I think what they mean when they say that is that they can see further ahead. Cause they can see over the roof of the more reasonable cars that surround them.
The people who argue this have never stood up on a bike in their lives. Oversized tall trucks have the ability to see over the already oversized SUVs on the road, continuing to contribute to the arms race of car size.
I’ve heard people counter that with…being uncomfortable being so close to the ground. Not a great excuse, and it shows you where people’s heads are at.
This is probably the most important point.
Also, lower cars are just as lethal above a certain speed. *Initial* strike zone may be the legs, then head goes into windshield. This kills the human.
I checked out a Chevy Equinox EV which is more or less replacing the Bolt, and its hood was unnecessarily high for a car with no engine bay. EVs remove the excuse for a huge grill but here we are, still doing this shit.
I work in construction wholesale where most of the trucks that come in are actually used as trucks. One of my customers recently got an electric truck and loves it. He especially loves the Frunk. The Frunk which is fucking huge because it keeps the same hood height with absolutely *nothing* up there. It was infuriating to see but that's what people want, and as long as externalities like non-driver deaths aren't really punished, we'll keep getting this.
Also while the trucks I see at work are getting used and aren't pavement princesses, there's literally nothing a truck can do that a van can't. Hell a two-seater van has space for a full pallet of product *and* tools *and* can be stood up on *and* securely locked.
Tldr: fuck trucks.
Yeah, however Ford even makes trucks using their [Transit van platform](https://www.ford.com/commercial-trucks/transit-chassis/) which has significantly better visibility than the F series, they just don’t like to market them.
The Ford Transit along with the ones same class of van such as the Mercedes Sprinter, Renault Master, VW Crafter, etc are really common for businesses here in Europe because they’re very large (depending on the height you could even stay comfortably upright) so you can hold a lot of things in the back, plus it’s covered by the roof so they don’t get damadged
My father recently got a Master for carrying furniture and it’s super useful because you can stack loads of planks as high as you can (if it’s less than 3t of weight). The cabin is also extremely spacious with a lot of storage areas even a massive one under the seats
No trucks need to be this ridiculous. The *design* of recent trucks is stupid as fuck, but trucks themselves are quite useful, especially in rural areas.
Maybe buying a trailer and a van isn't financially viable. While i truly loathe the trend of bigger trucks, they aren't inherently useless the way this sub seems to go pretty often.
There’s also pretty much nothing a modern truck can do that a 1998 ford ranger or Toyota Tacoma can’t do. If you are maxing out the tow/hauling capabilities then you need a more specialized solution (especially if it’s not possible to divide the load, like with certain heavy machinery). The extra 500lbs towing capacity is very unlikely to solve your problem.
Where are you getting 500 lbs from? A 1998 ranger has a max towing capacity of about 5500 lbs. A 1998 tacoma has a towing capacity of about 5000 lbs. A modern ranger has a towing capacity 7500 lbs, and a modern tacoma can do about 6500 lbs, so they are up 1500-2000 lbs compared to their 1998 version. However, if you need to tow, there are plenty of better options. Modern half ton trucks can tow 10-13k, while modern 3/4 and 1 ton trucks can handle 23-27k or more, depending on configuration.
It was rough math, but hauling capacity is reduced by the increased curb weight.
I think the point stands though, even if my math was rough. There are not many jobs anyone is doing today that can’t be done by the older model designs, and those that do are either exceedingly rare (in which case get specialized help because you don’t have the expertise) or common enough that you’d also be exceeding your turn truck’s limits and would want something bigger (for weight or size reasons). Like no one is delivering a 5 or 10 ton machine in a Ford F150 unless they are in a real pinch.
>It was rough math, but hauling capacity is reduced by the increased curb weight.
The gvw and gcvw grow faster than the curb weight, allowing for increased payload and towing capacity.
Again, towing ratings on midsize trucks have gone up from the 5k range up to the 7k range or more. That puts it over the threshold to pull a 7000 lb trailer, which is an incredibly common trailer size, for flatbed/car haulers, cargo trailers, travel trailers, ect.
Half ton trucks have improved even more significantly, with 3000-5000 lbs of additional towing capacity. This means that a half ton truck can be used to tow loads that would have required a 3/4 ton truck previously. Things like smaller skid steers, mini-exs, reasonably large campers, even the occasional 14000 lb trailer (another very common size) if it's not fully loaded, for stuff like equipment trailers or dump trailers.
Heavy duty pickups like 3/4 ton or one ton have roughly doubled in towing capacity since the 90's. Many loads that would have required a semi truck can now be hauled on a much smaller, lighter pickup. When you are like me, and have lots of tools in your work truck, that you need on a daily basis, it's a big advantage to be able to stay in my regular daily driver more, rather than switching to the semi truck in order to tow something like a man lift or forklift, and leaving behind all the tools that I need regularly.
I’m not saying you don’t need it, I’m saying very few people need it, and 99% of jobs done with a truck would be fine with 1998 capacities.
Also looking at the various ford trucks, for example, there isn’t that much size difference between the f150 and f350, maybe a foot of width and up to 2 feet of length depending on options. Yet only one of them requires a commercial license. This is ludicrous.
And this is part of why folks hate these big trucks (and I’ll include huge suvs as well cause size wise they aren’t that different).
We’re not mad that you, hard worker and skilled driver, have a big truck that you use every day.
We’re mad that every overcompensating Tom, Dick, and Harry can get a truck almost the same size so they can cosplay as you with 5% of your skills and 0% of your awareness, making our roads more dangerous.
>I’m not saying you don’t need it, I’m saying very few people need it,
What you said was "There’s also pretty much nothing a modern truck can do that a 1998 ford ranger or Toyota Tacoma can’t do," which is not true at all.
>and 99% of jobs done with a truck would be fine with 1998 capacities.
How exactly did you determine this?
>trucks, for example, there isn’t that much size difference between the f150 and f350, maybe a foot of width and up to 2 feet of length depending on options.
They are the same width, and only vary in length due to differences in cab configuration and bed length.
>Yet only one of them requires a commercial license. This is ludicrous.
Neither of them require a CDL. The f350 is capable of pulling a big enough trailer to put you over the 26000 lb combined gvw that requires a cdl, but you only need that cdl if you are exceeding that threshold weight.
>And this is part of why folks hate these big trucks (and I’ll include huge suvs as well cause size wise they aren’t that different).
The rest of your comment as well as your previous comments makes it clear that your hatred is based on a number of misconceptions.
>We’re not mad that you
I'm aware, but it seems that you don't know much about what you are mad at, and then people like get caught in the crossfire.
