[SilverElfin]

> I see them in pristine condition on city streets hauling a totality of one human.

It’s about having one vehicle that can do it all. Maybe you’re noticing when there’s one human but you don’t really know how else that person is using the vehicle at other times. Trucks can haul people, things, do road trips, etc. pretty well.

[toomuchtodo]

You Don't Need a Full-Size Pickup Truck, You Need a Cowboy Costume - https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz... - March 15th, 2019

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42638394 - January 2025

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21631704 - November 2019

Ray Delahanty | CityNerd: Rural Cosplay is, Unfortunately, A Thing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q_BE5KPp18

(Americans buy trucks out of emotion and cosplay, not realized utility and rational TCO, based on the evidence and data)

[jcgrillo]

I'm shopping for a truck atm because I need one. I am pretty routinely overloading the towing capacity of my Land Cruiser, and a decent flatbed pickup would obviate the need to hook up the trailer most of the time. Being able to tow/haul 3-4cord of firewood logs in one go would be super convenient, I'll use that capability at least once per year.

And if you're thinking "why not just rent?" I'll ask when was the last time you saw an equipment trailer rental with a winch capable of hauling logs up onto it?

Paradoxically, at least in the context of this thread, my motivation to own a truck is safety and efficiency. A 12 valve Cummins pulling the GCVWR of a 1994-1998.5 3/4 ton Dodge will get right around 10mpg and do it safely.

[toomuchtodo]

I admit there are many of you out there, and have no problem with folks who need a truck for truck use cases. That's what trucks are for. I take issue with those buying them for non rational use cases (status, etc), "Pavement Princess" vehicle duty cycles.

[Aurornis]

> Americans buy trucks out of emotion and cosplay

This is a hilarious take for anyone who has spent any time living outside of a big city.

Yes, there are some people who buy trucks because they want one but don’t actually use the truck features.

Generalizing to “Americans are cosplaying” is just trolling.

[toomuchtodo]

Study Claims That Most Pickup Truck Owners Don’t Actually Use Them For Truck Stuff - September 2023

https://www.powernationtv.com/post/most-pickup-truck-owners-...

https://www.axios.com/ford-pickup-trucks-history

[Aurornis]

You’re spamming this same study throughout the thread without realizing that is uses a different and much stricter definition of “hauling” than the average person.

[masklinn]

This demonstrating the average person is an idiot who never needed a truck because their “hauling” can be done with a sedan or even a compact car.

Which is rather the point.

[15155]

Could it be possible that while you can cram something in the backseat of a car, a truck bed might result in less damage to vehicle interiors and the object being moved?

[kortilla]

From that own study it shows more than half are using it at least “occasionally” for “hauling”.

I’d like to see the study on what percentage of people use all 4 seats in their car so you can dunk on people who buy 4 seaters next.

[master-lincoln]

You make it sound like it would be unreasonable to dunk on people wasting our society resources. Why not hit on people driving 4 seat cars when they drive alone most of the time? If it affects me it should be normal that I voice an opinion. Those cars use public space, roads, bridges that are affected more the heavier your car is. That also drives up the motor power needed which in turn increases public air pollution.

[kortilla]

Electric cars weigh far more than a gas Toyota Corolla. You don’t want to go down that path

[troupo]

> This is a hilarious take for anyone who has spent any time living outside of a big city.

People outside of big city need big trucks about as often as people in the city.

Source: lived in the middle of nowhere in North Carolina.

Living outside of big city doesn't mean you're immediately a farmer who needs to haul tons of forage or lumber. The absolute vast majority of people don't.

[giraffe_lady]

I live in a big city and two children under 10 have been killed by large pickup trucks within a half mile of my home in the last five years. Two that I know of anyway, because I'm acquainted with the families. One had been modified with a "bull bar" making it more dangerous to pedestrians.

And 80% of americans live in urban areas.

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

[Ray20]

>based on the evidence and data >Evidence and data show that cake taste better than bread, why are they starving? Let them eat cake

I really wonder what kind of world people live in who write such articles and what kind of world people live in who seriously read them. It's hard to believe that they live among us, there must be some separate island in the ocean or something like that where they can write their articles in complete isolation from the rest of the world.

