841
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
841 points (98.2% liked)
Technology
55547 readers
3892 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm sorry, why the fuck aren't these street legal in more than half of the states? The article says something about safety, but these are street legal all over Europe where we have stronger safety regulations.
Also there's something I can't put my finger on about the journalist choosing a hero image of the van losing its cargo.
Probably because it's not safe to drive them around giant pickups who can't see over their hoods
Europe and Japan all have freight trucks driving around, so I don't buy that. The fact that many states won't allow these is American truck manufacturing protectionism, nothing more. It's the same reason you can only get a 3/4 or 1 ton truck from Ford, Chevy, or Ram (chicken tax).
It's all about the chicken tax.
Cab over engine freight trucks with excellent visibility, not jacked up chevys where your view of the ground starts 20 feet in front of you
And that's precisely because the option isn't readily available here. We can argue merits of different countries versus the US, but at the end of the day it is what it is unless something changes at the legislative level.
When say a contractor goes to purchase a work vehicle, the option is either a van, which have pathetic motors and hauling capabilities, or a pickup from one of the big 3 that can be outfitted with a utility body. Sometimes you can score one of those Isuzu cabovers, but they're typically outfitted with a full sized box on the chassis, and they're far and few between, and often more expensive. Vans are also stupid expensive, especially 4x4 models, because of the van life crowd. The options really are much more limited than other parts of the world, and I truly believe it's to keep prices high and the money vacuum humming. Plus, you can find an older utility body truck for a fraction of the cost of a used van (I just did this 6 months ago; granted I'm in California, so my experience may not be the norm).
I ended up buying a Ram 2500 when looking for a work truck. I would've loved a 25/35 class van, but I need 4x4 (mountains, snow), and because of the premium those models fetch due to demand from the van life people, that wasn't an option.
And I dunno about other people, but I know what's in front of my truck at all times. It really isn't that hard to mind your surroundings.
The front view from a freight truck is better than that of a f150.
How's that different from driving a car roughly the same size?
Just noting as a reference these trucks are 11ft long, a Miata is roughly 20% longer at 13ft.
Doing comparisons like these don’t make sense when motorcycles and trikes exist.
I didn't really intend for it to be a comparison or supporting the narrative these trucks are 'too small for America', I just find many people hear small truck and imagine "like a ford ranger but a little less", as their starting reference point. Gotta go smaller, scale is tough.
My bad. It just seems like the low hanging fruit everyone plays off of.
We actually used to get vehicles close to this size. The Suzuki samurai (really a jimny) was sold here for a number of years. Geo sold a fair number of almost kei cars that Suzuki made.
I’m a fan of limiting them from interstate highways, but keeping them registrable. It’s just dumb they cite “safety” even though the law explicitly calls out they aren’t required to be safe. I just want a nice 25-45 mph city truck to lug dirty junk around.
But if anyone is curious, Douglas deBoard imported so many European cars in the 80’s that cut into the profits of Mercedes USA enough that they pushed the law through. Buying them in Europe and importing them was actually cheaper (in some aspects) than buying a US market one. And the imported cars were better equipped!
It wasn’t even about protecting American manufacturers or trucks. Mercedes has just always been a huge dick.
No lie. Gray market Mercedes were awesome. Way more powerful and you could get base models with zero cruft - manual transmissions and wind up windows.
Just for reference a Fiat 500 is roughly 9.75 feet long.
Maybe in the 70s, a modern 500 is listed at 11.6 ft
It looks like I got my info mixed up, thank you for the correction.
But then it's these giant pickups which are unfit and should not be road legal.
This is how we got in this mess, an arms race of trying to feel safe around larger and larger hunks of metal on the road. Americans just have to endanger everyone else for their own peace of mind.
And yet Smart cars are legal.
Ban anything bigger than a Kei?
Source
Protectionism.
Speed restrictions.
Kei trucks were designed for use in dense Japanese cities, which is why they also work in European cities. They are nimble but have a low top speed. You're not going 70 mph around a street corner for instance.
It would work in places like NYC for the same reasons, but remember that most of the USA is suburban or rural. You need vehicles that are capable of going fast if you're going to get on a highway.
A possible workaround is to have a separate class for these, like mopeds or scooters, which are road legal but are not highway legal.
That work around is what most states that explicitly legalized kei trucks have done, they can't enter roads over 55mph. It's a reasonable concession, you probably don't want to take one over 50mph anyway.
Most places in the US are connected by 55 mph roads. I'd be hard-pressed to get anywhere but the city center in most places I've lived if I couldn't use those roads.
Farm equipment and bikes use those roads all the time, and they go even slower, so I don't think being able to keep up with traffic is a valid concern.
Note that I said over 55, rural connection roads should still be traversable since most are 55. Basically limits them from entering the interstate highways.
Southern California is entirely navigable by surface streets, but also too, there are plenty of vehicles going only 55 in the slow lanes, which is the speed limit for trucks anyway (though few pay attention to it). I have a '72 camper that can barely do 50, and I take it on the freeway several times a year.
In Illinois, at least, your motorcycle has to be 150cc to ride on the interstate. A Chinese GY6 scooter might be able to do 50MPH with a tailwind. You'd get killed on the interstate on one of those, yet, fully legal to do it.
You guys in Illinois are crazy though. I learned very quickly how much that 55 MPH limit is a guideline and not a hard limit.
Here in the states we have ~~legal corruption~~ lobbyists which the auto manufacturers pay to keep cheap vehicles from being used. And then the lawmakers claim safety concerns as the reason.
They're not really safe. They are generally front heavy, so there is a risk of rolling forward, no crumple zone safety stuff, more often than not the front suspension is under the seat and if that breaks it would shoot up into the cabin, and on top of everything they are pretty slow. They have more in common with an off road Polaris than a traditional truck, which is to be expected because they were mostly designed to be farm trucks. I'd much rather be in an older s10 than a kei truck in the event of a crash (and s10's aren't very safe). I think I lot of why they are so popular these days is because there aren't really any light trucks anymore, and these are an alternative.
I'd still own one if they were just banned on highways. The risk is probably pretty low on low speed city streets, where these would be most useful.
I actually considered it when I last looked for a new vehicle but besides being too expensive for what they are ($10k for a 90s cheap truck) they made a lot of compromises on them. For instance, on most the struts and springs are right under the seats, so if that breaks it would come right up into your legs. If the truck is rusty and going over bumps, that is a non zero possibility.
We should take a step back: why do we need all those safety standards in the first place? The reason is that we have such gigantic vehicles in the first place, and smaller ones simply cannot be safe on the same road. Level that all down and suddenly Kei cars are as safe as they need to be.
The problem is not even big trucks. It is medium speed collisions with barriers. Kei trucks typically don't have air bags or a crumple zone. They are designed for low speed driving on open roads.
Not really. I compared it to an older Chevy s10 for a reason. Those were relatively small trucks that, while not always the most reliable, are still a pretty decent option for most people. Kei trucks are a smidge smaller, but are better on gas and frankly less safe. I don't think this is a "get rid of bigger vehicles and this goes away" but of a "Kei trucks aren't really any safer than an off-road golf cart and current regulations allows them on the road". We need the safety regulations so less people die on Auto accidents, and kei trucks don't really have to comply with even the basic ones.
I wrapped a 2017 SUV around a telephone pole and didn't get a scratch. It's not all about other cars.
Traditionally they've been banned because they don't do well in crash testing, as they don't have crumple zones or airbags. Here's some testing from 2010 by the insurance industry arguing that they shouldn't be on highways.