• Archmage Azor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    But if I don’t have a truck the size of a locomotive how will people know that I absolutely do not have a micropenis?

    • donut4ever@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I have always said “the louder the engine the smaller the dick”. Guess this now applies to bigger trucks, too.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’ve pivoted. I don’t think it’s the size of the penis. Plenty of people with below average penises are great in bed and their partners are happy.

        The people who feel the need to compensate know they are weak and cowardly and would never stand up for themselves against anyone stronger than them. And it emasculates them so they feel the need to compensate outwardly to other men. “I’m big and strong and tough!” In reality they’d back down from any other person, authority figure, or institution that they didn’t feel like could beat or bully.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Can’t buy a small truck because EPA regulations made it easier to make the trucks bigger. Let’s remove that failed regulation so small trucks actually exist.

    • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      11 months ago

      Meanwhile, builds the largest highway network in the world, many even in cities; maintain shitload of free parking; also enforces minimum parking requirements, all at the expense of tax payer.

      Many people are literally forced to pay to make everyone’s life worse, when they don’t own a car.

      FREEDOM!

        • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          In some state, yes, if by “most” you mean “more than 50% of road expense is paid by toll and car related taxes”.

          But that is still a huge percentage not covered by tax for car users, requiring other foundings to cover them. The highest percentage paid by user tax and toll is not even 70% in all the U.S. states.

          Not to mention many state dont even cover 50%; some only cover as low as 19% or even 12%.

          https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-20/mapping-how-u-s-states-pay-for-roads

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Well, we all benefit from the road system even if we ourselves don’t drive, so I guess it’s fair.

            • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              It depends, in a country where the road system makes sense, sure. In rural area where every road serves a purpose: connecting business to transport goods, sure.

              But excessive roads in cities and suburbs? No. Many roads in city and suburbs of the U.S. should be closed for cars, and be bike, bus, and emergency vehicles only. Since cars either don’t use them that much or just don’t have good experience on them because of the congestions. This also saves road maintainance, enables a smoother experience in transport and emergency vehicles, controls emission, and encourage a health life style in general.

              It is again about the right tools for the job. A loaded van to transport fruit to the local farmer’s market, emergency vehicles, these are times where cars are the right tools. On the other hand, F150 is not the right tool to get a Mcdonald’s drive through for one.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      This shit is the direct consequence of regulation, not lack of it!

      I’m talking about both CAFE standards that encourage manufacturers to build big vehicles to fit in the “light truck” loophole, and (infinitely more importantly!) the zoning regulations that led to all the car dependency in the fucking first place!

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I tend to see those very tall vehicles as tall chairs for the big baby behind the wheel.

      • Brahm1nmam@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        I call them “pavement princesses” since they’re driven by office types most often who have no interest in offroading, which is the original intended use for lifted rigs. They’re all rich sissies that want a giant truck for taking their fifth wheel to the lake because they’re scared of driving a bus

  • DaveFuckinMorgan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    11 months ago

    I have no idea why F-150’s keep getting bigger. Do people really like that shit? Old trucks are so much better, from design to MPG.

    • justhach@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      It has to do with new standards for fuel effiency being based on the size of the vehicle.

      In the Obama era, Edmunds explained, fuel economy regulations “changed from just a straight average across the board to what’s called a platform-based fuel economy standard. So your fuel economy target for a given vehicle is based on its wheelbase and its tread width, which is the width between the tires left to right. So if you multiply that you find the area of that rectangle and there’s a table that shows what your fuel-economy target is. The bigger the vehicle, the smaller the target.”

      In other words, the regulations put in place to get better mileage out of vehicles also led to an increase in truck size. “There was kind of an incentive to maybe stretch the wheelbase a couple of inches and set the tires maybe an inch [farther] apart, because you get a bigger platform and slightly smaller target,” said Edmunds. “Now, the bigger vehicle would be heavier and might use more fuel, so it’s not as easy as just doing that. But certainly there was a feeling that if they did need to make it bigger to accommodate more passengers, the fuel economy target wouldn’t be onerous. They could do it.”

      Basically, it was easier to make bigger trucks than it was to build more efficient engines, so we have this gargantuan trucks pushed on us and then they go “ITS WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT” because there are literally no other options besides these giant trucks if you want something with a bed.

      Like, even the “small trucks” like the modern Rangers and Colorados are about the same size as the 90s F150s and Silverados. Its nuts.