[toomuchtodo]

Ehh, vehicle affordability rapidly accelerating away as the middle class evaporates solves the problem if people can’t make financially rational choices themselves. As of this comment, the average price of a new full-size pickup truck is around $64,000, while the average price of a new mid-size pickup truck is about $42,690. This is before tariff impacts are baked in. Doesn’t include operating costs (fuel, insurance, maintenance), putting monthly payments around $1k/month (at least). Let them drive studio apartments around I suppose, if they can get financed and not repo’d in the near term.

Would you cry for me if I wanted a Lambo but couldn’t afford it? You would not. This is different? Everyone is entitled to wildly conspicuous consumption? I argue no.

[Ray20]

>affordability rapidly accelerating away as the middle class evaporates solves the problem

But that complete bs. Vehicle affordability is not in any danger, average price of a new pickus trucks depends on the amount of money the population has. Even if the middle class completely disappears, people will just drive cheaper pickups.

>Would you cry for me if I wanted a Lambo but couldn’t afford it?

But they could. And that the reason why "the average price of a new full-size pickup truck is around $64,000"

[toomuchtodo]

> But they could. And that the reason why "the average price of a new full-size pickup truck is around $64,000"

Car Repos Hit Levels Unseen Since 2008 Financial Crisis - https://www.pymnts.com/transportation/2025/car-repos-hit-lev... - March 27th, 2025

Late Car Payments Hit Highest Rate in More Than 30 Years - https://www.pymnts.com/loans/2025/late-car-payments-hit-high... - March 6th, 2025

St Louis Fed FRED: Average Amount Financed for New Car Loans at Finance Companies - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DTCTLVENANM

I’ll see if I have access to the Cox Automotive pickup truck specific repo stats as soon as I’m not mobile. Based on the auto loan delinquency and repo rates, the evidence is fairly robust that people cannot afford these price levels. They get off the lot with the vehicle, certainly, that’s super easy due to easy credit, but then the clock starts ticking on when the car gets repo’d.

(~100M Americans are sub 700 FICO subprime, 33-40% of consumers depending on credit reporting agency providing the data)

[monkeyelite]

> Americans buy trucks out of emotion and cosplay,

You don't need anything besides tent and food!

Every person buys almost everything for emotion.

[jakelazaroff]

Sure, but large trucks come with a ton of very negative externalities.

[monkeyelite]

The original comment is just about how "irrational" it is.

And truck owners pay more - for the vehicle, for tires, for registration, for gas, etc which are all taxed by the public to reflect their greater usage of public roads.

You would need to argue that trucks have a disproportionate impac. For example, if I commute 2 hours to work in an Accord, is that a greater negative externality than owning a Truck a commuting 15 minutes?

I suspect the answer is no - a truck is some small multiple of a smaller vehicle.

What I see in this thread is that the narrow demographic here is merely expressing a preference - they don't like trucks, and they wish that could be imposed on others. Ultimately, you need to convince your fellow men in an election.

[amarshall]

Small multiplier, I think not.

Pickup trucks weigh about 1.5x as much as a sedan (comparing Camry to F150). Due to the fourth power law, they should be taxed about 5 times higher than a sedan simply for road maintainence. I don’t have the numbers, but I doubt that is so. Toll roads typically charge per axle, and as below, gas tax is probably only about 2x. Ironically, EVs should pay more tax for maintenance since they are usually quite a bit heavier—though the OP truck is still ~600 lb lighter than an F150.

Fuel economy is about half in a pickup vs. a sedan, so they pollute that much more. Gas tax obviously scales here, but do the other taxes? Does gas tax go towards remedying the pollution impact at all? I don’t know.

Then there’s the safety impact on pedestrians and other vehicles. I don’t have numbers here, sorry.

[jakelazaroff]

Also, if you consider the externalities of cars in general, there's the additional issue of designing our communities around them rather than around the people who live there.

This quote is kinda a meme by now but here's SimCity lead designer Stone Librande on how the team had to make parking lots unrealistically small for the game to be enjoyable [1]:

> When I started measuring out our local grocery store, which I don't think of as being that big, I was blown away by how much more space was parking lot rather than actual store. That was kind of a problem, because we were originally just going to model real cities, but we quickly realized there were way too many parking lots in the real world and that our game was going to be really boring if it was proportional in terms of parking lots.

[1] https://archive.ph/z7hZG#selection-753.65-753.506

[monkeyelite]

> Due to the fourth power law, they should be taxed about 5 times higher than a sedan simply for road maintainence.