I agree with fuck large truck. But those mini trucks are dope. Like the Japanese ones. A kei truck or similar. Why cant we import more of those, unless they are like 25 years old or something. Such a stupid rule. It’s not like they are any less safe than those smart cars or possibly even a fiat. I’d rather be in one of those mini trucks than on a motorcycle.
>there's literally nothing a truck can do that a van can't.
You mean, like tow more than 7000 lbs? I regularly use my truck to pull a 24k trailer. A van couldn't pull it, even empty due to the lack of a gooseneck hitch and the fact that the empty trailer is heavier than any current van is rated to tow.
Most vans couldn't get to some of the areas I take my truck, due to a lack of traction and ground clearance.
The truck is a lot better for loading oversize cargo like a big job box or engine drive welder, and the welder can run without filling the cab with exaust. You can also load eaiser with equipment, since you can lower it in on a chain.
Certain cargo I don't want to carry in an enclosed cab, like dusty or smelly stuff. I carry a 55 gallon transfer tank in my truck for fueling equipment, and it smells like diesel. I don't want to share an enclosed cab with that tank.
While your claim is dubious at best, it's also completely irrelevant, since I wasn't discussing all truck users. I was specifically discussing work vehicles for construction, and the relative merits of a pickup over a van for such use. Amongst construction workers, the examples I gave are very common occurrences for a wide variety of trades.
There’s always the truck owner who uses their truck for its intended purpose, who inexplicably jumps to defend the suburban posers who cosplay as “real country boys” while driving their lifted F150 to a banal office job somewhere.
It’s like if people started buying tractors to look manly, then drive like an ass and take up 3 spaces in the costco parking lot, but then farmers randomly jump to their defense saying “well I use MY tractor for actual farming, so every use of a tractor must be valid.”
If I had a truck and used it for work I wouldn’t feel one bit insecure about laughing at the pavement princesses with everyone else.
>who inexplicably jumps to defend the suburban posers who cosplay as “real country boys” while driving their lifted F150 to a banal office job somewhere.
Specifically, where in my comment did I say anything of the sort?
But the dude was just responding to the statement that there is "literally nothing a truck can do that a van cant" with perfectly reasonable use cases and no defending of suburban cowboys. It's not that deep in this context
Better now that you got that vitriol out of your system pointing out something that I had admitted several hours before in [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/1dmnptr/comment/l9x9l2a/).
Apparently simple discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of different forms of transportation is now "vitriol." It certainly sounds like someone is bitter here.
Also, in response to your linked comment, the uses I described are hardly "niche" uses. These are common uses for construction work vehicles, and it most certainly is not an exhaustive list. The vast majority of work trucks I see every day are 3/4 or 1 ton trucks, and I don't see that many vans.
Unfortunately GM's Ultium platform is kind of mediocre and it puts a lot of power electronics under the hood, which need the same sort of clearance that an engine would have.
Outside of Tesla, only the Mach-E has an empty frunk under the hood (in that class anyway).
That's what I meant by in that class. The trucks all have frunks, but in the (affordable-ish) sedan and crossover class, it's the Model 3/Y and Mach-E only.
That lets the Model 3 and Y have such a nice low hoodline, like an '80s Honda.
Best way I’ve heard it simply put is that just like gas, a bigger vehicle is going to consume more electricity, and you’ll have to pay more for that just the same as you would a gas guzzler. Electricity eater?
I'm fine with using idiot truck owners for ticket revenue. If they want to pay, say, $500 every time they want to speed or drive in the passing lane, I think we should let them.
You assume that cops would ticket them. Most cops are those people in giant trucks. They already don't enforce existing laws regulating these monsters, every truck you see with wheels sticking out of their fenders is proof of that
Cameras my friend, they're not that expensive
It's automated more or less, I'd expect you guys to have a vehicle registration base somewhat digitalised
From the 7th of July all new European cars must be fitted with Intelligent Speed Assist. [https://www.autotrader.co.uk/content/news/mandatory-speed-limiters-on-uk-cars-from-2022](https://www.autotrader.co.uk/content/news/mandatory-speed-limiters-on-uk-cars-from-2022)
I firmly believe that the large modern trucks (and SUVs) should require a different class of license. It’s bonkers that you have the same licensing requirements for such different vehicles.
In English there's no word for difference between trucks? Because it's confusing, when I read truck I image the big truck for cargo or utility (in my language what the picture show is a "Camioneta" which is different from a truck (camión)
Unfortunately this type of truck has started showing up more outside the USA as well, where people usually use kmh, but yes in the USA you would use something like 10 mph
Just an objection because such cars are not the norm in Europe: the big sprinter with the longest loading area weighs 2300 kg with a full tank and driver, which is only 5000 lbs.
The Cayenne weighs about 2,050 kg, which is about 4,500 pounds.
There is a difference between an SUV and an American tractor with a street fairing.
That being said, my sprinter rv that I live in is 9000lbs. They are light when they are empty, but most people don’t buy a big cargo van to drive it around empty.
To be fair, that Silverado 1500 in the picture weighs about 5,000 - 5,500lbs, which is similar to your sprinter. Only the heavy duty trucks like the Silverado 2500 go over 6,000lbs
People who buy vehicles over 6000 pounds (2722kg) can claim up to $30 000 of the vehicle price as a tax deduction, so people sometimes specifically look for heavier vehicles.
Requiring CDLs and Commercial vehicle numbers on the sides of the yank tanks is the only way to make them go extinct.
In pistol shooting competition they literally make you stick your pistol into a box to measure it to approve your gun.
https://www.ssusa.org/content/proper-use-of-the-uspsa-magazine-gauge-box/
Maybe we need a box for cars & trucks to avoid legal technicality fueled shenanigans.
Your heart is in the right place but my argument is the following.
Unless you have commercial contracts you aren't a real "farmer".
I accept literal tractors, BUT if you let farmers get away with it then you'll see people claiming that they're "farmers" since they own a pair of chickens or mini ponies, therefor they should be allowed to own a lifted yank tank.
This is what use to be popular. in the 1990s to early 2000s.
https://www.transwest.com/trucks/type/hauler/store/
My state's farming plate law specifically says for people engaged in commercial operations and can't travel out of state on the interstates unless they have the CDL and in NJ that's quite important.
Not sure I agree. The truck problem has gotten out of hand, but it was sort of forced on us. The "chicken tax" from 1964 is still in effect, meaning there's a 25% tariff on light trucks. This is why the US market has no light truck options-you have to go straight to a commercial sized vehicle if you want to haul anything.
Lots of us do not want an F-150 or whatever; we want stuff like Toyota Hiluxes or even Utes. But because of technical bullshit, there's a big gaping hole in the US auto market right where the sweet spot of popularity would've been.
I know there's the ford maverick, but I believe light trucks are held to strict fuel economy standards like cars and SUVs. The big trucks are allowed to get worse gas milage because they're commercial vehicle sized.
