• moshtradamus666@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    142
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    Trucks are getting so stupid. The brands are smart though, they really know how to to make the most of men insecurities.

  • nickiam2@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    One is a truck made for actual work and the other is an abomination pretending to be a truck.

    • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      11 months ago

      The second is basically a minivan, but the 3rd row is a truck bed.

      My truck is kinda similar, but they just took a smaller suv and added a bed.

      • nickiam2@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        So why not just use the van? At least the cargo space is covered from the elements. Most people who drove these yank tanks don’t actually need the truck part.

        • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          So why not just use the van?

          Using the right tool for the right job.

          Open bed of a truck is very handy for very tall items or stuff that needs to be dumped like rocks, dirt etc… Or if your towing a very large load with goose neck trailer.

      • inverted_deflector@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Actually minivans have more utility cause you could take out the middle row. And they had the sliding door and hatch and were more compact .

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    But only one can crush a toddler without you even feeling it.

    Buy the new Ford Infanticide 5000. You’re American. You deserve it.

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m a tall male (6’3") and even I worry about being seen over the hood of those monstrosities.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            After many years of driving different cars/trucks/other I want to know why at some point in the year 2000 decided that vision out of a moving vehicle was secondary to swoopy body lines. Get in something from the 60’s and you can see amazing (even in a boat of a car) yet by 2006 you can not see shit. for example:

            Chad 1966 Chrysler 300:

            2020 Chrysler 300:

            • meowbotage@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Safety priority for those inside the vehicle. Significant improvement in side impact protection came around in the 2000’s. At the cost of thicker pillars, taller thicker doors, heavier cars.

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    willing to bet the driver of the tiny truck has a bigger… ahem

      • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        And potentially family. It’s a 4 door truck. It’s a transportation vehicle with a bed and slightly greater towing capacity than a sedan. Lot of suburban dads have these.

          • Bruce_Wayne@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m a tiny-truck-lover, and want one badly, but my family’s big 'murica truck is waaaay more comfortable than my current sedan :( Unrelated, but do tiny work trucks come with Bluetooth now?

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

              Damn I hated riding in the back of my dad’s Silverado. I’m almost 6ft and I can comfortably fit behind myself in the back seat of my impreza. The new Maverick looks like a pretty cool small truck option

          • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Eh, your cheaper compact sedans are comparable. It’s definitely not great, but good enough. The front seats are comfortable, at least.

        • uis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Smol one can tow stupid ugly one. What do you need to tow, that is heavier that stupid ugly one?

      • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Neither is trashing the climate with pointlessly big vehicles just to compensate for whatever insecurities they have. We need to either tax or regulate these stupid vehicles back to a reasonable and safe size.

      • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        In this case it’s not about body shaming but about shaming a means of compensation. Also it’s not really a literal take. “Big dick energy” has nothing do with actual dick size. And being a “Karen” has nothing to with a persons actual name or gender.

      • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        But the body on right is so much bigger, and takes up so much wasted space!

        The smaller body on the left is more fuel efficient too.

        Plus, body shaming when you’re ugly and useless like that is okay.

        • Mac@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Not sure if you’re serious but i will answer as if you were.

          A common attack against people with large trucks is that they have a large truck to compensate having a small penis. This implies having a small penis is bad/unacceptable. This is obvious body shaming but also contributes to toxic masculinity.
          Both of these are unacceptable.

          There are many alternative ways to talk shit without playing into these kinds of comments and TBH, the compensation comments have been used so much and are so obviously baseless that they don’t hit very hard, IMO.

          • gregorum@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            well, i didn’t actually say that, and i’m not responsible for others filling in the blanks with their own negative thoughts. as you can see, several others actually managed to conclude something different.

            don’t blame the Rorschach test because you see something you don’t like.

              • gregorum@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                that’s exactly what blaming me for something i didn’t say is

                • mriormro@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It was implicit. If you can’t deal with being called out on your rhetoric, perhaps you shouldn’t use it.

                  Body shaming is dumb and so is owning such a huge truck.

            • Mac@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Blocked. User has nothing useful to contribute and will argue in bad faith when called out.

    • seathru@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      11 months ago

      Death wish? I love kei trucks but I fear getting into a mash up in one of them.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Also, one of these actually needs and uses the bed, the other one doesn’t.

