If you ever find yourself tempted to buy a truck and/or SUV, just remember one thing: they’re not worth it. They’re a societal nuisance. They’re a massive pollutant. The maintenance, repair, and insurance will cost you a whole lot more. Aside from the aforementioned pollution, They’re overall environmental impact is egregious. These monstrosities are best left alone.
If you ever have to do any sort heavy work, rent one instead. Want to live that outdoors lifestyle? A sedan and/or hatchback will do. Just buy a bike and roof rack. Got a family? Again, sedan and/or hatchback will do but also consider a station wagon. Better yet, buy a cargo bike like the Urban Arrow or the Dutch bakfiets. These are way better options to those climate-changing abominations.
I know what I’m writing isn’t anything groundbreaking but I’m writing this mostly get something off my chest in relation to a dream I had last night. The dream itself was quite boring: I was driving around in a new Ford Bronco. The thing was that, in the dream, I was quite happy about it. This happy feeling was still felt when I woke up. For a brief moment, I was thinking about buying a Bronco. I soon returned to reality. But I’m not going to lie; the temptation was strong. The temptation was made stronger by nostalgia. I grew up with these kinds of vehicles. My dad worked in labor-intense, blue collar jobs that used trucks. He even owned some himself. But, once again, they’re not worth it.
You must log in or # to comment.
I think it’s funny that you overlooked vans like most people do. Vans make more sense for way more people than trucks and SUVs do. But they have a huge stigma attached to them and people don’t want to look uncool.
Except vans aren’t actually all that efficient, compare a Toyota Hiace VS Hilux, or ford Ranger vs Transit, and they are very similar in size and economy, with the Hilux actually being more efficient than the Hiace.
The biggest reason so many people have utes or pickups where I live is for towing, and the ability to carry five passengers and have luggage in a separate compartment.
I drive a van for work, and I’m well aware of how practical they are, but it only has one row of seats, can’t tow bugger all, and would get stuck on wet grass.
There’s plenty of work vans that are designed for a full 5 person crew. Vans can also easily tow whatever is needed for that crew, if the van was specced for it. It’s like not all vans were created equal and thus there are vans out there that are not like your van.
OK, but what’s the advantage? If the van is the same size as an equivalent pickup, how is it the better option?
And what model of van can carry five passengers and tow 3.5 tonne?
The Toyota Sienna can apparently tow
3.5 tonnes3500 lbs and carry 8 passengers. Average mpg while not towing is 36 too.But most people don’t tow anything ever and a van would be just fine.
It can tow 3500. 1.5 tons and that isn’t a lot. Not as much as an SUV with a towing package and not even close to a 1/2 ton truck.
My b, 3500lbs. Most families aren’t towing anything though. I’m not going to disparage anyone with a truck who needs to tow or haul a bunch. But there are people who don’t tow anything and complain about midsize SUVs not having enough space for their family but balk at the idea of a van.
I’m so tired of hearing this. I’ve met like maybe 1 truck owner who never uses it “correctly”. Y’all are inventing some imaginary figure in your heads from a 15 year old survey.
Yeah, 1.5 tonne sounds more reasonable.
Won’t tow construction equipment or a large boat or caravan, or travel off road, of course.
Clearly I’m not most people then.
The Toyota Sienna can apparently tow 3.5 tonnes
Bullshit. Show me the spec sheet.
Also, people movers generally aren’t made to move adults, eight manual labourers would be a tight fit, and leave no room for luggage.
Sorry, 3500 lbs. I’m not arguing that a minivan is a good work vehicle btw, but most families looking at SUVs would be better with a van. That’s my argument.
The two most common use cases where I live for a ute or pickup is a tradie or tech that wants one vehicle to serve as a work vehicle and a family car, or someone who wants the towing capacity of a ute or SUV. Neither one can really use a van, as trade vans only have one row of seats.
Most SUV owners want the towing capacity and ground clearance of an SUV.
As a former Sienna owner, they are great for families, and absolutely cavernous. Very practical for most families.
Towing is a pop up camper or small boat. I suppose a utility trailer would work, but it’s easier to just fold down or pop out seats and I’ve always made it fit.
Definitely not a work truck, and in particular that third row bench is constraining for adults
This is potentially more specific to the US, but I imagine even if that is the case it probably affects everyone else by proxy at a minimum.
