this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
503 points (94.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

9810 readers
3 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

All these children are invisible to the driver...

Fuck all those cars!!! Put them away to hell, not to earth. They are too big for all - except for small egos. But for small egos is therapy much better.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 153 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

Or we could, you know, follow previously established methods of building vehicles that make pedestrian death and dismemberment less likely.

No, no, no. Americans need them this way apparently for some inexplicable fucking reason.

So instead of just designing them with pedestrian safety in mind to begin with, we are just gonna slap on more fucking band-aids (like cameras) that do fuck-all.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting 61 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Americans never asked for this, it's the classification system for light trucks implemented following the Yom Kippur War that left too much leeway in the definition for "light trucks" that has been driving auto makers in this direction.

Of course there have been knock-on cultural issues where certain people make it part of their ego and the market effect becomes self reinforcing, but that's how we got into this mess. History is a series of unintended consequences, again.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Agreed. The industry is invested in avoiding regulation that could impede their profits at all costs. This means they will invest in advertising pushing the idea that these vehicles are needed.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting 20 points 1 year ago

It's almost like our enemies are rich people! Crazy thought, right?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'd argue that they have asked for trucks to get so big because they seemingly sell better that way. It's admittedly an imperfect thing to look at since there's few alternatives and many other factors, but these big trucks didn't immediately take over the market. At some point they were introduced and consumers liked them.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting 4 points 1 year ago

This is why I said it became an ego thing. Automakers didn't set out to kill the most kids possible and ask "how do we design towards that", they exploited a regulatory loophole which then cracked open a wider market niche based on people's egocentrism, brutality, and myopic attitudes toward transit (e.g. carbrain).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not sure if American consumers "liked" them so much as they were pushed heavily by auto makers while they quietly phased out more practically sized vehicles like hatchbacks, station wagons, and a lot of sedans (other than those sedans that fetch a high price for their performance and appeal to an entirely different market; your corvettes, mustangs, etc.) That 'light truck' designation brings with it larger profit margins; the vehicle itself is bigger so the manufacturer can charge more for it, and then they have to obey fewer environmental regulations so development/manufacturing is cheaper in comparison to trying to meet the regulations for smaller vehicles.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Americans never asked for this? Then who is buying these wanktanks?

[–] Gradually_Adjusting 3 points 1 year ago

Slow down buddy, you're skating past everything worth talking about.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

To be fair, they are hugely popular in both Canada and Mexico as well. I'll leave it to you to figure out why.

Hint; if marketing didn't work, it wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar industry.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Tedrow 42 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That truck isn't even lifted. Looks like stock.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Yeah, more like "Ban trucks that are built so high off the ground that they can't see pedestrians." That would easily include lifted trucks as well as general monstrosities.

I mean, it's not like any of these motherfuckers uses these things to haul anything other than their kids and fucking groceries anyway.

Too much of a pussy to just own it and just drive a fucking minivan, which can easily carry kids and groceries. Has to buy the big dick extender instead.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

But it's even worse than that. The front of the car being so big and high is PURELY aesthetics. All of the machinery that's in current trucks would just as easily fit under a hood that was lower and sloped downward for better visibility, but trucks with a high squared off hood and grille sell more because many truck buyers care more about it having a tough appearance rather then it being an actually better vehicle.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

They use them to haul their over-inflated self worth.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Yes, no one who owns a truck uses it to move furniture, trash, dirt, mulch, or an old transmission they pulled at the auto lot. None of them go fishing or hunting, obviously, so fishing rods, camping gear and coolers won't be necessary in the back. Also, no one who owns a truck has ever done home repair and would never carry wood or power tools in the back of, do you get how stupid your strawman is yet?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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

I guess self-reporting surveys must be lies then.

In other words, for the most part, these gas guzzling monstrosities are rarely used for hauling shit. Maybe they should just rent a truck when they need one?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That doesn't invalidate trucks used for commercial or professional use, or the fact I'll still stand on.... hauling and outdoor use. It being rare doesn't make it non-existent.

I'm sure some idiot is hauling refrigerators with a Civic, it doesn't make them progressive.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's not non-existent, but it's non-existent enough to justify most people not owning trucks and just renting them when needed.

I mean, if trucks were still like the 4-cylinder Ranger I had from the 80's, it would make more sense. But they aren't and it doesn't.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then you have to pay the rental fee. What if I own a truck... and a Civic?

Is it the ego at this point or are you really riding this train?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Is it the ego at this point or are you really riding this train?

At this point, I think that's projection.

Then you have to pay the rental fee.

Oh no! A rental fee! That must have made it so you couldn't afford to eat. What even is this argument?

What if I own a truck… and a Civic?

So you own more vehicles than you as an individual need? I don't know why you think that's supposed to go over well in a Fuck_Cars forum.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Three of the guys at my shop literally go fishing about twice a month. They own trucks. It's possible. One drives a focus to work every day.

