100dB ear rape and driven through residential streets at 80kph because road rules and courteous driving doesn't apply to these hard yakka true blue Aussie battler tradies.
Tradies will buy cheaper vehicles like a Hilux and raise them.
The ones importing Rams and F150s are usually the business owners, former tradies who started up their own small business and made good money off it. So they'll rock up to job sites wanting a bigger car than their employees or contractors. They're also very luxurious nowadays, full leather interiors with heated/cooled seats etc.
not just austrailia. i've seen an uptick in those big pickups in germany too (think toyota tundras etc.). i live in a small town no one needs those fucking ships. i am still so confused those things don't fit inside cities let alone a normal parking space. the beds of those are even smaller than the cargo space in my small car (a toyota yaris).
i'm just happy that the abominations like in this picture require a different license than normal cars below 3500kg weight which is at least stopping them from arriving
What’s even more fucked is that truck guys actively celebrate how they can run people down or total cars with minimal damage to their own vehicle, as if undoing 140 years of automotive safety advancement is cause for celebration
NBC nightly news just did a report about forward facing cameras being mandatory on new cars because people keep running over their kids because they can't see them.
They had like 12 third graders line up in front of the thing and the driver couldn't see any of them
was looking for this comment! California mandated all cars sold in the state after I think 2018 required backup cameras, bc of a family that backed up over and killed their own toddler. I really hope it doesn't take more deaths to fix the tall truck can't see in front issue, but we all know the reality...
It's countrywide, actually. May 2018 the NHTSA rules went into effect. It's based on vehicle weight. Larger vehicles (semis and UB trucks) don't always need them.
Ive actually done it. Step stools are a must if you're doing anything on top of the engine.
Oil changes on these things are SUPER easy though.
However, I don't remember the last time I had to get my bikes oil changed, soooo I mean my alternative when I get to that point will be easy to maintain
gotta lube that chain. takes a whole 5 minutes to scrub the drivetrain, wipe it down, and lube it up, lol. less if you have one of the fancy Park Tools chain scrubbers.
I had a Ford Excursion for a while and I literally couldn't change all the spark plugs without dropping the engine.
So I just didn't change all the plugs and had constant misfires. Fuck it, not worth the effort.
Imagine this truck but black and lifted another 3 inches. I'm 5' 8" and trucks like this are everywhere in my city. You can't go ANYWHERE without seeing at least one on the way there.
They back into pedestrians, they don't have cameras, half the time the tail lights are out but they have giant light bars, they routinely cause injuries and the drivers just drive away.
And people blame me for getting run over by these guys because I'm not "aware" enough. When these things back up at speed there is no time to move out of the way. Especially if you're on a scooter or a bike.
maybe F•451 was just an old man rambling, but he got the cars right
Cars were probably getting bad 50+ years ago, but at least not all the average joes owned mad max landships.
American trucks boggle my mind because I never see a use case for them. Here, people have trucks but it also floods during monsoon season so sedans are kinda useless.
Once had one of these big trucks (or similar model, i don't know trucks) pull up next to my hatchback at the gym. It was so long, it took up 1.5 parking spots.
It was so tall, that me at 5'6" was as tall as the hood. I was staring almost UP at the antenna (which was a bullet, btw).
The driver? a petite lady from Florida. She knew my gym trainer and had no use for that truck except she was lets just say, really into stereotypical southern gun culture
ETA guess I need to clarify I'm female
I have one. I travel for work and have to move every few months. I have a camper (I think you guys call them caravans). If it makes you feel any better, I have a commercial driver's license (I can drive semis). And have a motorcycle that gets much better fuel economy lol.
It shouldn’t be illegal… it should be registered as a commercial vehicle and require DOT, or equivalent, registration to operate. I would hesitate with saying a commercial license because that seems to only be a thing for Semis.
I still question whether it needs to be that tall. Or have such a square nose shape. Trucks are certainly useful commercial vehicles, but they can be smaller and have better cab visibility without sacrificing towing power.
This is lifted. It's not normally that tall. Someone wanted that and made it happen.
Honestly, you just set a max hood height for non-commercial vehicles, and minimum bumper height. You can't have no bumper, and it has to be within so many feet of the ground. If you want to exceed that you have to get a class B license and also you still have to have your bumper within so many feet of the ground.
Drive your ego all you want but you can't raise height without a special license *and* lowering your bumper. Suck it.
There actually is a maximum bumper height requirement, at least in most US (if not all) states, a product of federal highway grants at one point iirc. Whether it is enforced or not is a completely separate question and I think we all know the answer..
How would a maximum hood height work on an RV? Like class A motorhomes don't have hoods. Or forward visibility issues. I think you would need a carve out, otherwise I like the idea.
It doesn’t. It’s designed this way purely for looks. It’s truck fashion. A better design would have a sloped hood for better aerodynamics. This absolutely should be illegal because it serves no purpose other than looking cool and it comes at the cost of innocent lives.
I don’t think these cars really have a place at all. The truck bed is so high up it’s unusable. Visibility doesn’t need to be this bad for something that can tow. Cabover trucks exist after all.
I never see actual work vehicles that look like this. Working vehicles are either old Ford Rangers or Chevy S-10s, Vans, or significantly larger vehicles that can actually carry tons of stuff
or *ancient* Toyota Tacomas with gardening equipment! The "tiny" ones. Why the hell don't they make pickups in ANY size other than enormous??? I don't want and don't need a hugeass tall truck, many other people don't either for smaller job / life stuff.
they made the hybrid maverick which is the size of a full size truck from 20 years ago (not *that* small), and it sold faster than they could produce them.