  • mean_bean279@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    11 months ago

    This person might be a little confused as those beds are definitely not the same length. They might be consuming the mid-size truck 4.5ft bed as the length of that Silverado. I’m being generous to that smaller truck if it has a 4.5ft bed, but the Silverado has a 5.5ft bed standard and also has a wider bed. Specifically greater than 4ft between wheel wells making transporting of standard sized plywood and drywall super easy. Carrying 6 people too is also something that smaller truck isn’t doing, nor is a high towing capacity like 15k pounds. Does the average America need that? Most likely not, but to claim they’re the same is disingenuous.

    You can tell the about size by the tire. Considering a standard 5.5ft American truck bed could easily accommodate 4 tires laying down flat and still have plenty of left over space both width and length while this truck seems to struggle with one. Again, 4 tires could fit in the small one standing up, but this comparison is apples to oranges. Both fruits, but different categories.

    • jecht360@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Kei trucks can put the sides of the bed down, leaving a completely flat cargo surface. Depending on the model, the bed is 4-6ft long and 3.5-4.5ft wide with the sides up.

      Part of the point is that a kei truck can do a good chunk of small utility trips without being gigantic or bad on gas.

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

          No way. I could see 20 in heavy city use and loaded, but 30 to 40 mpg is fairly standard.

          • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I had a friend with one, he had mud tires on it and drove up a lot of hills. It was also really old, the newer ones probably get better gas mileage.

      • Enk1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        11 months ago

        Full size trucks aren’t bad on gas anymore. The F-150 comes with a 2.7 litre turbocharged V6 base now, or you can upgrade to the 3.5L twin turbo V6 or 3.5L hybrid V6. Check your local dealers page, you won’t find many 1/2 ton trucks with V8s anymore. They also have aluminum bodies and a 4-door weighs about the same as a regular cab shortbed truck did 20 years ago. Is the truck in the pic significantly more useful than the Kei truck? Not really unless you need to tow with it, or need the cabin space or seating.

        • SeducingCamel@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m seeing like 16-20mpg on a site that compiles user reports of mileage for both the V6 and V8. Pretty sure that’s what my 99 Ranger got so idk if I’d say “they aren’t bad on gas anymore”

          • Enk1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            The 2.7 Ecoboost, which is by far the most common on sale right now, gets 20-26mpg, the 3.5L Ecoboost gets 18/24, and the 3.5L hybrid gets 25 combined. The V8 gets 17-25mpg, but most dealers aren’t ordering many of those - check your local dealer’s site and you’ll see most new ones are the 2.7 and the 3.5L hybrid Powerboost.

            That’s pretty close to the Kei truck pictured, which gets in the neighborhood of 30mpg.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Edit: revised guess Judging by the design of the driver door, I’m guessing this is a 92/94’s Honda Acty, which has a bed length of 6.3ft

      https://davidsclassiccars.com/honda/498957-03994-honda-kei-mini-truck-rare-color-rust-free-5-speed-no-reserve-auction.html

      According to wikipedia, that length is normal: “They generally have 1.8 m (6 ft) pickup beds with fold-down sides; dump and scissor-lift beds are also available, as are van bodies. The length limitation forces all of these models into a cab-forward design.”

    • paulsmith@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Kei trucks have a 6.5’x4.5’ bed. I own one, and they are awesome.

        • jeffhykin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Judging by the design of the driver door, I’m guessing this is a 90’s Sambar, which indeed does have a bed length of 6.5ft and a width of 4.5ft.

          Also, this is normal: “They generally have 1.8 m (6 ft) pickup beds with fold-down sides; dump and scissor-lift beds are also available, as are van bodies. The length limitation forces all of these models into a cab-forward design.”

          • mean_bean279@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            11 months ago

            The sanbar has a horizontal door handle, not a vertical door handle.

            IF (and again, based on the wheel in the bed of that truck I’m saying it’s sub 5ft in length) that bed was 6ft that also means it’s not the same size. Which still means that information in the post is inaccurate.

            Kei trucks are limited to a maximum length of 3.4 m (134 in), a maximum width of 1.48 m (58 in). At a maximum length it would be half the size of the Silverado, which is definitely isn’t. A Silverado with the crew cab and 5.5ft bed is 242in in length and 81 inches in width.