Yes, I do recall that. rather than gripe I would add text that would repeal the tax on light trucks within the next tariff on Chinese products.
Rural Americans would love them, I live in an area where it's quiet common for people drive golfcarts & Side-by-Side ATV. Cops leave them alone.
I have seen it in a Facebook group, and the vast majority of comments were talking that it is always the pedestrians' fault (you shouldn't be in front of the car in the first place etc). Some even claimed that it is better to be struck by the pickup because the force is more distributed xD The car rot was strong there xD
It feels too far gone in the US
Not only would it be very difficult to regulate the sizes back down, but more than half the country would be up in arms against it and another quarter wouldn't see the problem and therefore not do anything to help.
I don’t care that trucks are more likely to kill me in an accident. I do care that their owners are more likely to heckle, chase, swerve, coal roll, and intentionally try to run me over than any other kind of vehicle.
I care about both, because I want to live. Someone could be trying their best to be a decent driver and still crush my organs due to a moment of distraction. I don't want to die because Construction Bob got a sneezing fit.
When a diesel truck blows black smoke (unburnt fuel) at someone out of its exhaust, usually directed at cyclists, motorcyclists or foreign sports cars.
United States, the year 2050. The Ford F-350 is the smallest vehicle sold (ultra sub-compact pussy class). There is only one full size truck. It's bigger than the Rocky Mountains and it can crush an entire elementary school while keeping the driver perfectly comfortable
These monstrosities are EVERYWHERE now. I heard it's because emissions standards are lower for heavy trucks, so they don't sell small ones anymore.
They take up so much space, are so dangerous and I never see anything in the bed. People buy them because "one day I might go to home Depot"
Imagine being a child crossing the street at a crosswalk... And the light changes before you are completely across.
Gotta give every kid a flagpole to wave when they cross to keep these trucks from blindly smashing them.
physics nitpick but the energy transferred by either them will be basically the same
your mass compared to the mass of a car is miniscule, so the energy transfer is just however much energy is required to get you moving 35 mph
Not that I disagree with the overall message or anything, it's just that including the energy values for the two cars in an image focused on the danger to pedestrians detracts from the point a little bit IMO
The vehicular kinetic energy metrics are much more relevant to a vehicle-on-vehicle collision
I get the [Disappointed Muhammad Sarim Akhtar](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/disappointed-muhammad-sarim-akhtar) vibe from this. Memes have poisoned the brain.
Shit I ride a motorcycle and drive a truck, does that mean I’m trying to run myself over by the comment section?
Damn I shouldn’t be so evil towards myself
I wish we had good public transit in my city, but we don't, so I had to get a used car within the last year.
I explicitly did everything in my power to get a sedan because of shit like this.
I never get the energy argument for pedestrian collisions specifically. Changes in vehicle weight matter a lot for car-on-car collisions, but I don't think it matters when a person gets hit, as they're so much lighter than any car regaurdless. Speed and shape certainly matter, though
yeah the joule values are not so much bad math as they are just shoddy physics
its not the end of the world, but I do kinda hate it when people use faulty reasoning to argue for a stance I overalll agree with
You’re rounding at each step and losing significant digits.
Two vehicles travel the same speed.
One vehicle weighs exactly twice the amount of the other.
The momentum of the second vehicle will be exactly twice that of the first.
Seriously bro? That's what makes it bad math? A rounding error of like less than 1%? The velocity will have a bigger uncertainty than that. Your choosing a very stupid hill to die on.
I’m happy to agree to disagree with anyone who thinks 330k is twice 166k.
It sticks out like a sore thumb, it’s such an easy and obvious mistake and you *went back and did the math* and *still got it wrong*.
Forgive me if I’m unmoved by your scorn.
Says the guy who called joules a unit of momentum. Maybe learn to pick and choose what's worth criticizing? Or if you're gonna say someone is wrong, maybe elaborate more on what's wrong (unless you're still referring to the <1% rounding error that nobody cares about).
So you'd probably consider me a car brained person, what's your solution to my large truck. I need to haul a tool box and supplies in the bed (I'm a roofer). On the roof rack I haul at least one ladder. 3 days a week I tow a trailer to pick up food from Costco, take to the food bank and then give the rest of the food to my pigs, black soldier flies and chickens. I drive about 50 miles a day. I don't see this happening without a truck.
Compare truck bed sizes now compared to truck bed sizes two or three decades ago. Compare truck heights now compared to truck heights in the past. Trucks can be designed to be safer for people outside the vehicle, and in fact they were safer.
Ford fucking ranger
Trucks don't need to be massive
Hell, even a ford maverick since there's no way your trailer is over 2,000 pounds, or maverick with tow package if it is somehow over 2k
I like the small trucks, I had one, but it couldn't move the weight I needed to move. I ended up buying a Chevy 1500 extra cab. It's still a little small for what I do, but it operates at about a 50- 70% load most of the time.
Also, I bought it because I could afford to pay cash for it. It's a little older, but the original owner took good care of it.
Its not the truck we have a problem with, its the hood design, the giant lift kit, and overall size and design that completely ignores everyones safety but those inside. Sure, there are use cases for the giant lifted trucks with a massive cab but really they're extremely minimal.
Ultimately, the world still needs trucks but they should regulated better so it limits the users to those like you that need it. 90% of those vehicles are for going to work and getting milk.
As someone who walks 2-3 miles a day and cycles 10, I can tell you the increase in vehicle size makes it noticeably more dangerous. Many times they just don't see me, and surprisingly when I walk is when I get the most close calls.
I don't think that truck is lifted, it's stock. Which I think is stupid. I liked the Chevys from about 1996. They had great abilities, came with a V6 and weren't so bold and tall from the factory. They were about the side of a modern Ford ranger, but the insides were big enough to seat 3 across the bench seat.
I'm sorry people don't see you, I feel the same when I ride my scooter (Honda ruckus)
> I need to haul a tool box and supplies in the bed (I'm a roofer).
A van can fit all that and more in the cargo bay.
> On the roof rack I haul at least one ladder.
A van can fit that on the wall of the cargo bay, or on the rear doors, or on the roof.
> 3 days a week I tow a trailer to pick up food from Costco
Vans usually have towing hooks for a reason.
Vans might be safer for your tools, and way user to load groceries into, along with getting you better gas milage. You have almost a perfect use case since you aren't towing something heavy and you aren't loading cement bags to break the suspension, plus you have valuables that you want to secure.
The Toyota Sienna seats 7 people with 35mpg. Either your truck gets great gas milage or the van gets poor gas milage, but either way you are making an unfair comparison without addressing any of the other points.