I noticed you danced around the owning two vehicles statement, very nice. I'm moving on with it since it's troubling you so much.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

*shrugs

Projection.

Personal anecdotes without evidence are like the least effective way to prove a point, by the way.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nice edit, low blow, bro, low blow. I didn't screenshot yours before you made it. I don't believe in being cheap.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The edit was made several minutes before you responded. Check it for yourself.

Finishing your thought to add more before someone else has responded isn't cheap. But it's clear you want to be a victim here.

Why don't you go back to being a crypto bro, it seems you're suited to it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fair.

You're still wrong about the truck thing, tho. Thank God you guys can't downvote me, I bet the urge must be painful.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That doesn’t invalidate trucks used for commercial or professional use

In that case they need a commercial license and/or it's business property for taxes and the company should own it (if not a sole proprietorship). And you can't use company property for personal use most places.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good Lord. Imagine living on 8 acres in the woods and you need a professional license to own a truck just to live, lmao.

No wonder none of you get it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Then how do you stop the spread of these monstrosities to suburbs where the driver never uses it for that function? All I'm seeing from you is calling us silly for now wanting something the size of a fleet vehicle used on streets not designed for it and killing pedestrians they cant see. Atleast requiring some sort of inbetween grade of license besides passenger cars and everything else could curtail people who are not skilled enough to drive those vehicles or not motivated enough for a status symbol purchase. Rather than say we don't understand that people have some legit need and poo-poo us, couldn't you try and be helpful with ideas?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

We came up with trailers long ago for occassional hauling needs. Not that any of your needs even warrant one.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

We don’t have this kind of trucks in the Europe AT ALL and people still go fishing, do home repairs, carry heavy or large loads. This is all American lifestyle.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I can easily do all of that and more with my non-lifted mid-sized long-bed pickup. It's just a fact my dude; they are selling a self-image, not actual utility. Or what about a van with a roof-rack. In my professional experience that's a lot more utilitarian if you're a tradesman.

Again, it's all about an image that's been meticulously and brilliantly marketed and sold to very specific demographics.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I fish with a Camry just fine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Almost no one uses trucks daily for those activities. It's an occasional thing. In which case renting is cheaper. Hunting, too since the vast, vast majority of hunters aren't even hunting weekly.

Fishing? Collapsible poles or strap them to the top. It's not like the rest of the world has trucks and they do these things.

Also, coolers and camping gear? My brother in gaia get a hatchback.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Don't impede the circle jerk, unless you use it everyday for work you should rent a truck every other weekend

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I work in industrial construction on massive unionized projects with tradespeople coming from all over the US and Canada and I can tell you for an objective fact that the number of guys --it's almost always guys, which should tell you something-- who drive giant lifted obnoxious trucks as their daily driver vs the number who actually really and truly need them on a regular basis is like 100 to 1.

But even if it were only 10 to 1, that means we have 10 times as many of these giant gas guzzling dangerous trucks out on the road.

The industry has done such a good job at selling these trucks as part of a self-image, that a lot of guys are incapable of admitting that the only reason they drive one is because they think it looks cool.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or just... have a truck? Look, man. Is your problem intensified by the trucks in question being 8-cylinder gas guzzlers?

Have you ever heard of Toyota?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Carbrained: When you're so stuck up your own ass you even lash out at people who were obviously making a joke that meant they agreed with you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's it. I've had enough of this. I'm off to buy a truck!

[–] Goldoad 1 points 1 year ago

They're wonderful. I personally enjoy looking down on everyone in mine. And if I was to ever hit a line of kids in the road, I know I'm safe.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Car manufacturers have been making trucks taller and boxier because their studies show that their owners do that to their trucks after buying them so they want to be more appealing to the average pickup truck buyer... and yes that thought makes my brain hurt

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Definitely stock cause it doesn't even look leveled, and no one lifts without leveling.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick 5 points 1 year ago

no one lifts without leveling.

Can I introduce you to the world of hack job block kits prolific in rural Canada?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I saw a YouTube explaining the giant cars in the US have to do with the government making a big equation that car manufacturers have to follow.

The equation calculated the weight, size, gas mileage, etc, and the only way they can make the cars pass the equation is to make them giant. The equation backfired and now we have giant cars.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

It didn't backfire. They designed a law that looks good at first glance but actually makes auto manufacturers richer. This happens all the time and it's on purpose, because they know voters don't have the analysis resources of lobbyists.

[–] Mitchie151 14 points 1 year ago

Yep, the manufacturers get massive tax breaks on this class of vehicle, which means they can make and sell them at the same or better price than a small, fuel efficient car. If a family with kids has to choose between a mid size crossover or an F150 at similar price points, why would you get the crossover? The USA needs to fix the way it taxes cars to disincentivise these fuel inefficient giant cars. No other country has these problems so it's not a selfish person problem, it's an entirely logical choice to make given the circumstances.

load more comments (6 replies)