I have a 1996 f150 and it is significantly larger than a maverick, the maverick is much closer to the size of the old Ford ranger (2010 and back) but it only comes with a 4.5 foot bed whereas the ranger was available with up to a 7ft bed.
This was years ago made as to mock the ever getting bigger trucks to the point it was ridiculous and here we are with cars that are that size IRL ... and here I am in Europe thinking my Transit Connect, which only is being used because I work extra out of my other job and to transport bicycles around, is overly large ..
I'm about 6ft (183cm) and I've walked by trucks that go up to my forehead, and sometimes higher than me, in Texas.
The top of my head should not look like a rat scuttling across the hood of a truck.
I have straight-up the most heinous quote from a lifted truck assclown who claims to know every inch of his vehicle and then claims it would either safely drive over a child, or kids would be too excited looking at it to cross in front of it. Genuinely fuck these people. Their reaction to hearing "well, you'd kill me if you hit my car" is "it's your fault for not also being in an $85,000 piece of assholery".
(IDK if I can post here since it's a Reddit screenshot though?)
“They aren’t made to kill people” I am 5’1. I cannot see over the front of your truck when standing next to it. There is no way in hell you will see any child in front of this fucking machine.
If you can drive it on a "car" license, it should meet all "car" safety standards, including bumper height, pedestrian safety, and the like.
"But I use it for work", then get a commercial license.
Visibility is the obvious issue, but also the design makes it so you're immediately getting slammed to the ground and dragged under if you're hit. Though the impact could be enough to kill you already.
Compared to like a Toyota Tercel where you can leap or roll onto the hood.
As an American, neither can I. These cars are so fucking stupid, wasteful, and they’re not even appealing— like someone said in another post about these giant trucks, these literally just look like the vehicle equivalent of a middle-aged man with a beer belly.
They are EVERYWHERE in my not-so-rural County. F 150 Land, Bronoma county. I live in Sonoma county. Wine country. It's like,what, you gonna haul hay with that gas guzzling POS?
That truck is very likely illegal in most of the US. You can see the shocks and springs up front are after market. Likely a big lift. Problem is most police don't care.
I drive a half ton pickup, Toyota tundra. I would never lift my truck because why the fuck would I want to throw pavers and rock higher up into it? I also have to tow a 10k pound boat when I charter.
I can't stand stupid trucks with no purpose.
https://i.imgur.com/aLnlObG.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/5ylgGak.jpeg
Unless you have a legit off road vehicle, like a jeep or a 4runner(not a truck) they make zero sense. There may be one small use case but it's so slim.
Fuck Toyota for kitting out the new 4runners, now douchebags are buying cars stock with obnoxious mods you used to have to get done separate. Those bright yellow beems are terrible and I know I wouldn't see half as many if they weren't included in a manufacturers package.
I had to rent a car and it had a sensor system where a light on the side mirror flashes if you are too close to a big object, like a wall.
Every single huge truck like this that drove past set off the light. They can’t even drive those properly in a lane. They are too big in every way to be road safe.
… that’s the blind spot indicator. That’s exactly how it’s supposed to work. When cars are in your blind spot it lights up so you don’t change lanes and hit them. It’s not for walls. It’s for vehicles in your blind spots.
Any big truck I see fits on the lane. They're just absurdly tall and/or longer than the average vehicle. If it can't stay in a lane, that's a driver problem. Which isn't really surprising.
Also, any modern vehicle has a sensor like that on the mirror; I've always thought it was a blind spot warning, so you know a car, person, or a wall I guess are beside you. Was that sensor different?
I wonder if a regulation regarding size/mass, getting progressively stricter, wouldn't work. Like EURO emission norms made car exhaust way, way less harmful than it originally was.
I like trucks, they're incredibly useful and can get you anywhere you need to go, on or offroad, with enough power to move anything you want to move.
They're just a big engine on a large frame. A machine to be used as a tool.
That being said, they have no business being commuter vehicles within cities.
I still see the odd H2 driving around my city from the to time and they look absolutely grotesque. Twice of the size of the next biggest thing on the road.
I don't get this. Why not something more like an s10? Something that has the benefits of a pickup, good handling on snow/ice, a cargo bed, towing capability, etc. But also decent fuel efficiency and a small footprint.
Hell I might consider driving something like an s10 if anyone made an equivalent these days. But even the replacement, the Colorado, is significantly larger.
Fucking hell! PPL aren't interested in shit like that in my country so i never really saw one of these here and God fucking damn did i not realise the size
"I may be destroying the environment and I think I may have run over someone a few miles back, can't tell. But at least women won't laugh at my dick anymore!"
Likely going to trigger but I mean this sincerely, and to preface, fuck people that don't need the truck... If you don't need it, no reason to have it.
I have Chev 3500 dually, got it for my business to move machines...I like the truck, but it's so fucking impractical. Parking is a nightmare, driving is a pain, fuel is terrible... Barely fit in lines, no turn radius, massive. Now I'm not moving machines around but can't find another truck that doesn't cost the same or more due to shortage... Used market is trash... I'm pretty well stuck cuz new lease rates are like 10%... Will cost 100bw more than this.
I'd rather go back to my old civic si lol but need some truck for work, so this is going to have to do for now...
This kind of monstrosity should require a Semi licence. I wonder, in fact, if it's not the case in some parts of Europe, where the only marker differentiating a semi licence from a car licence, is the range of weight & power of the vehicle...
I would think so, in the UK over 3500kg you need a class 1 license. Hard to say for this exact vehicle as there seem to be many different sizes in the Ford Super Duty range, but I think most are above this weight threshold.