One of the big problems with trucks and SUVs is that they are not subjected to the same safety regulations as cars. They have high ground clearances, high noses, stiff suspensions and frames, and so on, and these things make them extraordinarily dangerous in a collision. That being said though, they might be necessary in very specific circumstances, for example if you are going off road and/or towing very heavy loads. If this applies to you regularly, like for work, buy a truck and drive it in good conscience. It is a tool fit for your purpose.
But if you are like most people, you don’t regularly tow heavy loads for work, and you don’t regularly drive off road, but maybe you do need to carry around lots of stuff and/or people, and spacious van might be more suitable. And with that comes a softer suspension, lower ground clearance, and a sloped nose that will make the van much less likely to kill people in a collision
If the van is the same size as an equivalent pickup, how is it the better option?
Pickups and SUVs are extremely dangerous to pedestrians and smaller cars, due to their high, non-sloped fronts. Vans typically have a low, gently sloped front which is safer for people and other vehicles.
Historically, that has been the case, newer ones have autonomous braking and front cameras, which reduces pedestrian blind spots somewhat.
True, but it’s not just an issue of visibility but the height on impact too (head and chest for pedestrians).
This is potentially more specific to the US, but I imagine even if that is the case it probably affects everyone else by proxy at a minimum.
One of the big problems with trucks and SUVs is that they are not subjected to the same safety regulations as cars. They have high ground clearances, high noses, stiff suspensions and frames, and so on, and these things make them extraordinarily dangerous in a collision. That being said though, they might be necessary in very specific circumstances, for example if you are going off road and/or towing very heavy loads. If this applies to you regularly, like for work, buy a truck and drive it in good conscience. It is a tool fit for your purpose.
But if you are like most people, you don’t regularly tow heavy loads for work, and you don’t regularly drive off road, but maybe you do need to carry around lots of stuff and/or people, and spacious van might be more suitable. And with that comes a softer suspension, lower ground clearance, and a sloped nose that will make the van much less likely to kill people in a collision
I quite frequently tow, and drive down gravel access roads etc, so towing and ground clearance are very useful to me. My own car is a CX-5 though, so not a huge vehicle.
The safety rules thing isn’t the case here, they still need to meet the same safety rules as everyone else.
For me the biggest advantage is that vans fully enclose their cargo: good against climate and less likely to lose stuff to theft.
For towing capacity, this article gives 3 models that can tow 3.5 ton: https://www.vanarama.com/blog/vans/van-towing-capacity-chart-whats-the-best-van-for-towing
Seating can be however you want it to be. Vans are also used as mini buses, so all seating configurations in between no passengers and all passengers are possible.
Those are all bigger in every dimension than a ute though.
So, I repeat my question. How is a bigger, likely less efficient vehicle an improvement over a ute? Especially considering they can’t travel off road.
Also, lockable canopies are commonplace where I live.
Yeah, moving goalposts now are we :D
I could try look up a smallish van with high towing capacity, it’s probably not even that hard to find, seeing how easily I found multiple vans that fitted your earlier criteria, but somehow I know that I’d be wasting my time. You’ll grasp at any straw and think up any rare scenario to justify your belief in trucks.
Trucks have their applications sure, especially for gardening/farming or other mobile crews that can benefit from having that mobile open bed near them, but for most work crews, vans are the better solution.
You didn’t answer my question. How is a van inherently better than a ute of similar size? What’s the difference?
And you could drive a Kei truck into the vans with a 3500kg tow rating.
deleted by creator
My girlfriend’s sister has a van she uses for Vanlife™ and that big stupid piece of lumbering shit gets stored 10 to 11 months of the year because driving it for regular things is totally unaffordable. It’s just as gas inefficient and gigantic as the child killers.