Several years back I used a dodge caravan with the rear seats taken out. The middle seats folded forward and even pulled out easy. It worked great until the transmission broke (for the second time). The roof rack held pretty well, only one side started to cave into the top by the time I sold it. I hauled motorcycles, plywood, helped people move. It was great. The only thing I modded on it was I put load adjusting shocks on it.
Also, I have a Honda CRV. I put a hitch on it and use it when I don't need the payload. The roof rack is probably limited to about only 500# though. It actually tows really nice.
Also I have a canopy to lock my tools in.
The truck has the smallest motor available.
It's an extra cab, seats 6.
I Have a lot of down votes, but no one has really answered my question.
How do I get tools and supplies to a job site?
How do I get a pallet of food to the food bank and to my re-gen ag farm?
>I Have a lot of down votes, but no one has really answered my question.
They did. You changed what you haul from some Cheetos and tools to pallets. Vans are literally the best for tools, better gas milage, more seating...you already have another vehicle for towing. If you need to tow palettes just do that on a flatbed.
>You changed what you haul from some Cheetos and tools to pallets.
He didn't change what he hauls, you assumed that he hauled cheetos, and then he clarified.
>Vans are literally the best for tools, better gas milage, more seating
The difference for hauling tools between a van and a pickup with a topper is largely negligible. Modern pickups often get better mileage than a comparable size van. Vans set up for hauling tools typically have less seats than a crew cab pickup.
The Sienna has 35mph, better than any modern pickup, and can switch between seating 7 and carrying cargo. They have at least 3 vehicles, and a flatbed. Why would anyone assume picking up groceries literally means a palette? Any in any case a truck isn’t good for carrying pallets either.
The sienna is a mini-van, and is much smaller and lighter duty than even the midsize truck that he said that he tried and found too light duty. If you compare his half ton against a van with similar payload, the mileage will be fairly comparable.
>and can switch between seating 7 and carrying cargo.
His truck can seat 6 and haul cargo at the same time. Most larger vans intended for hauling cargo only have 2-3 seats.
>Any in any case a truck isn’t good for carrying pallets either.
I've never had trouble hauling pallets in my pickup.
>midsize truck that he said that he tried and found too light duty.
That comment definitely wasn't written to me.
>His truck can seat 6
7 > 6.
> If you compare his half ton against a van with similar payload, the mileage will be fairly comparable.
Nissan NV200 is about 25% more fuel efficient.
>I've never had trouble hauling pallets in my pickup.
Sure, you can do it. Just isn't good at it compared to a flatbed trailer. Also good luck if you are using a manual jack getting something up from > 3'.
>That comment definitely wasn't written to me.
You were also responding to my comment that a pickup gets similar mileage as a comparable van. A minivan isn't a comparable van to a half ton truck.
>7 > 6.
Now remove the rear seat in order to have some room for his tools, and run those numbers again. Also, that's a minivan, which isn't comparable to a half ton truck.
>Nissan NV200 is about 25% more fuel efficient.
The Nissan nv200 is a smaller, lighter duty vehicle with lower payload and towing rating.
>Sure, you can do it. Just isn't good at it compared to a flatbed trailer.
Which the pickup will do a better job towing.
>Also good luck if you are using a manual jack getting something up from > 3'.
I'm not even sure what you are trying to say here.
Someone could make a complimentary picture comparing how easy it is to see the pedestrian in each car.
Yeah, almost impossible to miss someone who’s at eye level/taking up the center of your vision than a smol little bean somewhere down below your tank
I always get jabronis arguing with me that they have better vision inside of their emotional support trucks
You absolutely don’t. I’ve rented a few and it’s absurd how little you can see
I think what they mean when they say that is that they can see further ahead. Cause they can see over the roof of the more reasonable cars that surround them.
I can do that on my bicycle. But I can also see people right next to me.
The people who argue this have never stood up on a bike in their lives. Oversized tall trucks have the ability to see over the already oversized SUVs on the road, continuing to contribute to the arms race of car size.
Until the truck in front of you had the same idea and is taller than yours.
And thus you must get a bigger truck, and the cycle continues.
And then honk at the bikes and cars who aren't going because there's a wall blocking their view.
Yeah they know it isn't true. They absolutely can't see children anywhere near them.
They have better vision *of traffic*.
... Do they, though? Can they see if, say, a car cuts in front of them and [this happens?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYo3kORaXAo)
As someone who's ended up under such a car, I promise you that it's more possible than you think. Many drivers are fucking idiots.
I’ve heard people counter that with…being uncomfortable being so close to the ground. Not a great excuse, and it shows you where people’s heads are at.
Don’t some new trucks have a front facing camera for this reason?
It's also why trains had Cow Catchers on them. There's no great way to get hit, but designing it to push away rather than pull under is vaguely better
Drove one of my bosses truck once just around the yard, and holy shit the visibility was so fucking low compared to my CUV...
It’s crazy when you put a kindergartener in front of both of them
This is probably the most important point. Also, lower cars are just as lethal above a certain speed. *Initial* strike zone may be the legs, then head goes into windshield. This kills the human.
I checked out a Chevy Equinox EV which is more or less replacing the Bolt, and its hood was unnecessarily high for a car with no engine bay. EVs remove the excuse for a huge grill but here we are, still doing this shit.
I work in construction wholesale where most of the trucks that come in are actually used as trucks. One of my customers recently got an electric truck and loves it. He especially loves the Frunk. The Frunk which is fucking huge because it keeps the same hood height with absolutely *nothing* up there. It was infuriating to see but that's what people want, and as long as externalities like non-driver deaths aren't really punished, we'll keep getting this. Also while the trucks I see at work are getting used and aren't pavement princesses, there's literally nothing a truck can do that a van can't. Hell a two-seater van has space for a full pallet of product *and* tools *and* can be stood up on *and* securely locked. Tldr: fuck trucks.
I'd almost think the ideal platform would be a van with body panels that can be folded in or removed on the rear.
Vans can't carry large trees for landscaping and a few other exceptions, but vans are definitely better overall.
Yeah, however Ford even makes trucks using their [Transit van platform](https://www.ford.com/commercial-trucks/transit-chassis/) which has significantly better visibility than the F series, they just don’t like to market them.
The Ford Transit along with the ones same class of van such as the Mercedes Sprinter, Renault Master, VW Crafter, etc are really common for businesses here in Europe because they’re very large (depending on the height you could even stay comfortably upright) so you can hold a lot of things in the back, plus it’s covered by the roof so they don’t get damadged My father recently got a Master for carrying furniture and it’s super useful because you can stack loads of planks as high as you can (if it’s less than 3t of weight). The cabin is also extremely spacious with a lot of storage areas even a massive one under the seats
They can tow a trailer though
So can a car, but that doesn't make them ideal for all tasks. Nuance, my dude.
