Remix clone Hacker News

I think that you're looking at extremes exclusively when it comes to your assessment. I live in a "city" in WV and need my truck all the time to get to rural areas, but that doesn't mean that I don't have reasonable access to electricity. Furthermore delivery around my city really isn't affordable or available in a lot of cases.

That being said, I really wish we had a small ICE truck in the USA, or an equivalent to the s-10/ranger. Even the ford maverick is exceptionally tall and it doesn't come with a bed that is big enough to conveniently move building materials. The maverick bed is only 54" or 4.5ft and older model rangers and S10s can be had with up to a 6ft bed.

https://www.motor1.com/news/698055/toyota-13000-dollar-hilux...

▲

cityofdelusion a day ago | parent | next [-]

I bought a Maverick and it wasn't noticeably larger than my extended bed ranger, I actually feel like it is smaller, especially considering modern A pillars and such are very thick and rigid compared to the death trap of the old ranger.

I have had no issues moving construction materials with the Maverick. I've moved around 12ft boards and stacks of drywall. The only real difference I noticed is I can't lazily hang things off the tailgate, which tailgate latches aren't specced to do anyways.

	▲	InitialBP a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Not sure which ranger you're talking about - but if you mean the 6ft one, 18 inches of bed length is definitely noticeable. It's also definitely possible to haul all those things with almost any truck. Hell, you could even buy a rack for a maverick that makes full 8ft by 4ft sheets of drywall/plywood super easy to carry around, but being able to really easily load up stuff and not have to do some complicated strapping/securing of the payload is a big win with a bigger bed. I personally haul motorcycles a lot, and being able to have two motorcycles in the bed with tailgate up is a huge plus for me. edit: misunderstood your first comment. What year Ranger are you talking about? The difference between an 80's/90's small truck and an early 2000s can be very considerable. There's a whole different conversation and argument about the general size of vehicles in the US that is essentially circular and leads to bigger and bigger vehicles in the name of "safety".
	▲	fckgw a day ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Yeah, with the exception of the bed size, the Maverick is only ~4in longer and wider than the 2000s era Ranger. It's a pretty close match. https://www.mavericktruckclub.com/forum/threads/2022-maveric...
	▲	potato3732842 a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		A Maverick is within spitting distance of a single cab short bed Ranger. You get a little less bed but an extra row to make up for it. There's plenty of pictures of them parked side by side.

▲

rpcope1 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The Maverick is also kind of dumb because of the choice to do unibody instead of body on frame. I'm sure there's some weight savings or whatever, but at least on a body on frame truck, I can opt to change the bed out even on a short bed truck and add a flatbed when it makes sense. When someone using it like a truck inevitably beer cans the bed, they're going to be really sad that it's not a relatively quick and simple thing to fix (by just going and getting another bed).

▲

michpoch a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> I live in a "city" in WV and need my truck all the time to get to rural areas

How rural are these areas? No roads?