I think the point is that even if you need to haul stuff frequently, a van will do the job way better than a truck
Just fix the laws in the US, and pickups and trucks for personal use will be as about nonexistent as in Europe.
im not a particularly big car hater but i dont get why you guys dont have mini trucks in the us, just the egregiously huge f150s and stuff.
you guys even call them mini trucks, we just call them trucks. they cover most of what regular working people would use them for, are easier to drive and maintain and can even be more economical because they end up being lighter than cars. im not even talking about kei trucks just the regular, car sized, pickup trucks!
also a lot of the suvs, but especially crossovers ive been in are just as cramped as cars inside. whats the fucking point why the fuck do they even build them like this 🤪
Car manufacturers cheating fuel requirements. When I was younger I had a Ranger that is what I think you describe. It was an early 90s model. We had them at one point. Federal fuel efficiency standards gradually made it so that car makers had to make them more and more efficient, and ICE was just never going to get that efficient. Either by lobbying or whatever, the regulations made exceptions for larger trucks. Some people do need to pull trailers and haul big loads. So instead of trying to make an ICE achieve this standard they just made the trucks and SUVs bigger. Today’s ranger is nearly as big as the F150 and it’s bigger than an F150 from a few years ago. It’s just a bit narrower now.
What’s crazy to me is with them electrifying the F150 there’s a ton of demand for them to make a cheaper electric truck. An old ranger size truck on the MachE platform that could sell for $25-30k would be a wild success.
One of the biggest consumers of pickup trucks in the US are insecure men who want the biggest dumbest machine they can buy. My favorite thing to do when I see one is to make fun of how pristine the bed is, because they never actually use it. They’re usually too jacked up to even use as an actual pickup truck anyway.
I don’t have a source on this but I think I’ve heard that a large demographic of SUV buyers are actually women; people who have all too much experience being vulnerable in city life, and want something that puts them in a protected position.
I have a civic and I’m looking to change for an old Ranger because I want to have a lightweight pickup I can use for everyday transport but also for turning into a camping/roadtrip vehicle. Like a Vanlife vehicle but without the stupidity of owning a gigantic, gas guzzling van that I will only use for getting to work most of the year. The plan is perfect in my mind except everyone is fighting over what are becoming very rare used small pickups because they just don’t exist on the regular market anymore and no one intelligent, doing regular work, needs a big dumb child killer of a pickup that drinks $100 of gas a day to move a few tool boxes from point a to point b.
Anyway, it’s frustrating that pickup trucks have become penis prosthetics for the insecure when the rest of us just need compact utility.
Truck owner here who had to move from an old Tacoma to 4wd. We would absolutely have a smaller truck if they were available.
Yeah, they have their place as working vehicles. Unfortunately too many are just pavement princess trucks. They might haul a few hundred pounds (not counting the driver) a few times a year.
It’s the mindset of fear and envy that underpins consumerism that needs to change.
No, the huge american pickuptrucks does not have a place as working vehicles, the are too big and too fragile, get a WV Transport pickup or van, way more practical than a huge F-150 or similar
It’s absolutely not easier to rent a truck 10 times a year. You people just assume that people don’t need or use this shit from one old ass survey.
I never mentioned renting?
Yeah, that’s just not a realistic idea, especially considering the time it takes to do so, and that you can only get one during working hours.
Basic economics…
If the demand is there, the supply of rentals will become available.
I’ve rented a truck before, no way would I want to do it ten times a year. What a pain in the ass.
Someone looking to buy a car or any variety is not going to be swayed by online forum posts, unfortunately
especially those who want an enormous truck/suv just for the sake of it.
also consider a station wagon
Do they still make those?
It’s been harder and harder to find them in North America over the last few years. I think in Canada its just the premium German manufacturers (Audi, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche) and Volvo who still have them.
If I’m not mistaken, they still sell them in “big” numbers in the EU. The only car sold in the U.S that could be considered a “station wagon” is the Subaru Outback but the latest models have become way too bloated. Technically speaking, the “station wagon” (or “estate” if you’re British) no longer exists since it has (mostly) merge with the equally abysmal “crossover.”
According to my insurance company, not only is an Outback a station wagon, but so is my Forester. It gives me a nice discount.
I imagine it’s something silly, like fitting crossovers into an old category when determining rates
Subaru markets the Outback as an SUV, and has done since at least 2004.
The new ones are utterly hideous, I agree with that.
In europe they sell like crazy, the volvo V90 is cery popular, but even the WV Golf has a station wagon configuration
I see them a lot in Colorado
*bakfiets. Don’t forget the s.
It’s a bike (fiets) with a bin/container (bak) in front of it.
Anyway, I think you’re preaching to the choir here.
