105 points

This is potentially good news, but we also need to fix the mpg exemption for trucks and SUVs if we want substantive change.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Allegedly the EPA is monitoring the 8500 Gross weight through 2027, so it’s on the radar.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I have long thought that if it is a truck/SUV it is for use in situations where you don’t care about dents and paint scratches and thus those are not factors in the value. Dealers and car rental places would quickly figure out that they cannot legally look for such things, but customers will find a reason to buy a different one and so they would stop leasing or renting trucks/SUVs. They may still lease/rent truck/SUV shaped objects, but they will count as light cars for MPG purposes and so cost a lot more.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Other countries can be good examples of policy that functions well. First and foremost, they should be included in the average fleet mpg rating for vehicle manufacturers. This is because they are a part of the fleet of vehicles produced and contribute a good sized portion of the greenhouse gasses emitted from vehicles. They are also one of the biggest number of vehicles sold so they shouldn’t be exceptional.

I like your idea but I feel it is too in the weeds for simple policy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The idea is trucks used for work will by nature need more fuel, but they should not be used where a more efficient car would work

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

Ban the crew cab and force the trucks to be used as trucks, not minivan/SUV substitutes. Suddenly a $60k+ pavement princess used for hauling a recliner once a year isn’t as appealing.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

I’d rather force safety requirements on all cars. Like limiting blind spots at the front and everywhere else, limiting speeds of vehicles above certain weights, increasing license requirements for vehicles that have higher safety impact etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-29 points

And you need two vehicles if you work and have a family? That’s insane.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Well… Back when a truck wasnt $60+k… Yes thats exactly what people did. They had a truck that guzzled gas and provided the bed space or towing capacity they needed for work, and a daily driver for other things.

From the last time I saw this ‘debate’… ~30% of truck owners use the bed once a year or less, ~75% of owners tow once a year or less, and ~70% go offroad once a year or less.

Now, obviously there are applications where a truck is needed. That can’t be denied… But there are so many applications here that use massive fucking trucks where another country would use a sprinter van or similar vehicle for the exact same application.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Now, obviously there are applications where a truck is needed. That can’t be denied…

Pickup trucks? Not sure why that couldn’t be denied, as the rest of the world don’t really use them and if they do they’re a quarter of the size

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
*

You are probably referring a 2013 phone survey of 1200 individuals which purposely split the difference between using the bed and towing making them mutually exclusive. When you didn’t treat them mutually exclusive showed something like 60% of owners used it or lent it out for use at least a few times a year. Or a 2018 report by a trade group axios which didn’t release data, methodology, or anything. It was released to auto trade folks but because of copyright none of the data was released. Just regurgitated media referencing each other.

If you would like to actually link a peer reviewed study on truck use with public data I’m happy to reconsider my position. But I don’t believe that data exists. But again, my position is completely open if something has changed there.

1/2 ton v8 trucks start at 35, 42 nicely configured. Not everyone is buying lariats.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Unless your truck has an 8-foot bed for work, which would actually be longer than the front portion seating a family and therefore useful, it’s a silly waste of money. The point of a truck is hauling things, not people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Fifth wheels do have a place. If you’ve never heard of them, then you should probably back off on strong opinions here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

Oh I guess workers don’t tow with them either. It’s insane how you folks invent these artificial restrictions and rules.

You would rather create extra waste than admit folks use them as both in some weird pyrrhic political win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

If you’ve got a two-income household and the worksites are in opposite directions, its pretty normal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

If you’re required to have a truck to work you should probably be using one owned by your employer or written off as a business expense if you’re self-employed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
*

Well I’m happy you live in a reality where that’s the case. Then ignore that folks do work outside their employment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Why? Just get a trailer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Does a trailer tow for me? Cool enough, that might actually be true soon. They have some fancy ev trailer boosters coming out and being developed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points
*

Ford F250 from the year 2035

permalink
report
reply
8 points

got to keep the family safe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Is that bigger or smaller than an H3? I haven’t seen one on the road since Hummer went bust.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Gonna need bigger truck nuts

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Where there’s a will, there’s a way

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

Having lived out of the US for two years, returning is a shock to the system with the size and exhaust volume of the vehicles on the road. I am skeptical that these changes can get through the gauntlet of lobbyists, however.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

Car manufacturers want these changes, mostly because they can sell their cheaper cars here at a high price since the US market is so used to inflated vehicle prices. Cheaper to make, more profit on the sell.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

This week, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) stunned safety advocates by proposing new vehicle rules that it says will help reduce pedestrian deaths in America. The new rules appear aimed directly at the trend of increasingly massive SUVs and trucks, which have been shown to be more deadly to pedestrians than smaller and midsize vehicles.

This will be really cool if it survives the SCOTUS war on the administrative state.

permalink
report
reply
5 points
*

then it has to survive the SCOTUS war on the people

permalink
report
parent
reply

Fuck Cars

!fuckcars@lemmy.world

Create post

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let’s explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be Civil

You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speech

Don’t discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass people

Don’t follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don’t doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topic

This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No reposts

Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

  • [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
  • [article] for news articles
  • [blog] for any blog-style content
  • [video] for video resources
  • [academic] for academic studies and sources
  • [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
  • [meme] for memes
  • [image] for any non-meme images
  • [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories

Recommended communities:

Community stats

  • 5K

    Monthly active users

  • 905

    Posts

  • 25K

    Comments