I understand, but a modern pickup truck comfortably seats 6 in its King Cab (and good luck finding a truck without a King Cab) and has a bed that is useless for carrying anything except maybe your gym bag or a dozen cases of empties. There is no doubt the purpose of a modern pickup truck is as a passenger vehicle and secondarily to provide an advertising medium for you political beliefs.

The fact that modern American passenger vehicles have evolved into statistically significant deathtraps for surrounding pedestrians, cyclist, and even smaller cars is as political as anything else in that country these days.

What's missing is that those "worksite" trucks should require a special commercial drivers license and extra testing for the professional drivers who drive them, same as big rigs. And not be allowed for non-work trips like driving to school.

This is a really good idea that I have not heard before.

It can also be introduced with new vehicle registrations so as not to bring out the pitchforks. Anyone with a truck can keep going, but next purchase, they need to do a driving test.

I can't imagine parents paying for their kids to do the extra course if it costs them a fraction of that for their kid to drive a regular sedan.

You need to do a pilot study to see if accidents can be reduced. This could be done in a Western town that has tens of miles from it to anywhere else, so you are only putting a few thousand people through the course.

This could be financially incentivised, so people get paid to do the course. If the results are good then you could make it so that people buying a truck or wanting to drive one get $500 off if they have done the course, with insurers in on it so that it just becomes easier to do the course. No freedom to be American need be jeopardised.

I’m not so sure that would keep the pitchforks away.

I think what you are asking is to lower the existing legal thresholds. Today if a vehicle's GVWR/GCWR or axle count exceeds a specific number varies by state then a different endorsement is required on the drivers license. [1] Each state may have additional requirements and some have additional endorsements and classes of vehicle.

Your comment is dripping with more political vitriol than I've seen in "that country" in a while

You can find plenty of more compact pickups - I've been searching for the best one for a while because the Dodge Ram and Ford F150 are just too big.

The Honda Ridgeline, the Ford Maverick, the Chevrolet Colorado, the Hyundai Santa Cruz, the Toyota Tacoma, are all more compact, only seat 2-4 people, and have more bed than cab.

The Honda Ridgeline has a wheelbase that's almost two feet longer than a mid-80s Ford Ranger. The body is almost a yard longer.

Bring back small, capable trucks.

The problem is not supply, it's demand. Every american wants to be the biggest vehicle on the road, and can't stand the mild inconvenience of sitting in a car, so their vehicle must be as large, spacious, comfortable, and luxurious as an expensive couch.

Toyota could bring back the tiny 90s tundra, and they would sell a tiny tiny number of them. That's why the modern corolla is as large as the 2000s camry.

A new EV (or even ICE) Chevy LUV would be so cool. Something small, simple, and cheap.

Got the f-150 as the main family vehicle. Extra width is a huge deal. we don’t feel squished together on trips.

Kids and and dog have plenty of room. And the bed is plenty big for all luggage / camping gear.

Plus it’s useful when we do need to haul couches or bigger items.

Downtown park isn’t fun but is doable.

so what you need is a minivan and what you got is a truck. this is pretty much what we're complaining about yes.

Plus minivan is way easier to park. I almost rammed somebody's fence with the rear end of the truck when I first drove a Nissan Navara.

Sort of comfortably, for how big trucks are they barely provide adequate passenger space.

Insanity in one sentence.

Indeed, it should be the actual use that governs this. If you use it as a passenger vehicle, it's a passenger vehicle. If you use it on a farm then it's a farm vehicle.

There's already special registration for farm vehicles in a lot of states. The taxes are lower and that's one of the few cases where you can use pink diesel, which is also taxed differently.

Trucks used as passenger vehicles are already more expensive to register and run than farm vehicles.

It’s pretty difficult to require a manufacturer to design a car today based on how someone will use it in the future.

Huh? To drive around?

A manufacturer does not know, at manufacture time, whether you will put hay bales or grandmas furniture in your truck bed.

Sure, but no matter what, there might be a kid of the road, even on the farm.

Exactly. The technocrats thought they'd be clever, and they basically outlawed reasonably sized cars for very small marginal efficiency gains. People bought light truck instead. People don't want to drive around in dinky death traps.

The CAFE standards for cars are too restrictive. The fleet averages look great, but the percentage of cars as vehicles on the road is low. Cars such as station wagons don't exist any more - the only option is to go larger and get an SUV.

The current crop of technocrats thinks that regulation is like violence. If you don't get the result you want, then add more regulation. Still don't get the result you want, add more regulation. They never think about offering compelling products that people want to buy at a decent price point.

I don't understand this comment. SUVs are classified as passenger vehicles. They're also getting larger (and more dangerous for pedestrians), but to nowhere near the same degree that pickup trucks have.

The danger posed by pickup trucks is chiefly a function of the absence of regulation: the US has decided that you can role-play as a farmer and get treated as one for safety purposes, without actually demonstrating a need for a car that's patently unsafe for US streets and highways.

It's complicated because the SUV label is arbitrarily used by manufacturers and consumers, but many/most SUVs are classified as light trucks for safety and emissions purposes.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fact-726-may-7-2012-suv...

My bad -- I thought that SUVs and "crossovers" were the same type of car, but the former is (apparently) typically the same platform as a light truck, while the latter is more typically a compact car or station wagon platform.

Far be it from me to defend truck-style SUVs!

Can you offer an example of any consumer product where you have to "demonstrate a need" before you're allowed to purchase it?

I'm not saying that we ought to restrict truck sales based on need -- I'd be perfectly happy restricting them to county roads only and requiring additional licensing and/or certification (similar to a CDL).

But since you asked: just about anything that can be turned into an explosive. Or, you know, prescription medicine.

> The technocrats thought they'd be clever, and they basically outlawed reasonably sized cars for very small marginal efficiency gains. People bought light truck instead. People don't want to drive around in dinky death traps

I thought this comment was saying the opposite of what you meant at first. There are no small cars anymore, even the "Mini" is gigantic. And modern cars are safer than ever, due to smarter design and better engineered materials.

None of your cited conspiracy really shakes out with reality. Station wagons are still being made but most Americans just don’t want them. There’s a stigma in the US against station wagons (Doug Demuro style enthusiasts notwithstanding,) similar to that against minivans, and this has resulted in less US wagons for decades. In some cases they’ve been rebranded as SUVs (eg Subaru Outback.)

Yeah the fashion went Station Wagons -> Minivans -> SUVs -> Crossovers

Each step of the way they went out of style when people went "eww that's a car for soccer moms"