You’re very much right. Like I said in the post, this was intended as something of a personal log entry rather than a thought-provoking discussion. I get very tempted to buy these pieces of shit when I know that I don’t need them. I vaguely mentioned the “outdoors lifestyle” since that’s one of the biggest appeals to consumers. What they fail to realize is that a mountain bike or even a simple hike offer a better off-roading experience. Also, thank you for the spell check.
I think you should live your dream and buy that Bronco. It’ll take you places no pushbike will, and with more gear and food.
Or drive it to the trailhead, and continue on foot.
True, although these posts do reach /all from time to time.
Removed by mod
I’m not understanding. Are you typically driving around town towing another car? Or do you just want to say you have the ability to tow it yourself when needed?
I tow my vehicle on track days as well as tow a small camper on race weekends.
Then you’re not who OP is talking about.
60% of people never tow anything in their trucks. The majority of people use them to drive between home and their office jobs and the grocery store.
They’re not needed and should require special licenses to drive.
First, I’m not speaking about anyone but myself.
Second, can you actually link a primary source for that argument? I’ve seen it on the daily show, motor biscuit, etc but never once have I found an actual source willing to share how that data was collected. I’ve basically seen surveys on ad supported need sites.
https://www.axios.com/ford-pickup-trucks-history
From surveys performed yearly between 2012 and 2021.
61% of F-150 owners rarely or never use their trucks for towing.
And 87% use them for shopping and errands, for which a giant truck is entirely unnecessary.
It sounds like you’re saying 39% of f150 owners should own two cars instead of one.
I knew Axios was coming. The amount you are towing vs using the bed isn’t mostly exclusive. You are just making up math. Second, yes I only rarely tow, is only 20 days of the year. I do frequently do daily things in my truck…because they are daily.This is an example of a poorly worded survey and going to the first Google result you see. This is a poor metric to use and wouldn’t hold up under any peer review.
You’re right, they should make production vehicles to cater to people that might want to tow their race car per chance 🙄
Even the echo chamber is pushing back on this one.
deleted by creator
Trucks don’t innately get worse mileage and not all trucks are big. Also, a new vehicle, including big trucks, will be better on the environment than a 20yr old wagon. Age is more relevant than model. You seem to be off track here.
I actually use my truck for what is built for. All these bright shiny cocacola cowboy carts look really nice but until they sweat theyre just toys for little boys.
You’re like a vegan hating on meat eaters or a closet gay hating on the openly gay. Basically your self imposed voluntary abstinence is causing you to dislike those who are just living their lives how you want to. Just get a Bronco, or whatever. Live and let live.
The latest Toyota Highlander Hybrid, as well as the Sienna, get 35 mpg city and highway. That’s under 3 gal per 100 miles. A Subaru Outback (about the only wagon in the states) will consume 4 gallons per 100 miles. That’s more than 30% more fuel for a wagon.
I have an SUV and a Tern HSD. A cargo bike is a replacement for a second vehicle, not a single vehicle. EV is also great as a second vehicle. But for a vehicle serving all the needs of a family (safety, transportation, outdoor recreation) a modern mid-size SUV is optimal. Not too big to park, not too small to fit stuff camping, safe, fuel efficient.
Why not hate on families with two or more cars, regardless what kind they are? Or hate on large square footage houses - those have a huge energy impact. Or you could just not worry about what other people do. It’s not like we’re all flying private jets…
@antlion If you’re taking criticism of your vehicle personally, there’s probably a reason you feel the need to be defensive about it. We all have room for personal improvement, but we won’t solve the problem at the personal level. We have to change the incentives to industry that are creating such unsustainable levels of consumption across the board. In the meantime anyone considering an SUV or multiple cars or a big house should think critically about it. @SpiceDealer
The focus shouldn’t be fuel economy of SUV, but danger to pedestrians and auto-centric development. I don’t really like my vehicle all that much, but it’s not a gas guzzler. Part of the reason I feel compelled to drive my tank around is not just the raised trucks but the increasing mass of EVs. Model Y is really heavy and compact vehicles don’t stand a chance.
at least the Tesla monstrosities outsource pollution to outside of the city, while trucks pollute our own living area. If coal power plants are in proximity to the residential areas, then my argument is nullified.
Buy that Bronco, OP. See the country in it. Go camping, experience the great outdoors. Meet new people.
That vehicle will take you places no van or station wagon possibly could.
You know you want to.
