[actionablefiber]

I get the sense that the pickup truck market in the U.S. particularly in suburbs is driven by brand marketing rather than consumer needs. People are paying a premium, in the cost of purchasing as well as in the cost of insuring, maintaining, and fueling, for the image of the rugged individualistic American ready for any terrain, weather, or load that needs hauling, and maximally armored to "win" should they ever hit a person or vehicle in their path.

There's a subset of contexts where they make sense although I think for _most_ people they're infrequent enough that it's way more sensible to use a cargo van or a sedan and then just rent a truck during the minority of times when you actually need one.

[decafninja]

That probably applies for many vehicle classes in general.

I live in the NYC area, and I see many specialized "lifestyle" vehicles such as offroaders like Jeep Wrangler Rubicons or sports cars like Porsches.

I would bet the majority of Rubicons I see rarely see terrain tougher than an unpaved driveway. The majority of Porsches I see will rarely experience a more thrilling drive than the owner flooring it from a stoplight.

Rather, it's to convey status or a lifestyle image.

While we're on the subject of pickup trucks - the Cybertruck. I have many friends who would never have thought of owning a truck before placing preorders for Cybertrucks. They are all white collar office workers, I've never seen them do any kind of hauling of cargo or offroading or other "rugged" or "adventurous" activities. But they are madly in love with the Cybertruck. It's purely a "look at me" lifestyle thing. Trucks like the F-150 (including the Lightning EV), Silverado, Tacoma, etc. don't even enter their radar.

Meanwhile I do have a handful of friends that work the trades, work in construction, etc. These guys all dismiss the Cybertruck as a toy and are interested in the F-150 Lightning, etc.

[kurthr]

The giant king cab luxury seating is the only thing available on the larger and more expensive models unless you have access to fleet purchasing. They definitely have a market and they've tuned product lines for it. There are even supersport models. Personally, I hate the short-beds cuz you can't easily transport lumber or plywood sheets.

[EricE]

Both the Hyundai Santa Cruz and Ford Ranger have tail gates that will partially lower to the same level as the tops of the wheel wells, providing a perfect platform for 4x8 sheets of plywood. I have a friend with a Ranger and we have hauled plywood and other larger objects with no issues. Would I want to do it routinely? Probably not - but for casual hauling they work well enough. I would expect the Scout to be designed in a very similar way.

I've owned trucks with 8 foot beds in the past - I'd rather have a second row of seats and a smaller bed as well as a vehicle that's overall smaller than the 8 foot bed trucks of old. These newer designs are a great compromise of functionality and convenience, which is why you are seeing them take over the lower end.

What I really want is the return of true micro pickups like the original Nissan hard body :(

[kevin_thibedeau]

The other problem with the short beds is that they are "compensated" for by raising the belt line to make the bed deeper. This compromises rear visibility. Then the long beds suffer because they also get a deep bed to integrate with the cab. On old Rangers you used to be able to walk up and just reach into the bed to get stuff. That isn't possible on any current midsize and up pickups.

[EricE]

Yup. The old Ranger died because it was a partnership between Mazda and Ford - and it expired.

With the chicken tax squelching real competition and the fact that they can charge more for larger vehicles - whelp, you end up with the current American market where there are truly no more mini pickups. It sucks!

[rascul]

> That isn't possible on any current midsize and up pickups.

Yes it is. Or maybe I'm just tall enough? I do it all the time. I can't reach the middle of full size trucks with both feet on the ground, but I never could with older full size trucks, either.

[EricE]

And if you are as frustrated by the lack of true mini-pickups as I am, search the 'net and read about the chicken tax. Which was aimed at locking VW out of the US market quite a while ago, has lingered on way past it's prime and has bit even American manufacturers in the butt as more manufacturing has shifted outside of the US. Gotta love unintended consequences - ha!

[dieselgate]

Ya it’s insane and unfortunate how the chicken tax wrecked trucks. Was it really directed towards VW though? I thought it was more against Japanese auto makes.

[EricE]

Nope, VW around WWII (I think just before - need to go re-read)

EDIT: It was post WWII. And VW Type 2 is profiled in the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax

[dieselgate]

Nice thanks for the follow up!

[dieselgate]

I’ve been curious with the functionality of short beds - the only advantage I can think of is a shorter wheel base for towing/maneuvering a trailer. Otherwise they make no sense to me

[corrral]

> There's a subset of contexts where they make sense although I think for _most_ people they're infrequent enough that it's way more sensible to use a cargo van or a sedan and then just rent a truck during the minority of times when you actually need one.

