| ▲ | api 5 days ago |
| Vehicular elephantiasis is largely the result of perverse incentives from emission regulation. Make something big enough and it fits into different more lax categories. The way we do emission and mileage standards might do more harm than good unless you’re an oil company. |
|
| ▲ | mitthrowaway2 5 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Maybe, but it's clearly worked it's way into fashions as well. The F-150 lightning doesn't have to worry about emissions categories, but it's just as elephantine as the rest, including a child-killing vision-obstructing front hood and grille whose only purpose is to enclose a frunk. |
| |
| ▲ | dyauspitr 5 days ago | parent [-] | | I like that’s the lightning is giant. I don’t particularly like small, low to the ground vehicles. | | |
| ▲ | arijun 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Your comfort shouldn’t outweigh the safety of pedestrians. There is a reason those cars do not pass regulations in Europe. | | |
| ▲ | dyauspitr 5 days ago | parent [-] | | I’ve driven plenty in Europe. Those small cramped roads can’t handle big vehicles and parking anywhere is non existent or highly inconvenient. I bet that’s the main reason European cars tend to skew smaller. |
| |
| ▲ | benregenspan 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | But why is that? Is there any chance it's at least partly to protect yourself from everyone else in giant cars? | | |
| ▲ | renewiltord 5 days ago | parent [-] | | I have a Subaru Forester. When I drive a sedan everyone shines their headlamps into my face. I parked my Forester behind a sedan and drove back and forth. My lights were not in their cabin. So other people drive in a way that is not compatible with my driving because I don’t want headlamps in my cabin. Occasionally there’s a lifted truck behind me and it brightens my cabin. In those moments I fantasize about placing retroreflectors all over my rear seat headrests but then I pull over and let them past and the moment passes. Besides, a HN truism is “Yield to gross tonnage”. I liked that. It makes sense that HN users who believe that if you’re big others should get out of the way also get large cars. “The cemeteries are full of people with right of way” so smaller vehicles should get out of the way of larger vehicles or risk death. It’s a good lesson. Can’t say it’s false. | | |
| ▲ | mitthrowaway2 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I guess there should be rules about the height of headlights. It seems like exactly the sort of safety and compatibility problem that standards exist to solve. | | |
| ▲ | renewiltord 5 days ago | parent [-] | | US mainstream belief is that standards can be enforced at factory but no laws should be enforced on individuals. I act in that ecosystem. Not worsening it, but not sacrificing myself to it. |
| |
| ▲ | MagnumOpus 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | It is obviously true. What is also obviously true is that road damage scales with the fourth power of vehicle mass, and that therefore vehicle taxation should increase at a similar power, so that the drivers of the 3-tonne trucknutted Canyoneros stop freeloading on the community. |
|
| |
| ▲ | masklinn 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | … and that’s why I bought a Marauder MPV to go get groceries. | | |
| ▲ | cosmic_cheese 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Nothing less than a decommissioned Abrams tank will do for taking little Billy to school! |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | adastra22 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Also the arms race of collision survivablity. I have no interest in driving a big truck, but with all the other big trucks out there I’m seriously tempted just for my own safety… |
| |
| ▲ | Spooky23 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The big trucks are not evaluated for safety to the same standard as other vehicles. They aren't rigged with exploding gas tanks anymore, but the feeling of safety is mostly psychological. | | |
| ▲ | adastra22 5 days ago | parent [-] | | That’s not the safety risk. The safety risk is not being in a big truck and getting hit by one. It’s not so much to do with the vehicle’s safety features as to (1) mass; and (2) height of the cabin. | | |
| ▲ | Spooky23 5 days ago | parent [-] | | That’s part of the issue. The safety ratings of a pickup truck do not incorporate the risk of the front end causing fatalities in collisions. The feeling of safety is part of that - drivers think they have better visibility due to seating position. They are also more likely to roll and spin out than other vehicles. | | |
| ▲ | adastra22 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Causing fatalities to the other drivers and pedestrians. This is, unfortunately, a selfish incentive that works against the common good. | | |
| ▲ | Spooky23 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Agreed. It’s gross. Unfortunately we live in an era where common good is a quaint concept. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | pantalaimon 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The only logical next step is the mini-tank | | | |
| ▲ | sneak 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | It isn’t an arms race, as being in those bigger vehicles only feels more safe; it isn’t actually any safer. | | |
| ▲ | adastra22 5 days ago | parent [-] | | It is much safer to be in a big truck hitting an another big truck, than in a small sedan hitting a big truck. Physics of momentum beats out safety features. Actual studies do show this: it is safer for the occupant of the truck in a two-vehicle collision. More trucks on the road make the chance of fatalities overall higher. You often find articles saying that fatalities go up when you introduce a truck, and that is true. But that's because trucks are more likely to kill pedestrians or drivers of smaller cars, NOT because of risk to the truck driver. [] It would be better if there were fewer trucks on the road. But if everyone else is buying a truck, it becomes your selfish incentive to do so as well, for the safety of your* family. It is a tragedy of the commons situation. [*] The exception is single-vehicle accidents, e.g. rollovers. Those are riskier and more likely for the driver of a truck, but also less of a concern in suburban driving. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | iambateman 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think that’s part of it, but also about 30% of men apparently have a nearly-unlimited budget for buying the biggest truck. |
|
| ▲ | kube-system 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Maybe we’ll see that change if the recent CAFE changes stick. I think the big bill passed recently set CAFE fines to zero. |