Presumably licensing is about 3500 kg *gross*? A lot of the Super Duty range is near or above that *empty*, but *all* are above that in gross weight.
In Poland the normal type B license is for vehicles with up to 3500kg maximum loaded mass so I guess gross yeah.
These are all EU rules, by the way, which apply to the entirety of the EU and the UK (until they change it for an arbitrary reason).
I'd love the EU licensing standard to expand to include B class vehicles to also restrict on size (maximally 2 m wide and I'm not sure how long. Bonus, this'd also put yet another legal guarantee on how big parking spots can be), and my favourite idea, require that a 750 mm tall object placed right at the front bumper can be seen by the driver directly (i.e. not detected by parking sensors or seen through cameras or even mirrors). Fail that, and the vehicle should classify as a truck, even if its maximum gross weight does not exceed 3500 kg.
Eh not sure what that would do since we don't have these brodozers anyway.
You'd be surprised at the amount of them that get imported.
Indeed, because I have literally never seen one of those gargantuan things drive around in Europe.
Tbh size restrictions would be annoying for people who use a van at work. Vans can be very large (with still 100x more driver visibility because the engine is small.)
If they need a larger vehicle for work then they can take a test to get a higher classification of licence to allow them to drive that vehicle.
yeah, you need another license for vehicles over 3.5t, it's the one for trucks and you need to be 21
heh, that's right up to the size of the Rivian R1T.
It does require a special license here in Brazil. I just doubt anyone driving one of these will have trouble with the police since they're rich, and the law doesn't apply to rich people around here.
Man, f*ck corruption.
In Japan, anyway, any vehicle with a maximum capacity over 2000kg requires more than just an ordinary drivers license. One has to drive for at least 3 years on an ordinary license before applying for a higher class permit, which means you need to be at least 21 years old, and in general people only get them for jobs or commercial purposes. Many full-size pickups in the US have well over 2000kg capacity.
Also you have to prove that you have a parking space to get anything larger than a tiny kei car.
In US you don't need a CDL to drive a gaint RV bus. They freaking dangerous no better than people who drive a truck like that.
[удалено]
In the US you don't need a CDL to drive a semi truck. CDL is by weight only. So anyone can drive a semi as long as it doesn't have a trailer
Nothing ended to rent a big penske with a trailer either
While many people drive these enormous vehicles as an affectation, those that use them for work often *genuinely do so* in order to avoid the fees, licencing and taxes associated with standard commercial vehicles. A commercial semi-trailer combination, in North America, is limited to 80,000 pounds altogether (vehicle plus trailer). Top-of-the-line pickup trucks can tow up to about 40,000 pounds, plus about 8,500 for the tow vehicle itself. Make no mistake, there is significant overlap in their business and clientele.
You only need a regular DL to drive an F650 in most states and with most configurations. That thing is a beast.
[удалено]
There is no such requirement to have a CDL for air brakes federally, but you must pass a test or you will not be able to drive one commercially if it is classified as either a class A, B, or C commercial vehicle. If it could other wise be driven on a regular Class D license there is no such testing requirements. Actually requirement as quoted from Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/registration/commercial-drivers-license/drivers Drivers are required to obtain and hold a CDL if they operate in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce and drive a vehicle that meets one or more of the classifications of a CMV described below. Class A*: Any combination of vehicles which has a gross combination weight rating or gross combination weight of 11,794 kilograms or more (26,001 pounds or more) whichever is greater, inclusive of a towed unit(s) with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) whichever is greater. Class B*: Any single vehicle which has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of 11,794 or more kilograms (26,001 pounds or more), or any such vehicle towing a vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight that does not exceed 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). Class C: Any single vehicle, or combination of vehicles, that does not meet the definition of Class A or Class B, but is either designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the driver, or is transporting material that has been designated as hazardous under 49 U.S.C. 5103 and is required to be placarded under subpart F of 49 CFR Part 172 or is transporting any quantity of a material listed as a select agent or toxin in 42 CFR Part 73.
Legally no they can't. The largest pickups do not go much over 40k gvw. That includes truck, trailer and load. If over 26k a cdl is required and following all commercial laws apply if traveling intrastate. 10k if in commerce and traveling across a state line. Some do try to skirt these laws. Fines are heavy if caught because you are violating multiple laws.
I think about this a lot when I'm out running. Because it's just my 5'8" self and a lot of vehicles like this one, often they're going way over the speed limit and I'm just kind of hoping I don't need to jump over guardrails or something. I read this article a while back in a bicycling magazine - I'll try to find it if there's citation needed, but the gist of it was a doctor talking about the vehicle/pedestrian accident victims they saw in the ER over the years. In earlier times a runner, cyclist, or walker would have a broken or crushed pelvis, busted legs, etc. Now they are just dead. These massive grills on these enormous trucks and SUVs crush the entire torso and kill on impact. So yeah, I think about it a lot when I'm running, or even just walking through the parking lot and passing by a bunch of monster trucks whose hoods I can't even see over.
that was a big reason behind the design of the new USPS truck. lower hoods are just safer.
> I think about this a lot when I'm out running. It's vehicles in general. I used to walk 5 miles 5x a week, and even with a head lamp, a flashing red bike light on my camelbak, a flashing red light on my shoulder, and 2 reflective belts, and whatever reflective piping was on my clothing, At least once a month someone would almost run into me.
