I am from Brazil, I've heard plenty of stories of people that bought imported Ford trucks and then are confused when their trucks get impounded because they drove without a license, not realizing that trucks here require a different license unless they are literally car-sized.

Example: Fiat Fiorino: https://www.hojeemdia.com.br/polopoly_fs/1.792949!/image/ima...

It used same Chassis as Fiat Uno https://quatrorodas.abril.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/...

So it was obviously a car, with the rear-part modified to carry cargo.

Meanwhile the 1980s F150: https://i.pinimg.com/564x/89/50/8a/89508a513b5076ef6413543f2...

It is obvious that thing is NOT a car, when you learned to drive in a UNO you can't expect a F150 to drive the same!

> I think we need to start requiring commercial drivers licenses on some of these beasts.

In the EU the maximum authorized mass (US: GVWR) you can drive with a standard car license is 3500kg or 7700lbs. That means for some models of the F150 you do need a commercial license.

There are no F150 models in the US that weight 7700 lbs or even close to it. The heaviest one is 5517 lbs.

https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North%20America...

It's not dry vehicle weight that counts. GCWR must not be above 3500 kg for the basic car driver's license.

PS: Actually, the limits for the basic German driver's license (B) are: Max GVWR of 3500 kg. With trailer, if GTWR not above 750 kg, no GCWR restriction, otherwise max GCWR of 3500 kg.

There's an extended license (BE) for max GTWR of 3500 kg and no GCWR restriction. (Max GVWR still 3500 kg.)

https://www.adac.de/verkehr/rund-um-den-fuehrerschein/klasse... (German text).

The curb weight of the F150 tops out at ~5000 pounds, the GVWR [which is what it is when full of people and stuff] tops out at ~7000 pounds.

The F250 line tops out at a curb weight of ~7500 lbs with a GVWR of an even 10,000.

And the GCWR can top 15000 pounds (my personal spec, though I had to custom order to get that combination). My 2018 F150 can tow a little over 10000 pounds vs the 6000 that my dad's 1995 F250 could tow. Things have definitely shifted a category or more. Similar comparisons for a current Ranger and an older F150. Basically, the older Ranger is an Escape with a hitch.

I don't disagree, but there would be a political shitstorm if you tried to take away their trucks.

You don't have to "take away" the trucks, but just make them more impractical:

- sales tax on cars/trucks is by weight and exponentially increases the heavier the vehicle gets

- increase taxes on gasoline

- require a special license to operate a vehicle over XXXX lbs.

- rewrite laws or encourage DAs to prosecute drivers that injure other people in cars or pedestrians even if it's unintentional

- illegal to have passengers in the truck bed (some states still allow this).

These are just off the top of my head.

Do you really think what you're suggesting doesn't map to "taking away" to the people involved?

News flash: People aren't stupid, and you're not that smart. NFA tax stamps aren't still a thing because people don't see the tax loopholes as a ban or infringement on the 2nd Amendment. They absolutely do. They've just grudgingly accepted there may be some positive utility to it. What you're talkong about is nothing but velvet gloved taking by policy.

And other posters are right. It'd be a shitstorm.

Yes it would be a shitstorm, but only because some grown adults act like big babies. None of these ideas are "taking away," they are merely requiring that people finally take some personal responsibility for their actions.

And the sort of person that is big about "personal responsibility" for others but calls personal responsibility for themselves "taking away" is actually somewhat stupid in their hypocrisy.

Unless all that "personal responsibility" is actually just backwards justification for a system that's rigged against people without wealth and power and the right skin color, but it couldn't be that could it?

Have you seen what pickemuptrucks cost these days? None of these financial changes would matter.

People will wail and cry and scream about their freedom being taken from them...

Do a Carbon Dividend and other people will scream when taking away the gas tax means taking away the dividend.

We need to stop these cowardly politics appeasing automobile users. This is how.