In this model wouldn’t 18 wheelers dominate and it doesn’t matter what personal vehicles do?

[toomuchtodo]

Right, carbon emissions, excess deaths incurred on others, etc.

[kortilla]

This is one of the dumbest takes I’ve seen on trucks. It attacks a straw man.

If you buy something for one of its features and don’t use the others, it doesn’t have anything to do with cosplay.

This is like saying people who buy electric cars should just buy race car driver costumes instead. Unbridled ignorance.

[jakelazaroff]

Most race cars aren't electric though? That analogy makes no sense.

If you buy a product that comes with a ton of negative externalities and then don't use the single feature that distinguishes it from other products, people will rightly judge you.

[modernpacifist]

> Most race cars aren't electric though? That analogy makes no sense.

No, they aren't. I attend a significant amount of track events as a driver and I will see maybe 1 electic car every few events. Besides the lack of charging infrastrucutre at most race tracks, the one positive of instant torque/power is significantly outweighed by their overall mass and significant heat generation.

The latter tends to result in a Tesla S being unable to last more than 20 minutes at Laguna Seca or Sonoma before the battery pack overheats and reduces power output requiring the car to exit the track.

[kortilla]

Electric cars have great acceleration. According to this thread that’s just pointless cosplay.

[modernpacifist]

The comparison breaks down since, in race car terms, the great acceleration isn’t enough to offset the negatives that make electric cars poor race cars. So in a sense it is pointless cosplay. Even the acceleration might be working against itself since the great acceleration comes at the cost of the battery pack expending more energy, contributing to heat build up.

This isn’t to say the heat problem couldn’t be managed, but one of the biggest issues with race cars generally is heat management so starting from a platform with a unique and significant heat problem isn’t ideal. Then the weight and overall longevity of the battery pack comes into play.

To tout the acceleration without discussing the drawbacks involved in delivering it or the practicalities of leveraging it suggests that it’s such a great feature that the drawbacks either don’t exist or don’t matter.

[jakelazaroff]

They also produce no tailpipe emissions and tend to have a lower carbon footprint, more storage space, a quieter cabin, no "hump" for the driveshaft, etc. There are lots of reasons you might choose an electric car other than the acceleration.

On the other hand, a truck's single distinguishing feature is the bed.

[pixelpoet]

> Unbridled ignorance.

Ironically, I don't think ignorance means what you think it means. It simply means not knowing something; it's not, for example, an attitude in itself.

[kortilla]

It means exactly what I think. This dunk on truck drivers based on seeing them in the city is ignorance. Trucks are multimodal. Seeing them in one mode does not mean they aren’t used for another.

[amluto]

A lot of modern “trucks” are pretty crappy for actually hauling anything. A few months ago I had the pleasure of loading some furniture into an Escalade. The outside is huge, but the inside is remarkably small. The height of the interior floor is also ridiculous, so it’s extra difficult to lift anything into the vehicle. I don’t think most full size pickups are a lot better.

Also, check out the underside of most of these monster vehicles. The approach, breakover, and departure angles may be awesome, but that’s only because the definitions assume uniform height transverse to the driving direction. If you drive these things over any substantial bump that the wheels don’t go over, the differential will bottom out. Oops. This means that, for many practical purposes, the height of the vehicle and the absurd suspensions don’t buy nearly as much capability as they might appear to.

[matwood]

I wouldn’t consider an Escalade a truck, just a luxury SUV. A Hilux/Tacoma, Tundra or F150 are trucks. And they pretty capable of doing all the things. My Tundra might be one of the best cars I ever owned.

[HeyLaughingBoy]

Rule #1 of driving offroad is that tires contact the ground, not other parts of the truck. If you see a bump, drive over it; don't straddle it.

[amluto]

What fraction of modern light trucks do you suppose are ever driven in a technically competent manner off-road, even once, by their original owner?

I bet a larger fraction, albeit still small, are driven around construction sites with crud on the ground, with a driver who pays approximately no attention to what they’re driving over. In which case a monster suspension with a dangly differential is probably less appropriate than a low vehicle without any dangly bits in the middle.

(I’m obviously excluding trucks that are used a loading docks. If you are planning to load and unload at a loading dock, you want your truck to load and unload at loading dock height.)