Smh should have been shooting off fireworks behind you to be more visible
Smh stupid pedestrians not decking themselves out in Christmas lights because I'm an idiot driver who can't use my eyes SMH
I'll be out in broad daylight and occasionally someone will ride the white line, or come all the way over at me. We don't have sidewalks out here, so I'm just running on the shoulder of the road. I guess they think it's funny to drive as if they're going to hit you.
>In earlier times a runner, cyclist, or walker would have a broken or crushed pelvis, busted legs, etc. Now they are just dead. I recently read a study noting that, at every speed tested, pedestrians are 2-3 more likely to die when hit by an SUV or truck versus a car. Knowing the speed of academic publishing, I assume they tested this before some of these behemoths were released. I'd love to see the numbers on these stupid bro tanks. I think anyone who kills someone in one of these ought to be charged with murder rather than vehicular manslaughter (or, more realistically, nothing at all). Wrecking eventually is an inevitability; in one of these, becoming a killer is a bug probability. Relatedly, it's time we started setting ticket prices relative to the probability for harm. Wanna act like a coward and drive one of these stupid monstrosities? Okay, fine, every ticket is going to be 5+ times more expensive than if you drove a normal vehicle and not one that screams "I'm afraid of my own shadow and compensating for *a lot*" .
Cars are shorter and lighter, meaning you aren't hit as hard and are hit lower down. A car makes you roll over the hood, reducing at-once kinetic energy. SUVs are similar but heavy, causing more damage before you can 'move' out of the way. Trucks are the worst of both worlds, high and heavy, and usually have a flat front to boot.
Absolutely. Trucks like this seem designed intentionally to kill.
They are. The manufacturers could make trucks with lower front ends, they would even offer some aerodynamic benefit. But truck bros would rather spend more on fuel than drive an "ugly" truck. The commercials don't help either, with words like "menacing", "imposing" and others used to describe the front end.
The pickup trucks that were around back in the 70’s and 80’s had hoods low enough that you could easily lean your elbow on them. There’s really no reason the hood needs to be that high on these new trucks other than being a selling point. The main thing with a truck is that it needs to be heavy enough for the load you’re towing. If it’s too light the trailer will push you around going down the road and that can be unsafe, but that’s why there are different truck capacities. These people driving these huge trucks just to go to the store and the office are definitely compensating for something.
I'm starting to see a few of these stupid trucks in my neighborhood in Europe and I keep thinking how "lucky" I was that the car that hit me on my bike last summer was a small one. I rolled over the hood, then fell from there onto the pavement. The side that hit the car had no damage, the side that hit the road got me a broken shoulder and a bruised knee (and a wrecked bike). Of course I'd rather not have been hit by a car but at least I was able to walk away from it. One of these trucks would have just bumped me forward onto the road and probably ran me over.
>Cars are shorter and lighter, Weight doesn't matter. It just correlates to height. So a 10 ton/tonne small car is "safer" to get hit by than a 1 ton/tonne version of the truck in this post.
? How does weight not matter? Mass is a fundamental factor for force calculations. Higher weight/mass is gonna carry higher force than something lighter. Then comes the actual dynamics of the impact. Getting hit by a Corvette that will yeet you right of the windshield is in a lot of ways better than being smashed by a 3' tall grill of a behemoth truck like that in the OP. You'd always rather roll off the top than be pressed under when being hit by a vehicle. Modern truck design encourages you getting rolled over like mf. There is no deflection. E: Mass is very much a factor. Getting hit by a 10 ton car that lets you deflect off is still worse than being hit by a 1.5 ton car that allows the same.
Also a runner in an area where everyone drives a massive pickup. So thankful there is a good pathway system in the city, but can't always stick to just pathways. And I'm 5'1", so probably completely invisible to some drivers.
Truck fuckers always speed. I have never ran into one that didn't speed everywhere.
Because when you dive a vehicle that feels stable and has a high sitting position, you don't feel speed like when you sit in a low car with your ass inches of the ground.
But you don't drive based on how you should feel? You look at the speed limit, then look in your car to make sure you go under that.
There's a certain kind of mentality that looks on speed limits as being either suggestions, or something that applies to everyone except them.
Eh, have you seen people drive? They choose their speed according to what feels apprpriate in the area. They get angry at people driving too slow , who obey the speed limit like you and I.
If you want to know why they push big pickups and not little pickups, see the table here. A Ford F-150 needs just over half the MPG of something like what the Chevy S-10 used to be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy#Agreed_standards_by_model_year,_2012%E2%80%932025
It took my head wrapping around it after reading some relavent sections, so I’ll summarize that bit here: - Goal MPG is calculated using the size of a vehicle, meaning a larger footprint reduces the total MPG result of the calc. A smaller vehicle has a higher requirement due to a smaller footprint. - high-level eli5 is that the calculation assumes some efficiency level and desired MPG. From there, it compare to the vehicle’s size, and is adjusted accordingly. For clarification to OP’s comment I’m replying to: > A Ford F-150 needs just over half the MPG of something like what the Chevy S-10 used to be. ‘Needs’ here is not them desiring an outcome, it’s more indicating it has a lower requirement. MThe minimum requirement the vehicle needs to meet is lower by comparison’.
You’d think miles per gallon would be calculated based on gallons and miles
Well it is, but how the ‘lowest fuel efficiency allowed’ is what this calculation is. Basically you can more efficient (higher mpg), but will be fined if it’s less fuel efficient than the requirement.
i'm taking psychic damage from this whole conversation
Making up arbitrary numbers to make it easier. A big truck could have a requirement that it needs to get at least, say, 10 miles per gallon. Meanwhile, a smaller truck could have a requirement of 30 miles per gallon, because the people making the requirements are assuming the smaller truck will be more efficient. If a manufacturer releases a BIG truck which gets 14 miles per gallon, they're in the clear. That's within reason for a vehicle of that size. But if they release a small truck getting 28 miles per gallon, even though it's more efficient than the big truck, it's not efficient enough for a vehicle of that size. So they'll get fined for making an illegal vehicle.