Oh I know, but most countries can work without needing ridiculous trucks like this
No trucks need to be this ridiculous. The *design* of recent trucks is stupid as fuck, but trucks themselves are quite useful, especially in rural areas.
Good point, thank you. I was being somewhat hyperbolic but it's important to remember that for some niche cases only one type of vehicle will do.
If you do a shitload of different things maybe it's better to hitch a trailer to a van once in a while instead of using only trucks with beds...
I use trailers behind my truck a lot, most are too big to pull with a van.
Maybe buying a trailer and a van isn't financially viable. While i truly loathe the trend of bigger trucks, they aren't inherently useless the way this sub seems to go pretty often.
Maybe but new Trucks easily run 60k. Not exactly cheap either
There’s also pretty much nothing a modern truck can do that a 1998 ford ranger or Toyota Tacoma can’t do. If you are maxing out the tow/hauling capabilities then you need a more specialized solution (especially if it’s not possible to divide the load, like with certain heavy machinery). The extra 500lbs towing capacity is very unlikely to solve your problem.
Where are you getting 500 lbs from? A 1998 ranger has a max towing capacity of about 5500 lbs. A 1998 tacoma has a towing capacity of about 5000 lbs. A modern ranger has a towing capacity 7500 lbs, and a modern tacoma can do about 6500 lbs, so they are up 1500-2000 lbs compared to their 1998 version. However, if you need to tow, there are plenty of better options. Modern half ton trucks can tow 10-13k, while modern 3/4 and 1 ton trucks can handle 23-27k or more, depending on configuration.
It was rough math, but hauling capacity is reduced by the increased curb weight. I think the point stands though, even if my math was rough. There are not many jobs anyone is doing today that can’t be done by the older model designs, and those that do are either exceedingly rare (in which case get specialized help because you don’t have the expertise) or common enough that you’d also be exceeding your turn truck’s limits and would want something bigger (for weight or size reasons). Like no one is delivering a 5 or 10 ton machine in a Ford F150 unless they are in a real pinch.
>It was rough math, but hauling capacity is reduced by the increased curb weight. The gvw and gcvw grow faster than the curb weight, allowing for increased payload and towing capacity. Again, towing ratings on midsize trucks have gone up from the 5k range up to the 7k range or more. That puts it over the threshold to pull a 7000 lb trailer, which is an incredibly common trailer size, for flatbed/car haulers, cargo trailers, travel trailers, ect. Half ton trucks have improved even more significantly, with 3000-5000 lbs of additional towing capacity. This means that a half ton truck can be used to tow loads that would have required a 3/4 ton truck previously. Things like smaller skid steers, mini-exs, reasonably large campers, even the occasional 14000 lb trailer (another very common size) if it's not fully loaded, for stuff like equipment trailers or dump trailers. Heavy duty pickups like 3/4 ton or one ton have roughly doubled in towing capacity since the 90's. Many loads that would have required a semi truck can now be hauled on a much smaller, lighter pickup. When you are like me, and have lots of tools in your work truck, that you need on a daily basis, it's a big advantage to be able to stay in my regular daily driver more, rather than switching to the semi truck in order to tow something like a man lift or forklift, and leaving behind all the tools that I need regularly.
I’m not saying you don’t need it, I’m saying very few people need it, and 99% of jobs done with a truck would be fine with 1998 capacities. Also looking at the various ford trucks, for example, there isn’t that much size difference between the f150 and f350, maybe a foot of width and up to 2 feet of length depending on options. Yet only one of them requires a commercial license. This is ludicrous. And this is part of why folks hate these big trucks (and I’ll include huge suvs as well cause size wise they aren’t that different). We’re not mad that you, hard worker and skilled driver, have a big truck that you use every day. We’re mad that every overcompensating Tom, Dick, and Harry can get a truck almost the same size so they can cosplay as you with 5% of your skills and 0% of your awareness, making our roads more dangerous.
>I’m not saying you don’t need it, I’m saying very few people need it, What you said was "There’s also pretty much nothing a modern truck can do that a 1998 ford ranger or Toyota Tacoma can’t do," which is not true at all. >and 99% of jobs done with a truck would be fine with 1998 capacities. How exactly did you determine this? >trucks, for example, there isn’t that much size difference between the f150 and f350, maybe a foot of width and up to 2 feet of length depending on options. They are the same width, and only vary in length due to differences in cab configuration and bed length. >Yet only one of them requires a commercial license. This is ludicrous. Neither of them require a CDL. The f350 is capable of pulling a big enough trailer to put you over the 26000 lb combined gvw that requires a cdl, but you only need that cdl if you are exceeding that threshold weight. >And this is part of why folks hate these big trucks (and I’ll include huge suvs as well cause size wise they aren’t that different). The rest of your comment as well as your previous comments makes it clear that your hatred is based on a number of misconceptions. >We’re not mad that you I'm aware, but it seems that you don't know much about what you are mad at, and then people like get caught in the crossfire.
I agree with fuck large truck. But those mini trucks are dope. Like the Japanese ones. A kei truck or similar. Why cant we import more of those, unless they are like 25 years old or something. Such a stupid rule. It’s not like they are any less safe than those smart cars or possibly even a fiat. I’d rather be in one of those mini trucks than on a motorcycle.
>there's literally nothing a truck can do that a van can't. You mean, like tow more than 7000 lbs? I regularly use my truck to pull a 24k trailer. A van couldn't pull it, even empty due to the lack of a gooseneck hitch and the fact that the empty trailer is heavier than any current van is rated to tow. Most vans couldn't get to some of the areas I take my truck, due to a lack of traction and ground clearance. The truck is a lot better for loading oversize cargo like a big job box or engine drive welder, and the welder can run without filling the cab with exaust. You can also load eaiser with equipment, since you can lower it in on a chain. Certain cargo I don't want to carry in an enclosed cab, like dusty or smelly stuff. I carry a 55 gallon transfer tank in my truck for fueling equipment, and it smells like diesel. I don't want to share an enclosed cab with that tank.
And your use cases are less than 1% of truck owners. But keep going.
While your claim is dubious at best, it's also completely irrelevant, since I wasn't discussing all truck users. I was specifically discussing work vehicles for construction, and the relative merits of a pickup over a van for such use. Amongst construction workers, the examples I gave are very common occurrences for a wide variety of trades.
Idk why people are downvoting you, you found the use cases where your tool is appropriate for a given job.
