Comparison left vs right for a craftsman who doesnt know which one he should buy:

  • l/r same bed size

  • r lower bed for way easier loading/unloading

  • r less likely to crash

  • r less fuel consumption and costs

  • r less expensive to repair

  • r easy to park

  • r easy to get around in narrow places like crowded construction sites or towns

  • r not participating in road arms race

  • l You get taken serious by your fellow carbrained americans because ““trucks”” are normalized and small handy cars are ridiculed.

So unless you are a fragile piece of human, choose the right one.

  • TheTaj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I agree with the sentiment of this post, but to be fair, you can also carry 3 or 4 passengers in the left vehicle, as opposed to only one in the right.

    The main problem is the US fuel economy regulations actually encourage manufacturers to build bigger trucks and SUVs so they get classified into a category that has looser fuel economy requirements.

    • YashaB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      You are right. Still the american truck is hugely oversized, even for 5 persons and cargo. But, for the sake of the argument, imagine standing on the highway. Have a gander at the cars around you. How many people per car do you see? Exactly, 90% of the time there is exactly one person in a car. What makes the american truck an extreme waste of space an ressources, beside being a health hazard to everyone outside of the car.

      Cars should get smaller, not bigger.

    • WetBeardHairs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      You’re mostly right. The main problem is that manufacturers chose to ignore the spirit of the US CAFE fuel economy regulations, and instead build everything bigger and bigger. That’s why quarter-ton trucks grew to the size of the F150 in the year 2000 when they were quite a bit smaller before.

      It’s not the fault of the regulation. It is the fault of the manufacturers and to an equal extent, of consumers for preferring gigantic vehicles.

      And let’s not let GM off the hook for the 1990s Suburban, which began to, quite literally, dominate the roads. Those fuckers were the original huge grocery getter, and they had truly awful turning radius and blind spots. You just couldn’t drive them safely or courteously if you tried. So of course everyone wanted more powerful and bigger vehicles to compete.

      • DaleGribble88@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I’m actually going to fault regulations on this one. The EPA bases fuel economy requirements on the wheelbase of the vehicle. They used to publish a range of values based every other year or so, but then changed it to a formula. The formula is non-linear, making it neigh impossible to build anything with a small wheelbase anymore. In theory, they could design a small hybrid truck, but would need an obnoxiously long bed to compensate.

        I watched a YouTube video on it not terribly long ago, and iirc, a 95 Ford Ranger, if held to the current formula-based regulations, would need 60+ mpg to be produced without major penalties to the company.

        The EPA either needs to reevaluate the formula, or start manually publishing the numbers with values that are actually achievable by the industry at scale. Basically, by publishing the formula, manufacturers are able to min-max their designs in all the wrong ways.

        EDIT: Updated for clarity and fixed some typos

        • WetBeardHairs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Really, the fault of the regulations is that the penalties for the number of vehicles in the heavy polluting category weren’t nearly stiff enough. That’s a big part of why the automakers went the opposite direction and just made bigger and heavier vehicles - they could.

        • kool_newt@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yep, I think I saw that video, I was shocked how bad the regulations were. It really makes no financial sense for companies to make smaller trucks.

    • fluxion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The extended cab version of the right truck would still tick all the boxes.

      Off-road and towing capacity are probably the main feature you give up with that sort of design. Whether or not most people need that is a separate story.

      • oatscoop@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        They make kei trucks in 4x4, but you do lose ground clearance.

        That being said, what kind of “off road” conditions are any of the trucks really contending with?

        • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Whats best is the kei 4x4 is probably significantly better in most off road situations due to its lighter weight and shorter wheel base. You can drive/manuever around things easier and when you are on mud or sand, the lighter weight prevents sinking.

    • 🐱TheCat@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Thanks for pointing our the real incentives which are always some bullshit about more money and less regulations - basically the reason capitalism sucks at innovation - it doesn’t care about whats important and in some cases actively hates it

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        What’s important for you specifically is not what is important to the customer base writ large.

        You have problems with fellow consumers that you blame on manufacturers.

        • spiphy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Given the usage patterns, most people in the US do not need large trucks. They have been convinced that need them because the auto manufacturers make a lot of money selling trucks.

          • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            That’s why the compact trucks are selling like hot cakes. People want trucks, but they don’t necessarily want these behemoths. I love my Santa Cruz.

            • snooggums@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Even compact trucks are not nearly as small as light trucks from a couple decades ago before regulations encouraged manufacturers to go bigger to avoid penalties.