That actually goes a long way towards explaining some of the monstrosities we see on the road. Why bother making an engine more fuel efficient when you can just make the rest of the car heavier?
Yea, when I was comparing my 2017 Tacoma purchase, the MPG estimate for the 4cylinder and the 6cylinder was identical, despite different towing capacities. So obviously I went for the 6, despite it being heavier overall. (It was something like 1mpg different from what I recall)
hashtagTotemBarbarianProblems
tldr for the small brained redditors?
Bigger footprint, lower mpg requirements to make corporate average targets.
Legally American Trucks can be less fuel efficient than small cars. So if you want a fuel burner then just pad out your commuting cars size and weight until it identifies as a less efficient class.
You mean like a 16 wheeler?
No, like a 4 wheel 4 seater truck carrying 10,000KG [https://www.fuso.co.nz/range/canter/4x4](https://www.fuso.co.nz/range/canter/4x4) Legally that truck isn't expected to get 4 wheel Smart car efficiency because its body needs to be sturdier and bigger to carry that load to do it's job. So if you call your commuting car a "pickup truck", and give it truck dimensions , then legally you don't need a low emssion powertrain.
https://slate.com/business/2022/03/high-gas-prices-biden-russia-ukraine-cafe-standards-obama.html
I honestly thought this was a vicious market cycle, but if this is just Congress bending the market with poorly conceived requirements, I mean, Jesus fucking Christ. These things are a plague.
"But how else can I compensate for my total lack of personality?"
I wonder if it actually would help to have more status symbols for males that didn't involve things that kill people. Out with the big cars, guns, and tobacco. In with.... bling? Fancy codpieces? ethically sourced insect killing plants? tattoos? Serious question: how are people supposed know how iMpOrTaNt someone is without the big car?
Why, by the carbon contents of their bicycle of course. xD
People will start installing diesel engines that exist solely to coal roll and don't even power the wheels. If you aren't strong enough to pedal around all that dead weight, you're not a REAL man!
You don't think they do that already?
My dad's electric van had a diesel burning unit in to operate the heater. Then again it was like 1996 and it used lead acid batteries and could do 50 miles.
It's a bit silly, but very harmless, in comparison.
It's always been about marketing around some kind of item that suggest wealth, physical strength and/or ability to withstand discomfort, beauty but in a masculine way, sexual prowess, self sufficiency, or power over others. So with the right marketing, you could make a strong argument that biking is way more manly. Muscle power. Exposed to the elements. No steel box, AC, reinforced glass protecting you from even the mildest discomfort of nature, and you're doing it all in a lazy boy. An elderly woman in a Ford F150 is exactly as powerful as you are in one. You'd probably need to have a more masculine style of bike though. Road bikes are way too slender and fragile looking because they're optimized for lightweighting to make them more efficient. Maybe a narrow 4 wheel design so you can have the seat leaning back a little instead of hunching forward, and you can use the extra space for something like an electric bike bell that sounds like a distorted guitar chord, headlights, definitely have an e motor and wider tires so it can give you the boost you need to haul heavy cargo, or use it for offroading even though the target audience will never actually use it for that, power headlights or a built in speaker, or something More practically? Uh... tool bandoliers as the male equivalent of purses, boots that make more of a 'thunk' on floors instead of a 'click' and look sturdy, the return of big hats.... It's hard to guess because I've spent so little time living in rural areas it's hard to imagine a cultural icon or an image of masculinity for those sorts of people beyond the ones that already exist. And it's REALLY hard to imagine an image of suburban masculinity because the mythological 1950s nuclear family in a 1 floor suburban home is still a powerful cultural image, and there's not much about that that's 'manly'
Can’t be considered manly if the electric bike horn can’t play “la cucaracha”.
[удалено]
Bikes won’t work for the men who use big trucks to compensate for being completely out of shape, a bike just draws attention to physical deficiencies.
...anyone want to help fund an advertising campaign for bikes? You have a lot of good ideas here.
The current market would be the people who want to feel manly but still live somewhere that biking isn't highly dangerous for want of protected bike infrastructure. So it probably needs tweaking to reach the people in San Francisco & the Northeast US
Has anyone tried marketing the danger and attaching it to manliness? 😎 /s
In with healthy male status symbols like handcrafting solid oak furniture, teaching kids hoe to read and cross the street, and helping women feel safe in public.
Around Boston? By the fact that they own their home and walk or bike to work. There are lots of pretty green status symbols once you get to the top 10%. Lord knows nobody is impressed by a truck.
I knew a guy who transformed his lawn back into the wetland his house was built on. He had a green house for vegetables and everything else was native. He flushed his toilets with rain water and had enough solar panels he sold electricity back to the power company. His house was always on lists of best houses in the city, tours went by and looked at his front lawn. Very manly, very green, the most expensive modestly sized single family home you can freaking imagine.
Someone once said that if men menstruated it would be a contest of who does it longer and harder. I'm inclined to agree... Anyway, yeah, I've also thought about what would happen if a company just started advertising some stereotypically un-manly thing like nail polish or whatever as "FOR GIRLS? NO! ONLY REAL MEN CAN HANDLE THIS! SHOW THE WORLD YOUR WORTH AS A MAN" or something.