[GiorgioG]

This. I have had a 2016 F-150 since late 2017 - I'd never owned a truck before. I can go get mulch, take an entire bed-load of stuff to the dump (couches, mattresses, etc). When we go on vacation within driving distance (usually up to 500ish miles for us, we can bring more or less anything we want without concern for space. We took my wife's SUV 2 weeks ago on a 700 mile trip (her mid-sized SUV is much newer) and we had to pack very carefully compared to when we take the truck. Our son plays ice hockey, his hockey equipment stinks (yes it gets aired out...he's still a stinky teenager), but it's never an issue because with the truck, it's not in the passenger compartment. We live in the south but drove to Pittsburgh through 2 snowstorm there and back...lots of SUVs stranded on the road...my 4x4 F-150 made it through without any trouble. When my father in law passed last year, we moved all of his things out of his apartment with my truck. I let my neighbors borrow it when they need to move something large. The only thing that sucks about it is parking in store parking lots. That and buying a newer (not brand new) costs 2x what I paid for my 2016 in 2017. I've toyed with getting rid of it for something smaller, but it's just too versatile for me to give up.

[rco8786]

> Maybe you’re noticing when there’s one human but you don’t really know how else that person is using the vehicle at other times.

95% of big trucks I see on the road have one person in them and beyond my anecdotal experience we know statistically that most vehicle trips involve 1 person. It's not super hard to extrapolate from there.

I'm not even particularly "anti" truck, though I do think the increase in size and weight has gotten totally ridiculous.

[bix6]

Except that one vehicle is completely incompetent for its primary use 99% of the time :)

[culi]

In a sane society "knowing someone with a truck" is all you really need. In a highly individualistic society "having a truck just in case" is the dominant precept

[NoLinkToMe]

Fully agreed. Although to add, I literally never met someone with a truck, and in fact never owned a car myself either, but rented a car and also ranted a van plenty of times during a move, even with a driver.

Same reason I don't own an airplane, I just rent one with a driver if I go on holiday trips.

Big caveat: I've always lived in a (capital) city of my country and I have no kids yet.

But by and large I think renting for the 3 day a year use-case makes more sense than owning 365 days of the year, even if you have no friends to rely on.

[SkyPuncher]

If you tow anything, renting is not an option. Rental contracts almost always prohibit towing or restrict it to only 1st party trailers.

[mlhpdx]

This. I learned as much when I was clobbered by a distracted teen and my SUV ended up in the shop. I use it a lot for moving people, things and towing (like daily). Nobody would rent me a SUV and allow me to tow with it, only commercial truck rentals at ridiculous rates.

And for the truck driver haters three things:

- Are you speaking from experience or projection? Stereotyping doesn’t work. After owning a large SUV for 25 years I can say with conviction that the price is worth the utility to me. No question. - I would LOVE to also own a small electric scooter for small trips. The cost and poor quality have put me off for years but it’s inevitable I’ll end up with one soon. - Our next sedan will be electric as well, and probably weigh more than the SUV.

Truck owners aren’t idiots or evil.

[NoLinkToMe]

Eh perhaps if you rent a recreational vehicle from a company that caters these cars 90% to tourists . I've rented plenty of cars for towing, even with the trailer, from the same company. There are lots of companies that specialize in renting out vehicles for moving, construction etc. There is a market for everything.

[SkyPuncher]

Those companies likely exist, but they don’t exist in my area.

The only thing that I can rent to tow with is a box truck. Needless to say, those aren’t really fit your whole family in type of vehicles.

[amelius]

In most places in the 1st world you can rent a truck if you need one *

For other times, use a car.

* a truck is just a car that misses a roof over the back part of it

[bArray]

> * a truck is just a car that misses a roof over the back part of it

Respectfully, a truck is not just a car missing the back part of it. It often has a lot more power, is lifted, has off-road springs, larger wheels, low and high speed gear box, roll cage for the front cabin, raised air intake - the list goes on.

Most people, though, do just need a car with a removable back.

[amelius]

In any case, the "truck" from the article doesn't seem to have all that.

[mullingitover]

I own a truck.*

*It’s stored at Home Depot and whenever I need it, I just pay them $19 for the hour or so that I use it.