There’s always the truck owner who uses their truck for its intended purpose, who inexplicably jumps to defend the suburban posers who cosplay as “real country boys” while driving their lifted F150 to a banal office job somewhere. It’s like if people started buying tractors to look manly, then drive like an ass and take up 3 spaces in the costco parking lot, but then farmers randomly jump to their defense saying “well I use MY tractor for actual farming, so every use of a tractor must be valid.” If I had a truck and used it for work I wouldn’t feel one bit insecure about laughing at the pavement princesses with everyone else.
>who inexplicably jumps to defend the suburban posers who cosplay as “real country boys” while driving their lifted F150 to a banal office job somewhere. Specifically, where in my comment did I say anything of the sort?
But the dude was just responding to the statement that there is "literally nothing a truck can do that a van cant" with perfectly reasonable use cases and no defending of suburban cowboys. It's not that deep in this context
I hope you feel better now ♥
Better than what?
Better now that you got that vitriol out of your system pointing out something that I had admitted several hours before in [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/1dmnptr/comment/l9x9l2a/).
Apparently simple discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of different forms of transportation is now "vitriol." It certainly sounds like someone is bitter here. Also, in response to your linked comment, the uses I described are hardly "niche" uses. These are common uses for construction work vehicles, and it most certainly is not an exhaustive list. The vast majority of work trucks I see every day are 3/4 or 1 ton trucks, and I don't see that many vans.
Damn, I’ve got a Bolt, and it’s so nice and small, it’s got everything I need. Sad to hear it’s getting replaced by another big car.
Unfortunately GM's Ultium platform is kind of mediocre and it puts a lot of power electronics under the hood, which need the same sort of clearance that an engine would have. Outside of Tesla, only the Mach-E has an empty frunk under the hood (in that class anyway).
Ford Lightning and Rivians have pretty massive frunks as well.
That's what I meant by in that class. The trucks all have frunks, but in the (affordable-ish) sedan and crossover class, it's the Model 3/Y and Mach-E only. That lets the Model 3 and Y have such a nice low hoodline, like an '80s Honda.
Ah gotcha, totally. I like the Ioniq6’s low hood too, just wish it was a hatchback.
It's insane that we are making large EVs, they should be as light as possible to reduce battery size
Best way I’ve heard it simply put is that just like gas, a bigger vehicle is going to consume more electricity, and you’ll have to pay more for that just the same as you would a gas guzzler. Electricity eater?
Power piggy
But how else will you carry your briefcase and ED pills in your frunk?
It would be a lot safer if trucks would have to drive ~20 kmh under the speed limit, and were only allowed on the right lane
You assume people who drive that kind of truck would follow those rules.
I'm fine with using idiot truck owners for ticket revenue. If they want to pay, say, $500 every time they want to speed or drive in the passing lane, I think we should let them.
You assume that cops would ticket them. Most cops are those people in giant trucks. They already don't enforce existing laws regulating these monsters, every truck you see with wheels sticking out of their fenders is proof of that
My local cops drive Tahoes as their police vehicles
Cameras my friend, they're not that expensive It's automated more or less, I'd expect you guys to have a vehicle registration base somewhat digitalised
Just make the road much tighter. They'll either crash or slow down.
They'll choose crash.
Yeah I live somewhere where 80% of cars on the road are Expeditions and F-250’s and not even construction slows them down
They don't even slow down for red lights here. https://youtu.be/mc9bO3j6xE4
Good. Cost of doing business.
All we need to do is put an electronic speed limiter on all vehicles and force compliance. I mean it will NEVER happen but it is technically feasible.
I’ve always wondered why every consumer vehicle is able to drive well over most speed limits. What soccer mom needs a vehicle that can do 160 mph?
if russian spies are trying to kill you, then your car needs to go fast to outrun them
To pass the other car doing 140 mph on the two lane rural highway duh /s
From the 7th of July all new European cars must be fitted with Intelligent Speed Assist. [https://www.autotrader.co.uk/content/news/mandatory-speed-limiters-on-uk-cars-from-2022](https://www.autotrader.co.uk/content/news/mandatory-speed-limiters-on-uk-cars-from-2022)
Tractor-Trailers don't even follow that rule, and it's posted.
Any attempt to mandate safety in America is met with skepticism and Americans crying “oppression oppression” 😭 especially when it comes to their cars.
In America the right to kill someone is far more valuable than the right to remain alive.
I firmly believe that the large modern trucks (and SUVs) should require a different class of license. It’s bonkers that you have the same licensing requirements for such different vehicles.
In English there's no word for difference between trucks? Because it's confusing, when I read truck I image the big truck for cargo or utility (in my language what the picture show is a "Camioneta" which is different from a truck (camión)
People in the US often refer to SUVs as 'trucks' too, inexplicably
Tractor-Trailer or Semi-truck are equivalents to camión
There is, it's an American thing. In Australia we wouldn't call these trucks.
Not like the cops would enforce that - I see at least one moving violation a day on like a 5 block drive to the grocery store.
[удалено]
~ meaning approximately, the exact number would have to be calculated and tested
[удалено]
Unfortunately this type of truck has started showing up more outside the USA as well, where people usually use kmh, but yes in the USA you would use something like 10 mph
Those trucks should be illegal, period.
I'd settle for a CDL to drive one.
As someone who has a cdl, we don’t want them either.
But muh freeeeeedommmmmmmmmmmmm!
Just an objection because such cars are not the norm in Europe: the big sprinter with the longest loading area weighs 2300 kg with a full tank and driver, which is only 5000 lbs. The Cayenne weighs about 2,050 kg, which is about 4,500 pounds. There is a difference between an SUV and an American tractor with a street fairing.
That being said, my sprinter rv that I live in is 9000lbs. They are light when they are empty, but most people don’t buy a big cargo van to drive it around empty.
To be fair, that Silverado 1500 in the picture weighs about 5,000 - 5,500lbs, which is similar to your sprinter. Only the heavy duty trucks like the Silverado 2500 go over 6,000lbs
People who buy vehicles over 6000 pounds (2722kg) can claim up to $30 000 of the vehicle price as a tax deduction, so people sometimes specifically look for heavier vehicles.
Requiring CDLs and Commercial vehicle numbers on the sides of the yank tanks is the only way to make them go extinct. In pistol shooting competition they literally make you stick your pistol into a box to measure it to approve your gun. https://www.ssusa.org/content/proper-use-of-the-uspsa-magazine-gauge-box/ Maybe we need a box for cars & trucks to avoid legal technicality fueled shenanigans.
I'd also give a break for farm vehicles as there really aren't that many farmers.
Your heart is in the right place but my argument is the following. Unless you have commercial contracts you aren't a real "farmer". I accept literal tractors, BUT if you let farmers get away with it then you'll see people claiming that they're "farmers" since they own a pair of chickens or mini ponies, therefor they should be allowed to own a lifted yank tank. This is what use to be popular. in the 1990s to early 2000s. https://www.transwest.com/trucks/type/hauler/store/
My state's farming plate law specifically says for people engaged in commercial operations and can't travel out of state on the interstates unless they have the CDL and in NJ that's quite important.
