The problem with this infographic is that they aren’t depicting the size of the trucks in proportion. That 37%er is probably 3x as large as the 64%er (the whole truck itself)
No, it’s an extended cab model, which have tiny beds. Like, you can’t even fit standard construction material (8ft) in it with the tailgate down without it sticking out well past the tailgate.
Yes, trucks are longer than they used to be, but extended cabs are far more common than they were. Living in a city, the vast majority of trucks are extended cabs with tiny beds.
They’re basically SUVs with an open trunk. Enough room for a tool chest and a cooler, and you’ll need to hitch a trailer if you actually want to haul anything.
Bed size is measured in feet. There’s never been a light-duty truck with more than an 8’ box, which is probably what the first one depicts. The last one might be a 5’ box but way more 6’ boxes get sold. So yah, they’re smaller, but they sure as hell aren’t half the size. Putting it terms of overall length is disengenuous at best.
I have an 8’ box because I want a toolbox and still be able to get a lot of undesirable stuff in the box besides. I wouldn’t have a shortbox.
Yeah, let’s compare different types of truck so we can complain about them
Always the same shit with you guys
A current gen regular cab long box F150 (you know, the same thing as the first one in the picture) measures 228" so 42% bed.
A 1995 F150 regular cab long box was 213" long, so 45% bed.
1983? 208" long.
1975 (first generation)? 205", 47% bed
And you know what, just for the heck of it, the 60s F100 was 202" long, that’s 47.5% bed! The only way you got it to 50% bed was without a rear bumper and that was 50% on the dot, I don’t know where they got their first truck but as far as I can find it’s never existed!
Inline 6 were the smaller engine back in the day for trucks, no way they could make the hood super short.
Trucks, especially full sized ones haven’t changed in size that much, they’re mostly taller so it makes them seem much bigger than they were, the rest is mostly so they’re actually safer than the thin boxes of the past.
I mean, it makes sense to me.
I know there’s a lot of hate for pickup trucks, but they are useful. Not useful all the time, unless you use it for work, but that can be said for many things that we own. Obviously, most people don’t use trucks for work, so they increasingly want more people-space and less (but not necessarily zero) cargo-space.
Cars and trucks in general are a problem, and the trend of increasing size of certain trucks is a problem, but imo if someone wants an SUV with a spot in the back to carry a Christmas tree or whatever, I don’t see anything particularly wrong with that.
Trucks with smaller beds are objectively less useful than trucks with larger beds.
While I agree with the sentiment, it is still annoying when they take up 2 parking spaces. They are just bad cars for cities and work better on rural areas.
I really wish two seat utility vehicle format in the spirit of the El Camino would be a thing again. Basically a station wagon size, but with an open bed. These could easily have bed covers in the same shape as a wagon as well, but removable to allow for taller items and a bed that can be hosed out.
The market shifting all in to four door cabs sucks.
They actually have modern El Caminos in Australia. They’re called Utes!
Unfortunately Holden (Chevy) has stopped making them in favor of the Colorado, which is basically just a pickup.
It is a four door and not significantly smaller than other compact pickups like a Maverick or Ridgeline.
People used to use trucks for hauling. Now they are $70k+ status symbols for people who need to scream, “I am insecure.”
I saw some truck commercial yesterday where the thing was eighty thousand dollars AFTER all incentives and rebates.
I thought to myself that the people who are screaming about inflation and how the Democrat president is ruining their lives are the same people who are lining up to make crazy monthly payments into a vehicle that will immediately be upside down on the note.
This may surprise you, but cars can cost much more than that price. So what’s your point?
Completely baseless assumption, but I think it’s just a continuation of the phenomenon when toddlers get hyped for trucks/tractors/combine harvesters/anything that is big and loud, maybe because it’s associated with power, I don’t know. Some people just stay at this toddler’s mentality and they see everything that’s big and/or loud as something you can boast about. See also: loud exhausts, 6400 deciBel motorcycle sounds, etc.
Fair. They should just get a job with machine builders. I get paid money to play with power all day. Why hello chemical processing equipment, I see you pull 180amps at 460V. Now let’s see how loud you are when I push start.
If you havent made an entire factory lights dim are you even alive?
I don’t get why people think an ugly looking vehicle is a status symbol. To most, it symbolizes something completely different.
These trucks are also a very American thing. Rarely see that anywhere in Europe. Lots of toxic masculinity in the US
I legitimately had a neighbor tell me “this is a truck neighborhood.” In a “joking, not joking” sort of situation.
And I can’t legally drive my kids around in one of those, so yeah it’s like they are different trucks for different purposes or something…. I don’t know…. Maybe…?
In my opinion, it should be illegal to drive any vehicle so tall you can’t see kids in front of you anywhere near a school zone. Unless it’s a fire truck or other service vehicle, for obvious reasons.
It’s funny, kids aren’t getting run down in school zones in other places, we don’t let them run indiscriminately across the road. They’re taught to walk to a a crosswalk to cross the road.
In fact, lots of places ban school buses using flashing red lights inside urban areas since it’s more dangerous, it’s only allowed on rural roads.
The other way a giant truck can solve your “driving my kids around” problem is via the massive blind spot in front. If you’re impressed how much you can fit in the back, wait until you see how many tiny little skulls fit between the road and your line of sight.
I’ve literally never had an issue and I’ve never heard of that being an issue. Do you not look at the road when you’re driving or something?
Can anyone provide anything that says this is a real concern…? Because people keep saying it, and no one wants to prove it. So strange… should be easy, no? So why can’t anyone do it?
Go watch a crash test for a Kei truck
Edit: at 0:50 https://youtu.be/roLcNwRi1Sk
And if people were buying massive trucks for their unmatched safety, that would be a point worth making. Unfortunately, there’s thousands of cars on the market that are safer than both those options (for both the occupants and the people around them) and some of them can fit just as much in the back.
There is no justification for these trucks. Not safety, not cost, not the environment, not accessibility and not the amount of stuff they can theoretically carry.
The only excuse is “I’m a massive cunt” and people are absolutely right to not accept it.
But we’re comparing getting a Kei truck instead of regular truck in this part of the conversation so it actually does make sense to discuss the safety question.
The conversation you want to have is elsewhere in this post.
If crash tests results were the main reasons for people to buy these shitty pavement princesses, Volvo would have buried the rest of the industry decades ago.
I mean modern kei trucks have airbags and safety features. They just have to buy 25 year or older to use the classic care rule.
But nowhere near the same driver comfort, crash test rating, towing capacity, top speed, tongue weight, or max load weight. Bed length alone is a poor measurement for a truck’s usefulness.
You can just drive your pavement princess, you don’t have to justify it to the internet
So is using those other measurements as a reason to justify owning a truck for most people. The Apes (Italian) serve a purpose, not a daily driver. Living in Houston I observed American sized trucks carrying single occupants with the occasional truck towing something once a month. That’s it, none of these people needed a truck for a daily driver which is what that pic is all about.
So you expect someone to have multiple vehicles? Yeah because that makes sense…,
Check how much worse it is for the pedestrian to be hit by the pick up truck.
Because the modern truck has crash safety in mind due to crumple zones and other shit. I bet if a small truck were to be redesigned today with modern collision technology it would be just as safe as the truck without being multiple tons heavy to the point you nearly need a cdl license to drive a behemoth