[mckn1ght]

I did this for a while. You’re leaving out some ancillary details: time driving to and from home depot to pick up and drop off the truck, needing a truck and no rentals available, picking up a rental truck and there’s some issue with it, something happens out of your control that requires more time with the truck but you can’t extend the rental… all things i’ve encountered.

At some point the number of times i needed to use it picked up (hah) which multiplied these inconveniences enough that it became worth it to just pick up (hah) a used truck.

I use it exclusively for hauling work, but that usually entails at least one trip without a load, which may lead people to incorrectly judging me for driving it unnecessarily.

[Ray20]

>In a sane society "knowing someone with a truck" is all you really need.

Yes, yes, we all know. "You'll own nothing and be happy". Fewer and fewer people believe you.

[SilverElfin]

You don’t know that. You’re making assumptions. But even if that were true, so what? Maybe it is important to that person’s quality of life to have the truck for weekend adventures or chores.

[stouset]

If this were the case, you’d see more trucks with wear and tear on them and fewer with five years in and pristine paint jobs. Most people buy trucks as a lifestyle choice, not as a practical one.

That’s not to say there aren’t real uses for trucks, or people who use them for their designed purpose.

That’s also not to say people should be required to purchase only vehicles that meet their basic transportation requirements. People drive sports cars even without ever going out to a track.

Trucks (and full-size SUVs) specifically push some pretty crappy externalities onto other road users, so it’s not exactly crazy to be annoyed with people who buy and drive big trucks a personality trait.

[Aurornis]

> If this were the case, you’d see more trucks with wear and tear on them and fewer with five years in and pristine paint jobs.

You can tell how few people in this thread have any idea how light off roading or hauling works.

Driving your truck down a dirt road or putting something in the back of it doesn’t destroy the paint job. You can have a work truck and keep it nice.

[stouset]

Sorry, but I have driven off-road and you inevitably get dings, nicks, and scratches from gravel, tree branches, and random detritus.

I know people that use their trucks for hauling for work and they are never pristine. They don’t look destroyed. They look used.

[HeyLaughingBoy]

I'm sitting here smh. Everyone in my (rural) neighborhood owns a pickup truck. Except for the one dude who towed a skid steer with an Escalade. Those trucks are often towing trailers, hauling messy crap, etc. and don't look any different than any other truck on the road.

Hell, I just unhooked a horse trailer less than an hour ago and the year-old truck that was hauling it looks like it just drove off the showroom floor.

[XorNot]

It is wild to me how heavily downvoted this comment is.

I bought by Ford Ranger off my in-laws who literally own a farm, and it got more damage from being parked under a tree with nasty sap for too long then it's 7 years handling hauling and field work (the lesson being, I really should've been washing it more frequently then I was... And then it would really clean and so obviously isn't used real work or something).

[SkyPuncher]

> If this were the case, you’d see more trucks with wear and tear on them and fewer with five years in and pristine paint jobs.

I generally beat the crap out of my truck and the exterior looks just fine.

It's really not hard to avoid damaging your exterior. In fact, you have to have a total accident or be completely negligent to cause actual damage. Stuff goes in the bed of the truck. The bed had a bunch of nicks and dings in it, but you're not going to be seeing that while casting judgement.

Heck, go take a look at the work trucks. Find something like a welding truck, an electrician, or a plumber. These are all trucks that people literally use every single day for work, tossing stuff in and out of the bed. They just don't look that beat up. That's because it's just not that hard to avoid completely destroying your vehicle.

[kortilla]

>If this were the case, you’d see more trucks with wear and tear on them and fewer with five years in and pristine paint jobs. Most people buy trucks as a lifestyle choice, not as a practical one.

No you wouldn’t. Off-roading, hauling things, and towing trailers does not require destroying the finish or exterior of the truck in any way.

[cosmic_cheese]

Yep. Trucks that actually get used as trucks look like it with dings, scratches, and scuffs because they’re tools, not toys.

Ironically they’re also often old small models that owners have been keeping running forever because they’re cheap to fix, practical, and easy to park unlike their embiggened modern counterparts.

[SilverElfin]

> Trucks that actually get used as trucks look like it with dings, scratches, and scuffs because they’re tools, not toys.

Not really. Lots of people use trucks and keep them in pristine condition too. Beds have liners now to keep them looking new. And you aren’t getting random dings on the outside unless you drive into things.