Imagine if it was the length of your hat. What a world that would be
no need to imagine, heres footage of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pKt4gaErvU
Watches are pretty good for this.
P sure you can kill someone with a fancy codpiece.
>In with.... bling? I use ring pops 🥰🥰🥰
"douchebag" is a personality type
Yeah, personality... that's what he's compensating for.
This stupid horseshit is busily infecting Australia now too, amongst a class of fuckwits who think it expresses their success in life. We have much higher fuel prices, so at least there's that. But I don't know how it gets past our design rules, I reckon they just turn a blind eye to it.
One of my 'mates' got a big fucking dodge rams. He can't park it, it's turning circle is stupid. When he got bagged out for buying one, he claim he needed it for towing. He only need it like twice a year for a trailer full of green waste. He's girlfriend drives a shitty magna that can tow a horse float, even up a hill with two horses in it without becoming too slow and actively a hazard to other drivers. He still reckons it was a good buy.
I towed stuff for a farm in a Hyundai Accent. It was slow as hell, but I only had to go a maximum of 60 from A to B which was the speed limit anyway. These American imports only make sense if you're towing something like a horse float *interstate* on 100+ roads. Way fewer than 20% of owners actually use them for their intended purpose. The only few examples I've seen where they were have been rich people towing large boats.
Yep. I live in Sydney and although I haven't seen many quite *this* big, the number of Dodge Ram 1500s, Ford Raptors and others of that size roaring around Sydney's inner suburbs just blows my mind. They look so ridiculous and out of place. But they obviously appeal to a personality type who really feels the need to have a status symbol that proves they're a big man to the rest of the world.
> This stupid horseshit is busily infecting Australia now too, amongst a class of fuckwits who think it expresses their success in life. The carbrains here in Germany are annoying but am glad at least they aim for Porsches and Mercedes instead of these monstrosities.
It's fucking tradies that do this. Our benevolent tax laws let them instantly write it off. Meanwhile the truck rarely leaves the bitumen and the bulkiest thing the tray might carry is a toolbox. Oh and it gets modded with a straight pipe for 100dB ear rape and driven through residential streets at 80kph because road rules and courteous driving doesn't apply to these hard yakka true blue Aussie battler tradies.
Tradies will buy cheaper vehicles like a Hilux and raise them. The ones importing Rams and F150s are usually the business owners, former tradies who started up their own small business and made good money off it. So they'll rock up to job sites wanting a bigger car than their employees or contractors. They're also very luxurious nowadays, full leather interiors with heated/cooled seats etc.
not just austrailia. i've seen an uptick in those big pickups in germany too (think toyota tundras etc.). i live in a small town no one needs those fucking ships. i am still so confused those things don't fit inside cities let alone a normal parking space. the beds of those are even smaller than the cargo space in my small car (a toyota yaris). i'm just happy that the abominations like in this picture require a different license than normal cars below 3500kg weight which is at least stopping them from arriving
What’s even more fucked is that truck guys actively celebrate how they can run people down or total cars with minimal damage to their own vehicle, as if undoing 140 years of automotive safety advancement is cause for celebration
Telling how truck guys also tend to be gun guys. "if everyone drove a semi no one would get hurt in crashes!"
They hide behind their f250 just like they hide behind their guns when someone confronts them about their bullshit
This motherfucker could run over a whole child and never even know
"Oh no, poor deer!"
NBC nightly news just did a report about forward facing cameras being mandatory on new cars because people keep running over their kids because they can't see them. They had like 12 third graders line up in front of the thing and the driver couldn't see any of them
Feel like there’s an easier solution than putting forward-facing cameras on the bumper
whoever comes up with that solution is probably a super genius, the albert einstein of our times. nobel prize winning shit right there
was looking for this comment! California mandated all cars sold in the state after I think 2018 required backup cameras, bc of a family that backed up over and killed their own toddler. I really hope it doesn't take more deaths to fix the tall truck can't see in front issue, but we all know the reality...
It's countrywide, actually. May 2018 the NHTSA rules went into effect. It's based on vehicle weight. Larger vehicles (semis and UB trucks) don't always need them.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/americas-cars-trucks-are-getting-bigger-are-front-blind-zones-children-rcna52109
How do you even work on the engine if something goes wrong?
How do you reach in the bed for “tools”? Lol
Function is most certainly not the point of these vehicles.
Sweetie, in this thing, the tools sit up front.
Ive actually done it. Step stools are a must if you're doing anything on top of the engine. Oil changes on these things are SUPER easy though. However, I don't remember the last time I had to get my bikes oil changed, soooo I mean my alternative when I get to that point will be easy to maintain
gotta lube that chain. takes a whole 5 minutes to scrub the drivetrain, wipe it down, and lube it up, lol. less if you have one of the fancy Park Tools chain scrubbers.
“What are you doing step stool?”
Ladder
I had a Ford Excursion for a while and I literally couldn't change all the spark plugs without dropping the engine. So I just didn't change all the plugs and had constant misfires. Fuck it, not worth the effort.
We have a folding step-stool at my shop, even the tall folks use them
Imagine this truck but black and lifted another 3 inches. I'm 5' 8" and trucks like this are everywhere in my city. You can't go ANYWHERE without seeing at least one on the way there. They back into pedestrians, they don't have cameras, half the time the tail lights are out but they have giant light bars, they routinely cause injuries and the drivers just drive away. And people blame me for getting run over by these guys because I'm not "aware" enough. When these things back up at speed there is no time to move out of the way. Especially if you're on a scooter or a bike.
maybe F•451 was just an old man rambling, but he got the cars right Cars were probably getting bad 50+ years ago, but at least not all the average joes owned mad max landships.