            • jeffhykin@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Ah You’re right, the window design is also straight cross the bottom rather than curved. My new guess is a Honda Acty, which is only 6.3ft. Ill update the comments

              And to be fair I upvoted your comment as I agreed it looked more like a 4.5ft bed. But then I looked it up.

              I don’t really understand the comment about the Silvarado. Are you saying a silvarado has a bed longer than 6.5ft?

              • mean_bean279@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                11 months ago

                The Silverado is my scale. That’s why I mention its size.

                The Suzuki Carry, which has a tire size of 145/70r12. That’s a diameter of 20 inches. The tire looks to be about 3x the bed length of the Kei Truck. I think it’s closer to 2.75xs the tire, but at 3x it’s still 5ft.

                I’m mentioning sizes of things for scale. It provides us with a way of identifying the potential length.

      • Enk1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Not every Kei truck has the same specs. Kei truck refers to a number of different brands of truck and most offer different length beds. This is NOT a 6.5 foot long bed. The Chevy has a 5.5 foot bed. Put a ruler up to both and you’ll see the Kei truck bed is shorter.

        Edit: down voted for stating facts about Kei trucks. This is definitely a place for reasonable discussion.

    • Robcia1220@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I always see this comparison. These are very different types of vehicles. I’m happy there are other people out there who realize this.

      I feel like that Kei truck is more comparable to a 1000cc side by side. I don’t mean that as a bad thing. But I think their main uses are much more similar.

  • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    11 months ago

    When my little 4-cylinder truck wore out in 2021, I looked so hard for one of the little kei trucks. But all of the ones I could find were $20k, or they were $15k and needed a lot of work to be driveable. And none of them were within 200 miles of my location.

    I ended up with a used base-model F150 which only cost me $12k. It had 81k miles on it. As near as I can figure out, it started life as a rental truck for a hardware store called “Menards”. It has an 8ft bed, no carpet, no power locks, no power windows, no back seat, no touchscreen, and no color LCD screen in the gauge cluster. I use this truck for a small farm that my wife and I run, so it doesn’t get driven every day.

    Im still looking for a kei truck, though.

    • tty5@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Try carused.jp - they’ll find you a truck matching your requirements, arrange shipping and even customs.

      I recommend Suzuki Carry da52t 4x4 - you should be able to get a low mileage one for 5-6k all in.

      • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The Suzuki Carry is the one I really wanted. I’ve a soft spot for tiny suzuki vehicles.

        Every time I mention not being able to find one in early 2022, people come along to show me where I can get one now. The issue was, I couldn’t find one when I needed it.

        • tty5@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          If you still want one as indicated in the comment I responded to contact carused with what you want and they’ll notify you when it’s available

      • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        It was half the price of the next cheapest truck on the lot, and the next cheapest truck had twice the miles. But the next cheapest truck had all the whiz-bang fancy electronics, instead of being four wheels and a truck bed.

  • mutch@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    11 months ago

    Towing capacity, payload weight, carrying 3 more people, bed width, drivetrain? I think many trucks are way too big, and it’s silly to own a big work truck if you just use it to go to the grocery store but it’s really about so much more than bed size.

    • jimbo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Let’s be honest, most people with trucks that large rarely have passengers, rarely even approach the payload for the bed, and they never tow anything.

      • mutch@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah sure but I guess my point was that it’s a false equivalency. The truck on the right is massively more capable than the one on the left. I certainly don’t need one that big and most people don’t.

    • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah it’s about

      BIG TRUCK MAKE ME FEEL LIKE MAN. MAKE ME FEEL LIKE BIG BOY. LOOK ME DRIVE BIG VEHICLE SO YOU KNOW I’M IMPORTANT.

      LOOK AT ME!!!

      • cannache@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Legit I know guys that don’t even need one for work or anything, just get one for ego

      • mutch@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Maybe sometimes, but it’s also just a massively more capable vehicle. Sometimes the simplest answer is the truth.

        • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s really not.

          It’s about getting past emission standards and pandering to people who don’t understand enough is enough.

          They’re also hazards as the increased hood length and height create massive blind spots that have caused a rise in collisions and deaths.