[cosmic_cheese]

The amount of effort required to keep them pristine scales with the quantity and intensity of the work performed, no? The most serious truck drivers probably aren’t going to have time to buff out every little mark when it’s going to get covered in them again on the job tomorrow.

[bix6]

I do know that because I see the same trucks driving around my neighborhood with Jerry cans and recovery boards 7 days of the week!

Best case you’re looking at 28.5% weekend utilization which isn’t that bad, much better than the 1% I joked with, but how many people do you know taking an offroad adventure every single weekend?

So what? Yeah I don’t really care. It’s mostly hilarious watching them try to park.

[SilverElfin]

Does it have to be an off road adventure specifically? I feel like most people will want to get two vehicles in their family that can do many things, since that’s what they have room for, rather than more. A truck could be used for off road stuff but it could also be used for taking kids and gear to their games, or for a weekend camping trip, or just for commuting. It can do whatever you need without needing to rent a different vehicle or borrow from a friend or whatever. That’s peace of mind and flexibility. I don’t even own one but I do appreciate that aspect.

[bix6]

Why do you need a truck for that? A cross over can do all that.

[stouset]

> Trucks can haul people, things, do road trips, etc. pretty well.

Yes, as can most vehicles?

[SilverElfin]

Not to the same ability. Sedans and mid size SUVs have far less space, and also less ground height. If you’re traveling on gravel roads or camping, most sedans and smaller SUVs aren’t ideal. If you have kids, space fills up quickly even for small trips. If you’re moving something larger (like drywall or a TV) it may not fit at all in a smaller vehicle. Even most full size SUVs also have less space than a full size truck (even one that isn’t one of the larger models).

[fumar]

The argument Telo makes is that you can have high utility in a smaller vehicle designed well. I was my own GC for a site-built home and sub contracted out many parts of it. I did it while owning a 2 door Mini SE. Only twice did I need to rent truck from my local Home Depot to haul some unwieldy and heavy debris. Most stores will deliver what you need (lumber, large pipes, insulation, etc) because consumer trucks are rarely large enough. I would not have been able to load any significant amount of lumber into an F250. That leaves large vehicles for recreation or family space. I hope car manufacturers rethink vehicle packaging now that EV motors and batteries allow for different confirmations like putting the motor in the wheel hub.

And, the sub contractors - the ones doing the work (immigrants) - they had a wide variety of vehicles. I took note that some had Camrys, Prius, old Golfs, small picks ups like Rangers, and some older mid size trucks that were visually heavily used. Else, they used commercial trucks or vans. When did I see the prestigious full cab F150s or Silverado RTs? When I originally interviewed GCs which is when I noticed they drove their clean and new trucks.

[mlhpdx]

They did a good job maximizing wheelbase given the small size, which is very important for safe and comfortable towing. I look forward to their launch and some real-world reviews and drive tests.

[gdudeman]

The vast majority of dirt roads are fine. I put hundreds of miles on my 1996 Honda Civic hatchback in the Cascades with no problems many years ago.

If the road existed in the 1990s, it's quite likely accessible by a mid-size SUV. Similarly, if families of 4 could go camping with cars from 1950-2000, you can today as well. In fact, you can get more compact tents, etc. today.

Trucks and huge SUVs come in handy if you want to bring lots of modern toys like gigantic prestige coolers and 4x4s.

[stouset]

I have multiple times driven a Mustang Mach E (a heavy, very low ride height EV) out to a friend’s property an hour off of anything resembling a road, down multiple dirt switchbacks into the bottom of the Yuba River canyon.

Vehicles these days are shockingly capable.

[jnwatson]

You can do all those things with a vehicle half the size. Modern F-150s are industrial vehicles. They weight 5000 pounds. They and their large SUV cousins are a menace to pedestrians, normal-sized vehicles, and the road itself.

[stn8188]

The other day, I was just remarking how my minivan makes a better pickup than most pickups for most tasks. For years I've wanted to get another truck (had an old Dakota that I had to sell when kid #3 was on the way). Practicality reigns, though, and I'm extremely satisfied with the usability of the van.

[cosmic_cheese]

Getting a cheap minivan with an ugly, worn out interior that’s been through the rigors of family and ripping the seats out seems like it’d be a great cost saving hack for a number of businesses that people often buy trucks or small commercial vans for.

