Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fultonn 10 days ago
> 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.

1 comments

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
> wagons

Wagons (as sold in the US market anyways) are passenger vehicles and therefore have the same problem as the Forester[^1]: your saw leaking some gas or bar&chain is kinda not ok. Or insert any other "thing that makes messes".

The true ideal is a 90's regular cab Tacoma/Ranger or a final gen Transit Connect depending on use-case.

> It's too bad this is america and everyone hates them and buys these dumb trucks instead

Well, at least that hypothesis might get tested.

[^1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48968375