Even a minivan can tow a small trailer for occasional lumber store runs or towing a jet ski or two. Or just use the roof rack and some tie-downs. Or take the seats out, many of them will fit some plywood inside without trouble. For a larger boat, you can often rent a slip at your usual lake or whatever cheaper than the difference in annual TCO between a truck and a smaller car. Not helpful if you move your boat from one body of water to another a lot, but the only folks I know who do that have small fishing boats that a van could probably tow just fine. Besides, you can pay for several construction deliveries and probably pay to have your boat moved a couple times a year for the difference in annual cost. No sense paying all that extra gas, insurance, and up-front cost for something with features you only use every other month or less, when you can just pay less money to do a daily truck rental periodically, for a delivery service, et c.

But no, people need their immaculate $50,000+ trucks in the 'burbs just to show that they could blow $50,000+ on a truck they don't need, and so they fit in with their buds who also own trucks. Quite a few are purchased for good reasons, but a lot are mostly purchased for social signaling.

[bluGill]

If you need a truck even 5% of the time it is overall cheapest to just own a truck. Insurance, car payments, and other fixed costs are too high to make a second car worth it, and renting a car is not cheap, not to mention rental rules often mean you can't use the truck as a truck. (I've been looking for a place to rent a truck so I can replace mine, a couple times a year I do something that no rental truck will let me do) Sure a truck uses a lot more fuel, but fuel is a small part of the cost of a car.

Though I don't get families with more than one truck/suv. One will do the job for all of those things, and a EV (even a limited range one like the older leaf) will take care of all the other. Only rarely do you have to tell your spouse that you need the truck so drive "my" car.

[olyjohn]

No it's cheaper to just get a utility trailer and hook it to your existing vehicle. Even a compact economy car can do just fine towing one. They can carry up to 1500lbs for the smaller ones, and cost less than $1000. You don't have to pay the same road tax every year, or insurance. You don't have maintenance to do on it other than tires and wheel bearings which are all generic and dirt cheap.

I've been able to do all my house projects for the last 7-8 years towing one behind my Honda Fit. I've picked up motorcycles with it (which is way easier to load than a tall pickup bed). Picked up engines, car parts. I have hauled sheetrock, pavers, plywood, lumber, furniture... I have done countless dump runs... I have moved with it, and helped others move with it. The car + trailer ends up embarrassing the pickups who show up to help move, as they can't carry as much stuff as the car + trailer combo.

And when I'm not hauling things, the car seats 4 comfortably, and we can put stuff in the hatch without worrying about it getting wet... I get mid-30s mpgs.

Anything that's too big or heavy for my trailer... well I have it delivered. Chances are, that load is also too big for your average 1500 pickup.

[JoeAltmaier]

Most compact cars can tow maybe 1000 pounds. Thats including the trailer weight. Any more, you risk damage to the transmission - they're largely aluminum these days, and not designed to do much more than move the car around.

You have FWD, don't even think about it.

I would be careful taking any recommendation to 'just pull a trailer'. Sure U-Haul will install the hitch. That doesn't mean anything.

[yencabulator]

> renting a car is not cheap

U-Haul pickups are $19.95 + mileage. For me personally, I think that'd come to something like $50 for a single hardware store trip, plus inconvenience. So far I haven't had to do that, so I can't vouch for that number to be accurate.

[ovao]

There’s the subject of availability, however. Pickup trucks tend to move quickly on weekends especially. The last time I needed to rent one on a Saturday, for example, it took eight or nine phone calls and driving to three different Home Depots (which rent out trucks on a first-come, first-serve basis). Just getting the truck took half a day.

More planning would’ve helped on my part, but damn, what a hassle.

[yencabulator]

Sure, your mileage may vary. There's a lot of pickups and small box trucks a few miles from here, and I've never seen it empty in the last several years. I'm pretty remote though, bigger cities are probably much more rush hour driven.

[NeuNeurosis]

Is your need expedition based; ie, rugged backcountry vacation? or work based, need to haul some dirt, lumber, random material? If so what about renting a truck form Uhaul?

[bluGill]

I collect antique tractors which will fit on a heavy duty car trailer. One bigger than what uhaul rents for cars.

As mentioned elsewhere, uhaul is often sold out when i'm likely to do this.

[corrral]

I expect using a truck as a truck, for a situation in which a roof rack or a small trailer towed by a lesser vehicle wouldn't have sufficed, 18-19 days a year would put you way above average for non-business truck owners in my area.

[quickthrowman]

> I've been looking for a place to rent a truck so I can replace mine, a couple times a year I do something that no rental truck will let me do

Off the top of my head: Home Depot, Lowe’s, Menards, U-Haul, Penske, United Rentals, Sunbelt Rentals.

[mulmen]

Will those places let you tow a heavy utility trailer with trailer brakes?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32158302

[quickthrowman]

Yes, United or sunbelt for sure, they rent construction equipment.

[rascul]

> it's way more sensible to use a cargo van

If I could have gotten a cargo van for an equivalent price when I bought the (used) truck I have now, I would have. But they were starting at 4x the price. I use it to haul tools and materials and a cargo van would have been so much easier.