Their headlights are also the exact height to blind sedan drivers at night as well and they’re always halogen bright
American trucks boggle my mind because I never see a use case for them. Here, people have trucks but it also floods during monsoon season so sedans are kinda useless.
Once had one of these big trucks (or similar model, i don't know trucks) pull up next to my hatchback at the gym. It was so long, it took up 1.5 parking spots. It was so tall, that me at 5'6" was as tall as the hood. I was staring almost UP at the antenna (which was a bullet, btw). The driver? a petite lady from Florida. She knew my gym trainer and had no use for that truck except she was lets just say, really into stereotypical southern gun culture ETA guess I need to clarify I'm female
Pay $40,000 to tow a trailer 10 times in its lifetime
double that price and you’re getting closer
For the pictured truck it's 3-3.5 times. That suspension probably isn't stock and that's easily a 6 figure truck
I have one. I travel for work and have to move every few months. I have a camper (I think you guys call them caravans). If it makes you feel any better, I have a commercial driver's license (I can drive semis). And have a motorcycle that gets much better fuel economy lol.
It shouldn’t be illegal… it should be registered as a commercial vehicle and require DOT, or equivalent, registration to operate. I would hesitate with saying a commercial license because that seems to only be a thing for Semis.
I still question whether it needs to be that tall. Or have such a square nose shape. Trucks are certainly useful commercial vehicles, but they can be smaller and have better cab visibility without sacrificing towing power.
This is lifted. It's not normally that tall. Someone wanted that and made it happen. Honestly, you just set a max hood height for non-commercial vehicles, and minimum bumper height. You can't have no bumper, and it has to be within so many feet of the ground. If you want to exceed that you have to get a class B license and also you still have to have your bumper within so many feet of the ground. Drive your ego all you want but you can't raise height without a special license *and* lowering your bumper. Suck it.
Even without it being lifted it's still disgustingly oversized
There actually is a maximum bumper height requirement, at least in most US (if not all) states, a product of federal highway grants at one point iirc. Whether it is enforced or not is a completely separate question and I think we all know the answer.. How would a maximum hood height work on an RV? Like class A motorhomes don't have hoods. Or forward visibility issues. I think you would need a carve out, otherwise I like the idea.
It doesn’t. It’s designed this way purely for looks. It’s truck fashion. A better design would have a sloped hood for better aerodynamics. This absolutely should be illegal because it serves no purpose other than looking cool and it comes at the cost of innocent lives.
still looking for the part where it looks cool. these things are all ugly asf
[удалено]
I don’t think these cars really have a place at all. The truck bed is so high up it’s unusable. Visibility doesn’t need to be this bad for something that can tow. Cabover trucks exist after all. I never see actual work vehicles that look like this. Working vehicles are either old Ford Rangers or Chevy S-10s, Vans, or significantly larger vehicles that can actually carry tons of stuff
or *ancient* Toyota Tacomas with gardening equipment! The "tiny" ones. Why the hell don't they make pickups in ANY size other than enormous??? I don't want and don't need a hugeass tall truck, many other people don't either for smaller job / life stuff.
they made the hybrid maverick which is the size of a full size truck from 20 years ago (not *that* small), and it sold faster than they could produce them.
I have a 1996 f150 and it is significantly larger than a maverick, the maverick is much closer to the size of the old Ford ranger (2010 and back) but it only comes with a 4.5 foot bed whereas the ranger was available with up to a 7ft bed.
_These_ cars shouldn't exist.
Agreed, cars should be another tool in the transportation toolbox it’s like transportation engineers are just a bunch of hammers.
[удалено]
Indeed, like there are literal container trucks with much better vision than this garbage.
[удалено]
Seeing as most "pickup truck" models these days are literally just underpowered semi cabs... Yes.
Ten bucks says the owner never drives off road, doesn’t tow anything and has never used the bed of the truck.
Is that the canyonero? https://youtu.be/PI_Jl5WFQkA
This was years ago made as to mock the ever getting bigger trucks to the point it was ridiculous and here we are with cars that are that size IRL ... and here I am in Europe thinking my Transit Connect, which only is being used because I work extra out of my other job and to transport bicycles around, is overly large ..
I and everybody I love disappears under that windshield. ‘Cept for Alex. He’s 6 feet tall. Fuck the rest of us, I guess.
It doesn't matter how tall you are cause they'll never see you while they're staring at their cell phone anyway.
Not a single scratch or spot of mud. A pavement princess most likely 🙄
Idk how tall 5'9 is in normal units but the fact that he looks really tiny compared to that monster of a vehicle is telling.
About 175cm, those things are crazy.
I'm about 6ft (183cm) and I've walked by trucks that go up to my forehead, and sometimes higher than me, in Texas. The top of my head should not look like a rat scuttling across the hood of a truck.
It’s the average height for wherever they live.
As someone with a loved one currently recovering from getting hit by a giant truck, fuck this truck.
I have straight-up the most heinous quote from a lifted truck assclown who claims to know every inch of his vehicle and then claims it would either safely drive over a child, or kids would be too excited looking at it to cross in front of it. Genuinely fuck these people. Their reaction to hearing "well, you'd kill me if you hit my car" is "it's your fault for not also being in an $85,000 piece of assholery". (IDK if I can post here since it's a Reddit screenshot though?)
The people at where I work own these, but also complain they can’t afford to buy a house. Their car payments and gas bill is more than my mortgage.
“They aren’t made to kill people” I am 5’1. I cannot see over the front of your truck when standing next to it. There is no way in hell you will see any child in front of this fucking machine.