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

        And even still, if you’re not looking for 4 doors you’re doubly SOL. You can have the fleet vehicle, poverty-spec or you can have crew cabs.

    • Jarmer@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think there’s a huge percentage of truck drivers who never use their truck for truck stuff. It’s simply a status symbol to them which is pathetic. And bigger equals better in their feeble minds.

      I have a 13 yr old Tacoma and it’s tiny compared to even the modern “small” trucks. When this thing finally dies, I have no idea what I’ll get. I love the size of it though. Maybe a Ford Maverick, but those are on backorder for years I heard from several friends who tried to get one.

      • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I use my truck for hauling stuff and camping.

        For hauling big is objectively better. Without a doubt.

        And for camping it’s nice that I can sleep in the 6.5 foot bed of my truck, and also fit my camping supplies in the back seat of my full sized cab. I only put maybe 300 miles a month on it. So it’s not like I’m driving it as my primary. But yes, it’s huge.

        My other car is a tiny Honda. Which is great for everything else.

      • edric@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Even the new Tacoma is still smaller than those F-150 monstrosities. The only other small pickup other than the Maverick is the Santa Cruz, but it isn’t really a utility truck if you actually need to haul a ton of stuff.

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

        Exactly. I wanted a pickup for the convenience of the bed for the occasional project I might work on but 98% of the time it will just be me in there going to and from work.

        I ordered my hybrid Maverick September 2022 and it’s finally scheduled for production. On the one occasion every year or two that I need the power of a full size pickup, I’ll just borrow it or rent some from Home Depot for a few hours.

  • ThickQuiveringTip@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    More and more of these are coming into Australia. They carry extremely small dick vibes. They are fucking annoying how much road space they take up. It’s comical watching them drive around a car park. My friend bought a RAM and his personality changed with it in that he actually belittles our cars and kind of acts like we are weak?! He works as a corporate job and has absolutely no need for such a car apart from helping his inferiority complex. Now I can’t help but dislike anyone who has one of these.

    • theplanlessman@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      They’re popping up here in the UK too. Our winding pre-industrial roads really aren’t big enough for these road tanks, they constantly get in the way. They’re even too big for a lot of parking spaces, you see them spilling over all the time.

  • HubertManne@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    ugh. my sister at one point had one of those H3’s and gushed about how safe it made her feel for her and her children. Yeah safer for you!

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      At least it wasn’t the H2! One of the worst vehicles I had to drive when it comes to visibility (second only to the F650) and I probably have driven a thousand different models in the 10 years I was a valet!

  • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    There are some minibuses that my local transit provider uses for suburban routes, the kind that’s a bus cabin bolted to a modified Ford truck body or van. Something I noticed riding those buses is that the operator sits lower and has a smaller engine compartment up front obstructing their view than a lot of five-seater SUVs. Hell, some SUVs are nearly as wide and long as a minibus, just not as tall.

    Also, those busses are operated by trained CDL drivers who are subject to regular examination and tracking of their performance by both the CDL issuer and the transit authority. Can you say the same for the average family SUV?

  • nik0@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Don’t give any Republicans any ideas. They might consider this seriously.

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Trucks are commercial vehicles. You need them for towing, hauling and other construction related activities. License, permit and tax them as such. If you have a huge boat or RV you need to tow, get and pay for a permit. Have the taxes be based on mileage so the more they’re used, the more expensive it is. We invented weigh stations to make trucks compensate for the additional strain they put on roads. Same for these trucks. That’ll help prevent them from being daily drivers.

    • SaveComengs@lemmy.federa.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      idk if it’s an American thing, but please stop calling them trucks. Trucks are actual freight hauling industrial vehicles. This is just a family car with a bucket at the back. Call it a ute or whatever.

      • ThePalmtopTiger@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Truck is just slang for pickup truck. Ute as a term isn’t really a thing in the US. Coup utilities like an El Camino or Subaru Baja feel pretty distinct from modern American pickups though. It’d be weird to put them in the same category given how different they are in both form and function.

  • CCatMan@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    Bring back the station wagon 😭 I want a hybrid wagon, but the Volvo is is prices so no one can afford it lol… I really don’t want to get the Chrysler van…

  • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    Should be required by law that all new cars have Pedestrian crash avoidance mitigation (PCAM) systems. In the same way that seatbelts and rear cameras are required. Would be surprised if it’s nit required by 2030.