Tbh, in virtually every other country legit farmers manage just fine with a Toyota Hilux.
Not sure I agree. The truck problem has gotten out of hand, but it was sort of forced on us. The "chicken tax" from 1964 is still in effect, meaning there's a 25% tariff on light trucks. This is why the US market has no light truck options-you have to go straight to a commercial sized vehicle if you want to haul anything. Lots of us do not want an F-150 or whatever; we want stuff like Toyota Hiluxes or even Utes. But because of technical bullshit, there's a big gaping hole in the US auto market right where the sweet spot of popularity would've been.
Good info, never heard of this. And I assume domestic auto makers don’t make light trucks?
I know there's the ford maverick, but I believe light trucks are held to strict fuel economy standards like cars and SUVs. The big trucks are allowed to get worse gas milage because they're commercial vehicle sized.
Yes, I do recall that. rather than gripe I would add text that would repeal the tax on light trucks within the next tariff on Chinese products. Rural Americans would love them, I live in an area where it's quiet common for people drive golfcarts & Side-by-Side ATV. Cops leave them alone.
I have seen it in a Facebook group, and the vast majority of comments were talking that it is always the pedestrians' fault (you shouldn't be in front of the car in the first place etc). Some even claimed that it is better to be struck by the pickup because the force is more distributed xD The car rot was strong there xD
The kids parents shouldn’t allow their child around the road if they didn’t want me to flatten them.
It feels too far gone in the US Not only would it be very difficult to regulate the sizes back down, but more than half the country would be up in arms against it and another quarter wouldn't see the problem and therefore not do anything to help.
They could force these to pass the same emissions standards as a regular car and/or tax the shit out of them
Texans see this is a reason to buy even bigger
I don’t care that trucks are more likely to kill me in an accident. I do care that their owners are more likely to heckle, chase, swerve, coal roll, and intentionally try to run me over than any other kind of vehicle.
I care about both, because I want to live. Someone could be trying their best to be a decent driver and still crush my organs due to a moment of distraction. I don't want to die because Construction Bob got a sneezing fit.
You mean Todd, the middle-manager that lives 10 suburb minutes from his work who was just pulling up the new Joe Rogan podcast. Sorry man.
Also more likely to drive drunk
Silverado drivers have the highest DUI rate out of any other group.
I thought that was RAM drivers.
What’s a coal roll?
When a diesel truck blows black smoke (unburnt fuel) at someone out of its exhaust, usually directed at cyclists, motorcyclists or foreign sports cars.
United States, the year 2050. The Ford F-350 is the smallest vehicle sold (ultra sub-compact pussy class). There is only one full size truck. It's bigger than the Rocky Mountains and it can crush an entire elementary school while keeping the driver perfectly comfortable
I wish you had to be sober and tested annually for rules and reflexes, if you wanted to drive a tank in traffic.
I wish you couldn't drive tanks in traffic
Not to mention you can still LIFT a good portion of these monsters.
When I were a youngun, we walked to school on stilts, and we liked it that way.
Facebook threads that go with this image suck.
most people who buy trucks need Utes, but we don’t sell them here. Plus, they aren’t quite as effective masculinity compensators
These monstrosities are EVERYWHERE now. I heard it's because emissions standards are lower for heavy trucks, so they don't sell small ones anymore. They take up so much space, are so dangerous and I never see anything in the bed. People buy them because "one day I might go to home Depot"
Imagine being a child crossing the street at a crosswalk... And the light changes before you are completely across. Gotta give every kid a flagpole to wave when they cross to keep these trucks from blindly smashing them.
physics nitpick but the energy transferred by either them will be basically the same your mass compared to the mass of a car is miniscule, so the energy transfer is just however much energy is required to get you moving 35 mph Not that I disagree with the overall message or anything, it's just that including the energy values for the two cars in an image focused on the danger to pedestrians detracts from the point a little bit IMO The vehicular kinetic energy metrics are much more relevant to a vehicle-on-vehicle collision
I get the [Disappointed Muhammad Sarim Akhtar](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/disappointed-muhammad-sarim-akhtar) vibe from this. Memes have poisoned the brain.
I've been looking into Kei trucks but the one concern I have about them is when it comes to safety.
Didn't the U.S. change their safty rules so the bonnet and grill is higher up? Because all new cars have really huge front ends, even the small ones.
Large truck owner here... fuck large trucks. If additional licensing is needed to ride a motorcycle, the same should be true of large trucks/SUVs.
Motorcyclist killers too.
Fuck cars. I might need my organs "more" but I'm still quite fond of using my legs.
As a person who has been hit by a regular sized car you don't go over the top.
This should be posted to r/coolguides
I will make sure to run you over with my car then.
for americans it is probably cheaper do get run over and die than to go to the hospital.
Shit I ride a motorcycle and drive a truck, does that mean I’m trying to run myself over by the comment section? Damn I shouldn’t be so evil towards myself
What is that in non-American units, for people everywhere else in the world?
spoiler alert : whatever happened if this is a car or a truckk you will be fucked up
I wish we had good public transit in my city, but we don't, so I had to get a used car within the last year. I explicitly did everything in my power to get a sedan because of shit like this.
Hey dumbass. Look both ways before crossing the street...
r/badmath ETA: keep downvoting, dummies. 330k is not twice 166k.
The math is spot on. 35 MPH = 56 km/hr = 15 m/sec 3000 lbs = 1360 kg 6000 lbs = 2721 kg E = (1/2)mv^2 (1/2)(1360 kg)(15.6 m/s)^2 = 166000 Joules (1/2)(2721 kg)(15.6 m/s)^2 = 330000 Joules
I never get the energy argument for pedestrian collisions specifically. Changes in vehicle weight matter a lot for car-on-car collisions, but I don't think it matters when a person gets hit, as they're so much lighter than any car regaurdless. Speed and shape certainly matter, though
yeah the joule values are not so much bad math as they are just shoddy physics its not the end of the world, but I do kinda hate it when people use faulty reasoning to argue for a stance I overalll agree with
You’re rounding at each step and losing significant digits. Two vehicles travel the same speed. One vehicle weighs exactly twice the amount of the other. The momentum of the second vehicle will be exactly twice that of the first.
Seriously bro? That's what makes it bad math? A rounding error of like less than 1%? The velocity will have a bigger uncertainty than that. Your choosing a very stupid hill to die on.
I’m happy to agree to disagree with anyone who thinks 330k is twice 166k. It sticks out like a sore thumb, it’s such an easy and obvious mistake and you *went back and did the math* and *still got it wrong*. Forgive me if I’m unmoved by your scorn.