Because it is in fact taking away their freedom

The public roadways have never been especially free, not as in beer nor as in speech. It's a pretty unfortunate choice of setting for expressing individualism. Many have put some of their identity into how or what they drive anyway, of course.

Yes: Their freedom to pollute the environment and to endanger other people's lives. Hey, there are laws against murder and robbery too. "How dare they take away my freedom to relieve others of their life and property!"

Perhaps it's time Americans stopped reacting like conditioned Pavlovian dogs to the mere word "freedom"? Not all "freedoms" are unequivocally good.

sure, although metaphorically salting the earth through global warming for future generations arguably is also taking away freedom

Not doing things for fear of political shitstorms is a large part of why everything is so broken these days.

Terrible leadership!

I don't do certain unpopular things at work because I know it will be a political shitstorm, and even if I try to, everyone else will not cooperate and I could possibly lose my job or not get promoted. That is why. They usually cannot even do it if they wanted to.

If your voters will vote you out because you do unpopular things, that's democracy at work.

Politics is about figuring out what to expend community energy on that'll actually A) Work And B ) Not have to be undone the next time the winds change.

Terrible leadership I can agree with wholeheartedly though.

You have to pick your fights. I'm not sure this is the hill to die on.

You can take away the CAFE rules that can be gamed by making trucks bigger than necessary.

True. In Florida, 1/3 of trucks are raised so there occupants have to literally climb in. These are commonly adorn with "Trump" and "Don't tread on me" bumper stickers and even massive flags (because you know, big truck means big flag...)

I once drove one to move something (the cab/bed being five feet off the ground wasn't as helpful as you'd think \s). The experience was somewhat surreal, like driving in an air traffic control tower. Much different than a u-haul (my only other trucking experience).

Edit: oh yeah, they do this to go "mudding" (drinking and driving in a giant muddy mess with guns, so much fun!).

Mudding doesn’t mean drinking and driving with guns. It means tearing up the wet muddy ground with your vehicle. Spinning your tires, getting stuck, getting unstuck - just goofing off off-road. I personally don’t see the appeal of it but have friends that enjoy it. They don’t drink and drive (with or without guns).

> The park does not sell alcohol, according to its website, but patrons bring their own beverages.

https://www.yoursun.com/charlotte/news/redneck-mud-park-has-...

Destroying forests and wetlands while spewing carbon into the air.

Trucks are vehicles. How can they be political? I know plenty of people from all kinds of backgrounds owning a truck.

"Rolling coal" (modifying a diesel engine to run rich and increase soot in the exhaust, a.k.a. incompletely combusted fuel) has become a statement in many places of the U.S. that you are opposed to the EPA, clean air rules, regulation, and in general the perceived nanny state.

My friend is a Tesla owner in Georgia and has been deliberately blasted by these guys at stoplights a few times. They tried, anyway—hard to do this to a car with superior acceleration and a HEPA cabin filter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal

Ah yes, we have tons of these folks in AZ, frequently they're the same people with the "Don't tread on me" stickers and flags that seem to think "don't tread on me" means "But I can tread on you."

I don't understand it myself. I'm fascinated by the energy extraction from a properly calibrated diesel engine. They get more efficient the more air you pump in.

Ruining that for the sake of pissing people off seems a travesty against the machine.

This is something entirely different and reprehensible. I was mostly concerned with the utility of Trucks and how politicization of it is absurd and dangerous. Next time someone wants to buy a truck, they’ll think twice what the society would think of them. What would the neighbors say? All they wanted is a utility vehicle.

This is just one example of many things that are dividing the society into factions.

The same reasons usually apply to large BMW and Mercedes SUVs. The correct people own those so they don't attract the same Attention.

Up until this year I would have agreed with you, but grills this year have gotten completely out of control. The lack of visibility and the height of the impact zone has really changed on some trucks.

The needless bloat of pickups is what got me more interested in minivans

Do pick up trucks cause more accidents? Is there data that supports this?