[qingcharles]

The people I know with pick-ups don't use the bed half the time "in case it rains today" and have to tow a covered trailer to haul anything that wouldn't like to get wet.

[lo_zamoyski]

Let’s not play this game.

The main objection is the buffoonish size. Look at trucks in the 1990s and compare the size.

There is absolutely an element of clownish machismo involved.

[SkyPuncher]

> Look at trucks in the 1990s and compare the size.

If you actually compare similiar configurations, you'll find basically no difference in size.

Compared to a 90's F-150, a modern f-150 is

* 1" wider

* Either 0' longer or 1' longer depending on the exact configuration

* 1" taller

* Nearly 1k lbs less heavy (lots of weight optimization in the past ~35 years)

[silisili]

I agree generally, but blame the makers I guess. One important thing to remember is bed length. Trying to haul plywood or 2x4s with a 5 ft bed is a joke, and not easy with even a 6 ft bed.

The old, small rangers used to have a 7 ft bed option! I believe the longest you can get today is 6. So if you want a longer bed, you're kinda forced into the full size fold.

I don't know how well they'd actually sell, but it'd be neat if they at least offered something maybe a hair bigger than maverick sized with a 7 ft bed.

[Vinnl]

Where I'm from, people often own a car for their commute to work, and rent a van when they're moving. Their regular car is way less of a hassle for other people than the van is, but that's okay, cause the van is just for a few days.

[SkyPuncher]

I now own a truck. I’m actually regretting not getting a bigger/heavier duty one. The biggest limitation is payload capacity. Payload is anything that puts weight on the vehicle - occupants, dogs, gear, food, supplies, bed covers/caps, etc. You must legally be under payload capacity or you can risk fines or liability in an accident. A lot of people are willing to push these limits, but cops pay a lot more attention to people towing/hauling.

If you want to actually tow with your truck, you need to allot a good portion of your payload to trailer weight (and hitches) that rests on the truck (tongue weight). This can range from 200lbs to 1k+ lbs, but is typically in the 500 to 600lb range for something like a boat or travel trailer. It can easily go higher if you load the trailer up with stuff.

A typical light duty truck might have 1500 lbs of payload capacity. Four people and their belongings can easily add up to 800lbs. Add pets, bikes, travel gear, food, etc and your suddenly well over 1k lbs of payload. You literally have no capacity to tow anything but the smallest of trailers.

So what do you do, well you get a bigger truck. You don’t need it all of the time, but it just doesn’t make sense to own a vehicle that cannot legally handle a family road trip.

Before people say “rent”. That comes with its own major set of issues. The biggest being little to no ability to tow with a rental vehicle. Most rentals flat out prohibit towing (even if technically capable and equipped). Those that do allow towing, generally limit it to 1st party trailers (U-Haul truck can only tow u-haul trailer).

[Marazan]

The typical number of times an American non work truck is used to haul a load each year is zero. Same for using it's bed capacity.

[freshtake]

I don't think this generalization is quite fair. I'm sure this is true for some folks and their social circles, but for those of us who engineer and know our way around a Home Depot, the capacity is a game changer. I used to have to rent or borrow trucks for my projects.

Not to mention Christmas trees, moving, helping friends out, etc.

[Marazan]

Depending on the survey 63-to-75% of truck owners use it for towing once a year or less (i.e in reality never). So yes, the majority do not use it for towing.

To be fair I'd misremembered the load carrying figure and the load figure for 1 time a year or less is 32-35%

https://www.axios.com/ford-pickup-trucks-history?trk=feed-de...

https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz...

[culi]

Yes this has actually been studied. Though I don't have a link on hand I remember the numbers being quite stark

[Aurornis]

> The typical number of times an American non work truck is used to haul a load each year is zero.

If you specifically exclude work trucks and define “haul a load” as filling up the bed with loose dirt or gravel or something then I could believe this.

I haven’t put a cubic yard of anything in my truck bed this year but hauling a cubic yard of anything is a rare occurrence for someone who isn’t doing landscaping.

But you have to really stretch the definitions if you believe that people never put anything in the bed to haul.

[wyre]

If you’re not hauling a cubic foot then why need a truck?

[ggoo]

Hm, sounds like you don't really need a truck... The world is racing to +4C and you're over here defending 25mpg gender affirming care mobiles - you're on the wrong side of this one buddy.