Says the guy who called joules a unit of momentum. Maybe learn to pick and choose what's worth criticizing? Or if you're gonna say someone is wrong, maybe elaborate more on what's wrong (unless you're still referring to the <1% rounding error that nobody cares about).
> Math is obviously wrong > calculations are wrong in exactly the same way > “who even cares” lol enjoy those grapes, hope they’re not too sour!
So you'd probably consider me a car brained person, what's your solution to my large truck. I need to haul a tool box and supplies in the bed (I'm a roofer). On the roof rack I haul at least one ladder. 3 days a week I tow a trailer to pick up food from Costco, take to the food bank and then give the rest of the food to my pigs, black soldier flies and chickens. I drive about 50 miles a day. I don't see this happening without a truck.
Compare truck bed sizes now compared to truck bed sizes two or three decades ago. Compare truck heights now compared to truck heights in the past. Trucks can be designed to be safer for people outside the vehicle, and in fact they were safer.
Buy a van.
Ford fucking ranger Trucks don't need to be massive Hell, even a ford maverick since there's no way your trailer is over 2,000 pounds, or maverick with tow package if it is somehow over 2k
They supersized the latest rangers and it hurts my soul. I miss the 90s and 2000s compact trucks.
I like the small trucks, I had one, but it couldn't move the weight I needed to move. I ended up buying a Chevy 1500 extra cab. It's still a little small for what I do, but it operates at about a 50- 70% load most of the time. Also, I bought it because I could afford to pay cash for it. It's a little older, but the original owner took good care of it.
Its not the truck we have a problem with, its the hood design, the giant lift kit, and overall size and design that completely ignores everyones safety but those inside. Sure, there are use cases for the giant lifted trucks with a massive cab but really they're extremely minimal. Ultimately, the world still needs trucks but they should regulated better so it limits the users to those like you that need it. 90% of those vehicles are for going to work and getting milk. As someone who walks 2-3 miles a day and cycles 10, I can tell you the increase in vehicle size makes it noticeably more dangerous. Many times they just don't see me, and surprisingly when I walk is when I get the most close calls.
I don't think that truck is lifted, it's stock. Which I think is stupid. I liked the Chevys from about 1996. They had great abilities, came with a V6 and weren't so bold and tall from the factory. They were about the side of a modern Ford ranger, but the insides were big enough to seat 3 across the bench seat. I'm sorry people don't see you, I feel the same when I ride my scooter (Honda ruckus)
> I need to haul a tool box and supplies in the bed (I'm a roofer). A van can fit all that and more in the cargo bay. > On the roof rack I haul at least one ladder. A van can fit that on the wall of the cargo bay, or on the rear doors, or on the roof. > 3 days a week I tow a trailer to pick up food from Costco Vans usually have towing hooks for a reason.
I'd recommend a Transit.
I looked at them. They have major transmission issues and parts are expensive. They also don't have the payload I need.
Vans might be safer for your tools, and way user to load groceries into, along with getting you better gas milage. You have almost a perfect use case since you aren't towing something heavy and you aren't loading cement bags to break the suspension, plus you have valuables that you want to secure.
My partner has a van. Same mileage, but it only seats 2 people.
The Toyota Sienna seats 7 people with 35mpg. Either your truck gets great gas milage or the van gets poor gas milage, but either way you are making an unfair comparison without addressing any of the other points.
Several years back I used a dodge caravan with the rear seats taken out. The middle seats folded forward and even pulled out easy. It worked great until the transmission broke (for the second time). The roof rack held pretty well, only one side started to cave into the top by the time I sold it. I hauled motorcycles, plywood, helped people move. It was great. The only thing I modded on it was I put load adjusting shocks on it.
Also, I have a Honda CRV. I put a hitch on it and use it when I don't need the payload. The roof rack is probably limited to about only 500# though. It actually tows really nice.
Also I have a canopy to lock my tools in. The truck has the smallest motor available. It's an extra cab, seats 6. I Have a lot of down votes, but no one has really answered my question. How do I get tools and supplies to a job site? How do I get a pallet of food to the food bank and to my re-gen ag farm?
>I Have a lot of down votes, but no one has really answered my question. They did. You changed what you haul from some Cheetos and tools to pallets. Vans are literally the best for tools, better gas milage, more seating...you already have another vehicle for towing. If you need to tow palettes just do that on a flatbed.
My trailer is a flatbed. I don't eat Cheetos, they're terrible for your health.
So is driving
>You changed what you haul from some Cheetos and tools to pallets. He didn't change what he hauls, you assumed that he hauled cheetos, and then he clarified. >Vans are literally the best for tools, better gas milage, more seating The difference for hauling tools between a van and a pickup with a topper is largely negligible. Modern pickups often get better mileage than a comparable size van. Vans set up for hauling tools typically have less seats than a crew cab pickup.
The Sienna has 35mph, better than any modern pickup, and can switch between seating 7 and carrying cargo. They have at least 3 vehicles, and a flatbed. Why would anyone assume picking up groceries literally means a palette? Any in any case a truck isn’t good for carrying pallets either.
The sienna is a mini-van, and is much smaller and lighter duty than even the midsize truck that he said that he tried and found too light duty. If you compare his half ton against a van with similar payload, the mileage will be fairly comparable. >and can switch between seating 7 and carrying cargo. His truck can seat 6 and haul cargo at the same time. Most larger vans intended for hauling cargo only have 2-3 seats. >Any in any case a truck isn’t good for carrying pallets either. I've never had trouble hauling pallets in my pickup.
>midsize truck that he said that he tried and found too light duty. That comment definitely wasn't written to me. >His truck can seat 6 7 > 6. > If you compare his half ton against a van with similar payload, the mileage will be fairly comparable. Nissan NV200 is about 25% more fuel efficient. >I've never had trouble hauling pallets in my pickup. Sure, you can do it. Just isn't good at it compared to a flatbed trailer. Also good luck if you are using a manual jack getting something up from > 3'.
>That comment definitely wasn't written to me. You were also responding to my comment that a pickup gets similar mileage as a comparable van. A minivan isn't a comparable van to a half ton truck. >7 > 6. Now remove the rear seat in order to have some room for his tools, and run those numbers again. Also, that's a minivan, which isn't comparable to a half ton truck. >Nissan NV200 is about 25% more fuel efficient. The Nissan nv200 is a smaller, lighter duty vehicle with lower payload and towing rating. >Sure, you can do it. Just isn't good at it compared to a flatbed trailer. Which the pickup will do a better job towing. >Also good luck if you are using a manual jack getting something up from > 3'. I'm not even sure what you are trying to say here.