          • mutch@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think both are true. The truck on the right is super capable, and also dangerous, inefficient, unnecessary for most people.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      carrying 3 more people

      As a payload.

      I’m not sure if you can fill it to load capacity even with lead bricks.

      Or if you want to carry people, you can use this: . For carrying not people you can remove seats. It’s even roughly same size.

        • uis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Bless your city. I know one city in Belgorod Oblast that still 100% microbuses.

      • mutch@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        In addition to the payload. Payload goes in the back! Fill it with stones then put five men in it to shovel the stones. You’d need two vans for the same purpose. And if it’s roughly the same size, what’s the problem? Vans like that can be nice too, we see lots of Ford transits here in the states for tradesmen. Similar use case to what you’re describing.

      • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        But a van and a truck are used for different things. Your not going to see a van around the farm for example because it just isn’t that useful for farm work. Just like your not going to see a truck out delivering packages because it just isn’t the useful for that use case. Many of these vehicles have the exact same frame and engion just with a different body on top for whatever best fits the use case.

    • tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      the larger one does do more:

      • Pick up 3 extra people
      • Can roll down the back window to let long planks of wood through

      These are the only extra advantages I can see, and they are seldom use cases at best.

      Fine, if you’re a contractor driving your workers to/from work whilst carrying all the equipment, on a daily basis, such a truck is very useful.

      But how many people who drive these do that?

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            On the other side based on what I hear about american obesety, it can carry only 3 asses: one for each row including bed.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        • Pick up 20 extra people
        • Or pick up 30 extra people if some of them can stay
        • Have enclosed trunk(you still can leave doors in the back open)
        • Lower bed
        • Can carry bigger payloads
      • The Menemen!@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        The 3 extra people is a valid reason to not want the smaller truck. Still wouldn’t need to be so monstrous.

  • TheaoneAndOnly27@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    I really like my 2003 Ford ranger. It’s small, but can still haul enough that it works perfectly fine for when I’m picking up dirt for my garden. But also it’s definitely not fuel efficient in the way that I’d want it to be. I wish they made something that size but newer.

    • GospelofJohnny@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      2002 Tundra here. It is definitely the perfect size for a truck. However, now that it’s pretty old and beat up, and I’ve moved into a denser city, I think it’s getting time for something new :(

    • mean_bean279@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve been thinking a good business idea would be to make “restomod” Rangers. With luxury interiors and new engines with more fuel efficient setups. People do want them, but the chicken tax and CAFE makes it so Americans have no choice in trucks.

      • jecht360@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s sad to say, but that generation of Ford Ranger is way smaller than trucks from the last decade.

        • cmbabul@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’ve never really been a truck guy, I also hate driving large vehicles in general and both preferences predate both my knowledge and even belief in climate change(I was raised as an evangelical in the south).

          If there was something like a Ranger or an S10 from the mid-late 90s with an electric motor I’d be all over it, fuck put out an electric El Camino and I’d rip my sleeves off on the way to the dealership

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

            There’s kits to convert the old Rangers to electric I think and there was an electric model from the 90s sold only to Ford employees. You’re definitely going to drop a ton on batteries though if you were trying to convert one yourself

      • TheaoneAndOnly27@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Man, I tried finding one of those cool websites where you can put like two cars together to compare their size. But it doesn’t have the year of my ranger. But yeah, they’re smaller than the new trucks by a lot. And they weigh about half as much. If you can get one of the older Toyota’s or like a cool little Datsun, they’re a little bit smaller, but really kind of in the mid 2000s was when trucks really started blowing up in size and absurdity.

    • Opafi@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I really like my two-and-a-half-tonnes death machine. It’s small, but can still haul enough that it works perfectly fine for when I need to dispose bodies that I just ran over. But also it’s definitely not fuel efficient in the way that I’d want it to be. I wish they made something that size but newer.

      • TheaoneAndOnly27@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        My ranger is 3200 pounds.

        Edit: Just checked cuz I was curious, and that is only 300 lb more than the Tesla model 3. Your comment felt rude and unnecessarily aggressive. I hope you’re having a good night.

  • jaschen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    No clue why people buy kei cars from Japan when they can pick up the left hand drive version of the kei cars from Taiwan.