              Basically if you have two trucks with the same engine, but on a smaller wheelbase, the smaller one might be penalized for not being fuel efficient enough while the larger one isn’t. Might as well go big to avoid the cost.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            That doesn’t even make sense in the logic you’ve presented. Shareholders want to maximize value, which means selling more things to consumers, which means selling things consumers want.

            If your entire worldview falls apart at the slightest scrutiny, it may be time to re-evaluate said worldview.

            • Kythtrid@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              When you consider that marketing is intended to manipulate consumers into thinking they want your product, it’s more about convincing people that your product has value, and that they need it, rather than selling something that consumers actually need.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                You are not the arbiter on what people “need,” and people do not only purchase or consume things based on “need.” As a hilariously easy example, neither of us “needs” to be here right now having this conversation.

                Again, it’s time to re-evaluate the entire worldview

                • Kythtrid@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I never claimed to be the arbiter of what people need, but im just saying consumers dont have as much freewill as they claim when they’re actively being manipulated at every corner. Marketing is literally intended to make you feel like you need a product you didn’t previously want.

            • 🐱TheCat@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Look up manufactured scarcity. Great way to make money for shareholders without providing more to consumers. You charge them more for less. Notice any of that recently? Notice any record breaking profits in any industries? Notice any shortages of important things like IDK … housing!!!

              I’ll also give you another example of capitalists not giving a fuck about what consumers want: electric cars back in the 1990s. The auto manufacturers realized they would lose their parts and repair businesses, as electric vehicles have fewer moving parts, the oil companies got pissed, so they put some power together and used the federal government to overturn californias electric car act that consumers voted for. The also forcefully recalled electric cars from consumers and crushed them. They did not care if there was demand if they could make more money in the short term by staying the same.

              Hell, the very existence of exxon mobile disproves your ideas that companies will innovate in response to demand because they spent their money lying to the public about climate change so they could avoid any innovation at all for as long as possible. So WTF do you mean they care about demand?

              Your logic that capitalists only do what consumers want is whats basic and flawed. If thats true, WTF is advertising? You think it’s just a fun hobby that doesn’t work? If advertising doesn’t create false demand, why do it? We have evidence advertising creates demand, therefore advertising works, therefore you need to adjust your worldview to allow for the fact that some amount of the shit that consumers buy is nothing more than light brainwashing. Including you dear.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                The difference is that efficient demand incentivizes h switchover. You’re blaming businesses for… Not leading with changes their customers don’t want

                • 🐱TheCat@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I guess I shouldn’t have tried to talk about several concepts at once since your brain skipped past the manufactured scarcity concept, which is far more integral to capitalism.

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

                  Note that capitalists have been practicing the art of ‘just burn the shit I can’t sell so no one can have it’ since the Dutch East India company burned islands full of spices to make them rarer. O such innovation

    • Deftdrummer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Can’t tow a boat an RV or trailer with the Japanese vehicle. All things Americans do for fun. For work? The Japanese vehicle can’t haul 6,000 lbs of lumbar or steel, nor can it pull another vehicle out of a ditch.

      • BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The left one looks a little too expensive to actually haul with. If you needed to move that much wouldn’t something like an Isuzu Grafter make more sense?

        If you tow things wouldn’t a van or any 4x4/high powered car be a better choice?

    • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is why Pedestrian crash avoidance mitigation (PCAM) needs to be standard required by law, and will be on Californian shortly, and with California goes the world.

    • Obi@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      This pic is fantastic but I wish there were more examples from actual alternatives to what people claim they need the pickups for e.g. vans like Trafics, Kangoos/Berlingos, Mercedes Sprinter/Vito etc etc. There is at least a sprinter there in version pickup, which has a very good result as I’m sure the other ones would as well, because these things tend to have the windshield all the way at the front of the vehicle so you have great visibility for the front 180°, the back 180° depends on the configuration you have which range from completely closed/opaque cargo space to fully furnished 5/7 seaters with windows.

    • SerenityNow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Good pic. Question : I’m new to Lemmy. How come it’s almost impossible to resize a pic without the pic closing on me? Is there a trick to this?

  • mrbubblesort@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    To anyone claiming that the bigger one is the safer one …

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-06/what-drove-japan-s-remarkable-traffic-safety-turnaround

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24499113/

    https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-the-most-car-accidents

    From the Bloomberg & NLM articles

    From a safety perspective, kei cars have a lot going for them when compared with American-style SUVs and trucks. Their light weight generates less force in a collision, and their stubby front ends reduce driver blind spots. Research suggests that their occupants are equally safe as those inside full-sized vehicles.

    • TraceLines@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      At first, I was going to criticize the collision speed of the example study, but found ( ok, I say found, I mean I googled for 15 seconds ) that the average American collision is occurring at less than 40mph, so good to go there.