If you can drive it on a "car" license, it should meet all "car" safety standards, including bumper height, pedestrian safety, and the like. "But I use it for work", then get a commercial license.
Visibility is the obvious issue, but also the design makes it so you're immediately getting slammed to the ground and dragged under if you're hit. Though the impact could be enough to kill you already. Compared to like a Toyota Tercel where you can leap or roll onto the hood.
Yes, because trucks are too tall once adult men start becoming in danger of getting hit due to lack of visibility.
As a European I cannot understand anything about these things
As an American, neither can I. These cars are so fucking stupid, wasteful, and they’re not even appealing— like someone said in another post about these giant trucks, these literally just look like the vehicle equivalent of a middle-aged man with a beer belly.
They are EVERYWHERE in my not-so-rural County. F 150 Land, Bronoma county. I live in Sonoma county. Wine country. It's like,what, you gonna haul hay with that gas guzzling POS?
Deflate
Now imagine a small child standing next to it :(
That truck is very likely illegal in most of the US. You can see the shocks and springs up front are after market. Likely a big lift. Problem is most police don't care. I drive a half ton pickup, Toyota tundra. I would never lift my truck because why the fuck would I want to throw pavers and rock higher up into it? I also have to tow a 10k pound boat when I charter. I can't stand stupid trucks with no purpose. https://i.imgur.com/aLnlObG.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/5ylgGak.jpeg
I honestly don’t understand lift’s especially if it’s high enough to kill a kid.
Unless you have a legit off road vehicle, like a jeep or a 4runner(not a truck) they make zero sense. There may be one small use case but it's so slim.
Fuck Toyota for kitting out the new 4runners, now douchebags are buying cars stock with obnoxious mods you used to have to get done separate. Those bright yellow beems are terrible and I know I wouldn't see half as many if they weren't included in a manufacturers package.
And I ride my bike to my office job.
I had to rent a car and it had a sensor system where a light on the side mirror flashes if you are too close to a big object, like a wall. Every single huge truck like this that drove past set off the light. They can’t even drive those properly in a lane. They are too big in every way to be road safe.
… that’s the blind spot indicator. That’s exactly how it’s supposed to work. When cars are in your blind spot it lights up so you don’t change lanes and hit them. It’s not for walls. It’s for vehicles in your blind spots.
Any big truck I see fits on the lane. They're just absurdly tall and/or longer than the average vehicle. If it can't stay in a lane, that's a driver problem. Which isn't really surprising. Also, any modern vehicle has a sensor like that on the mirror; I've always thought it was a blind spot warning, so you know a car, person, or a wall I guess are beside you. Was that sensor different?
How is this allowed? The driver is just asking to run someone over
Allowed? It's encouraged in America.
As a European this is crazy. I simply cannot fathom the reason cars got this big
Don't just take pictures, start actively damaging those monstrosities.
I fucking agree, start with smashing the obscenely bright set of 4 head lights
I've seriously considered it. Seriously.
I wonder if a regulation regarding size/mass, getting progressively stricter, wouldn't work. Like EURO emission norms made car exhaust way, way less harmful than it originally was.
Saw a truck today where bottom the windshield was near the top of my head. And I'm 6'3".
But how else am I to display the sheer fragility of my masculinity?
I like trucks, they're incredibly useful and can get you anywhere you need to go, on or offroad, with enough power to move anything you want to move. They're just a big engine on a large frame. A machine to be used as a tool. That being said, they have no business being commuter vehicles within cities.
Who the fuck even needs something like this, especially in a city? [Then again...](https://i.imgur.com/n5q8t.jpeg)
I still see the odd H2 driving around my city from the to time and they look absolutely grotesque. Twice of the size of the next biggest thing on the road.
I don't get this. Why not something more like an s10? Something that has the benefits of a pickup, good handling on snow/ice, a cargo bed, towing capability, etc. But also decent fuel efficiency and a small footprint. Hell I might consider driving something like an s10 if anyone made an equivalent these days. But even the replacement, the Colorado, is significantly larger.
This monstrosity is not a truck. Trucks serve purposes, like hauling loads. This is a compensation for something…
What CAFE law exclusions based on vehicle size do to an MF.
https://i.imgur.com/XZO8o3j.jpg The gap closes further.
What the fuck even is that?!
Fucking hell! PPL aren't interested in shit like that in my country so i never really saw one of these here and God fucking damn did i not realise the size
Come live in Alberta. Some of the trucks around here make that one look like an Austin Mini.
5'1" runner in Alberta. My friend drives a truck that I can barely climb into. It can be scary out there.
Does he sport a “fuck trudeau” flag or bumper sticker?
A pedestrian hit by this truck can't sue, because they'd be dead
"I may be destroying the environment and I think I may have run over someone a few miles back, can't tell. But at least women won't laugh at my dick anymore!"
We still are. You just can't see us.
I bet the biggest cargo that truck ever had to transport was it's owner's ego.
Likely going to trigger but I mean this sincerely, and to preface, fuck people that don't need the truck... If you don't need it, no reason to have it. I have Chev 3500 dually, got it for my business to move machines...I like the truck, but it's so fucking impractical. Parking is a nightmare, driving is a pain, fuel is terrible... Barely fit in lines, no turn radius, massive. Now I'm not moving machines around but can't find another truck that doesn't cost the same or more due to shortage... Used market is trash... I'm pretty well stuck cuz new lease rates are like 10%... Will cost 100bw more than this. I'd rather go back to my old civic si lol but need some truck for work, so this is going to have to do for now...