Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wlesieutre 13 days ago
Still see this in the ones with tonneau covers as if they intended to put cargo in the bed

But who knows maybe it’s already full of stuff under there

3 comments

> But who knows maybe it’s already full of stuff under there

This is why I'm excited for REO.

I live in a pretty dense city and don't have much storage space in my residence. On the weekends I'm clearing and developing a lot a couple of hours away. My vehicle doubles as storage for all the stuff I need for that and don't want to leave unattended (saws, tools, winch, etc).

I used a Forester for the first two years, which was cramped but doable. The bigger issue was messes. Oil has a way of getting everywhere. I also had one gas spill from a faulty saw gas cap which was both dangerous and a huge PITA to clean up. I also got to a phase where the difference between awd and 4x4 matters, and where I was yanking milled planks around which didn't feel safe doing with the forester.

I switched to a truck after a couple of years and went small. The box is completely full between tools, saws, gas, winch, ropes, etc. When I do groceries I can usually fit some of the "hard" bags back there (cans, bottles) but the rest has to go up front.

A REO would be great for my use-case. The price is low enough that for the price of a new Tacoma or F-150 I could (get close enough to) buying both a REO and a used beater 3/4 ton at the property, which is a better fit for the things I need a big truck for anyways. And I wouldn't be driving a dumb big truck around a very cramped city.

For now I'm stuck with a big truck in the city because owning more than one personal vehicle in this town is insanity.

Get a work van. It's a big capped pickup bed basically. But a reasonable size
I did consider.

Maybe in the past, but the size thing isn't really true of the modern line-up. Relative to eg a base Tacoma or especially a Maverick, The Ford Transit has about the same wheel base, is slightly heavier, has worse visibility (for me at least), has a larger displacement engine, and is on a pragmatic level more difficult to maneuver and park. They also have far fewer creature comforts, which wouldn't be a huge deal if they didn't MSRP at $10K MORE than a base midsized truck!

Vans also don't have 4x4, have much lower ground clearance, no good mechanism for transporting longer stuff, and you can't hose them out nearly as easily as a truck bed. The main thing that those vans are built for is just lots of weight in the van. Great fits for some use-cases, but not mine.

And, again, they're just seriously expensive for what they are because of all the commercial applications.

I did also consider an old minivan or a used van from previous generations when they made the smaller transits. Again, 4x4/awd isn't really super optional in these parts, so pickins were slim.

Roof rack for long stuff. Maverick seems too small to even be useful for that.
> Roof rack for long stuff.

Unfortunately I'm 5'7 and even the low roof transit is 6.8. So it's paying >$10K more for a pretty non-ergonomic solution.

> seems too small to even be useful for that.

One advantage of a bed when transporting 2x's is that you get the hypotenuse. So the bed goes further than you'd think in terms of load length. The 60/73 beds of the tacoma are certainly better than the mavericks, and those trucks are still smaller/same size as the transit.

But my actual observation is that, in cities, transits just really are strictly more annoying and dangerous to drive than a mid-sized truck. Maybe it's just me, but maintaining situational awareness on an unprotected bike lane to my right in a transit is way way way more difficult than the same in a mid-sized truck.

The shorty transit connects from the 2010s aren't what the modern line-up looks like. Modern transits are heavy long wheel-base vans with surprisingly large displacement engines and unfortunate blind spots.

I do get the animosity about trucks on city streets (...I bike to work and pass 4 ghost bikes every morning and evening and have had my share of close calls...).

But as a bicyclist, I'd rather ride next to a tacoma or ranger than a current gen transit. And it's not even close.

If you bicycle and prefer vans over trucks on your streets, I encourage you to test drive any 2026 transit. It'll change how you ride around vans, even if you're already a careful cyclist.

yep, wagons and roof racks are the ideal. It's too bad this is america and everyone hates them and buys these dumb trucks instead
I once met a homeless guy who kept a mattress back there.
The Ram 6000 Max Diesel Rampage Pro: Because homelessness can be anyone's future
A friend with a RAM 1500 truck (a brute of a machine) bought a Harley in a neighboring state, I kept him company during the 8h ordeal. He rented a trailer because the bike was too heavy to hoist on the bed. Hillarious.

It's just a style thing, folks, however silly. Why do Texans wear cowboy hats and boots?

> hoist

FWIW, transporting (even large) bikes in the bed of a truck is doable and normal. The typical way to do this isn't with a hoist. You just ride or walk it up a ramp and tie it down.

ofc a Forester or RAV4 with a trailer is a far superior solution, especially for interstate driving where the trailer is less of an annoyance.

I’ve seen that on highways. This thing was a fire breathing monster though. King or California something or other. My buddy looked like a teenage jockey on it, but he is a life long rider. I’m sure it could be coerced, but was tough even with the low height U-Haul trailer.
What’s the “all hat no cattle” for pickups?

All truck no load?