      Second, I was going to comment on the relative safety of being in the Kei truck and being struck by the 2500HD… but that just goes back to the ‘participating in the arms race’, so feels… stupid.

      So, overall: Thanks for providing this. It directly answers the primary concern of ‘what if I hit something tho’. There are some other angles I could nitpick on maybe, but they all feel like a kind of ‘consolation prize’ to the argument.

      • Hyperreality@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        One thing you also need to remember, is that the smaller car has a far smaller braking distance and is more maneuverable, so is less likely to get in a crash. The lower centre of gravity also decreases the likelihood of a roll-over.

  • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    95% of the craftsmen I know have panel vans. Easier to both organize and secure tools and materials, more overall room.

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I lived in (and now commute through) a neighborhood of older houses, and higher incomes, so I see a lot of contractor vehicles. It seems like it breaks down as landscapers and lawn services use the pickup trucks; trades companies (plumbers, electricians, HVAC, carpenters, painters, etc.) use vans or box trucks; and the independent guys tend to use Dodge Caravans. Nearby, the university uses fleets of kei trucks (the low-speed versions because “freedom”), Ford Model E vans, and Caravans. I think the landscaping crew has pickups.

      There are an increasing number of company pickup trucks, but most of them appear to be pavement princesses, used only for their usual function: transporting egos, not equipment.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Ours are utes. Either road versions or 4×4 versions. American trucks sell here but they’re seen as a joke in both capability and practicality, so it’s assumed the owner is very insecure about something or not very intelligent. As a result, they’re very rare.

  • WhataburgerSr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    As an American, I’ve written to multiple manufacturers, foreign and domestic, to bring/build the smaller Kei trucks but I have never heard any response except for Ford that basically sent a brochure for their F150 that has ‘more space’ for ‘getting work done’. I would love these for practicality but the cost of importing a used one was MUCH higher than buying a normal truck/suv here. :(

  • SeatBeeSate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Really wish I could get my hands on one of these. The import process is so complicated it makes it barely cheaper than a domestic used truck.

    • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I was going to buy one of the kei trucks when I had to replace my truck in 2022. I ended up with a base used F150 for 12k, because it was cheaper than any kei truck I could find.

    • Anonymoose@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s probably model dependent, but the one I drove around for my job in Japan had zero leg room. My knees were resting on the dash as the passenger with the seat all the way back.

      • SeatBeeSate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        With a bunch of headache and work to do the paperwork, sure. Depends on what your time is worth.

        • neal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Plus can’t imagine it’s cheap to work on a car that had to be fully imported by yourself. A car sold here likely has more readily available parts.

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I was the only guy at the marina showing up in a compact Nissan. Got a lot of shit for it from the raised up pickups.

    Yet I always had that extra $20 for beers.

    It’s a mystery.

  • RufusFirefly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Sizes aside, whenever I bought a Toyota or if I bought a Lexus, I would make sure that they were manufactured in Japan.

  • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Hey! I live in Korea. These things are ubiquitous. They are colloquially called “Bongos” as that was the name of an older, popular model. There are more and more electric ones on the road these days, too.

    Unfortunately, you can find a few of the monstrosities on the left here these days, too, but at least very few. They’ve got nowhere to park them here. Haha!

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    But the right one doesn’t have enough room for a crate of piss-weak “beer”, a gun rack, or a perch for your eagle.

  • Robcia1220@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I get the point your trying to prove but i don’t think it’s fair to compare these 2 as they are meant for different things and also brings in the assumption that all American craftsman vehicles are 2500HD’s, which is not true.

    Now I agree, people using the one on the left specifically as a daily driver is actually overkill and are not using it for what it’s supposed to be used for. The one on the left is a 2500HD. They are SUPPOSED to be used for hauling and carrying equipment. The crew cab is meant to also transport the crew that is for said equipment.

    The one the right is specifically meant what appears to be lighter duty use and hauling. I agree that people should use the right tool for the job. I find the one on the right to be very practical. But for the sake of this post as a means to compare Japanese craftsman vehicles to American.

    You should actually show something actually comparable. Like a ford ranger with a standard cab. Which might be about the same size and power. Maybe even the same bed size. Not something that has HD (Heavy duty) in its name.

  • mochi@lemdit.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The Japanese one would be fun for use in New York City. LOL. Easy parking, easy to navigate double-parked clowns. It just needs a bed cover to lock down anything purchased.

    • chocoladisco@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t understand pick up trucks, unless you do landscaping or farming. In a van your shit won’t get stolen as easily.