Or are modern pickup-pedestrian accidents more deadly than other classes of cars?

This will be a weird number because I rarely see pickups in urban centers with lots of pedestrians, but I see them all the time in rural places.

They are actually useful vehicles in rural places.

This thread is filled with ignorant city boys who have never done any useful farm work.

I cannot imagine how excrutiating it would be for my wife to have to pay a bunch of stupid taxes and follow a bunch of fascist new laws in order to grow her 100sq ft garden every year which, even so small, STILL requires truckloads of compost and mulch since we are just in the process of building our soil. And that's just for the gardens. I don't have any idea how many times we've hauled in cow, pig, and goat panels. I propose that the assholes proposing taxes and limits on trucks find a way to bring us these goods.

Lol, one would have to be an "ignorant city boy" to believe your claims here, don't BS us.

We are talking about the poorly designed showboats that do nothing to improve hauling capacity or utility. In my experience, I'd vastly prefer a lower bed for any of the tasks you mention. The extended crew cabs, stubby beds, and jacked to hell trucks are for aesthetics, not hauling mulch.

Plus you don't even seem to realize the distinction, just emotionally (and perhaps intentionally?) misunderstand what is under discussion.

Well the fact that we're complaining from the city means there's trucks in the city that don't belong in the city, not that these things are being used for farming or hauling. My wife's family owned a ranch, I know what a practical truck for farming looks like - it's not what these people are driving. These vehicles are statement vehicles, not work vehicles.

in europe you'd just use a trailer for this kind of work on a (compared to american cars) small car

Come to texas. Everyone has a truck, including me. But I bought the smallest one i could with a diesel to get 30mpg+ and its still the size of a 2009 F150.

I'm guessing the answer to your question is "yes" but I don't know how much insight this gives to GP's question.

>Yeah, the size of these trucks has completely put me off ever wanting one. I miss the small ones from a few decades ago.

<rolls eyes>

You (statistical you as a HN user, not you personally) say this with one breath but one look at the B pillar of an 80s minivan and you'd start coming up with excuses for why it's not safe enough for your kid.

The same demographics that complain about cars growing do a hell of a lot more complaining about safety and efficiency. So the OEM adds space for crumple zones, thick strong doors, a bulbous front end that pedestrians can gently (lol) bounce off of. And the OEM makes smooth sculpted curves so the vehicle can punch the cleanest possible hole in the air. And then they realize there's no room for people, so they scale it up to make more space so we get a Civic that's bigger than a 90s Accord.

You can't have it all HN, so which is it?

Modern trucks are still huge relative to other vehicles on the road. I want smaller trucks.

Small trucks are available. A base model, 2wd, 2-door Tacoma is not big.

They don't make a 2-door Tacoma any more (for the US market). The smallest now is an "access cab".

I bought a 2-door Tacoma 5 years ago, and the dealer struggled to find one for me. It shipped from over 1000 miles away, meanwhile they had 20+ 4-door Tacomas on the lot.

It may be poor memory, or maybe different styling, but a 2020 Tacoma feels a lot bigger than a late 80s Toyota Pick Up or Ford Ranger.

Looking it up, the longest fourth-generation Hilux was 195.5 inches long, and the shortest Tacoma is 212 inches. Similarly its ~60 inches vs ~70 inches of height. For the single cab, long-bed it's 10 inches higher and 16 inches longer and the Hilux was available with a single-cab short bed that was even 12 inches shorter.

It's comparable to the Dodge Dakota. And the Dakota was supposed to be larger than the compact trucks.

Not to mention that a full sized F150 is less than an inch wider than one from 25 years ago. What people see when they see truck size is vertical size and hood lines which is what has changed the most. Trucks look much bigger now, which is partly aesthetics and partly for safety, but I think people have internalized a belief that they have grown outward too, which is not the case.

The small trucks that the HN demographics tend to err toward have grown substantially.