One of them is a tool, another one is driven by a tool.
Erin OâToole nods in agreement
is driven by a fool.
The worst part with all these big trucks is the bed is significantly higher requiring much more effort to actually put anything in.
You're not only looking like a dumbass you actually are one.
Honestly this. I had one of these that replaced my old Dodge van at work, and I hated it because all my equipment was much more of a pain in the ass to get in and out.
That's something i often wonder--how do they manage to load stuff in/out? I'll always remember a woodshop class i took and someone asked me to help lift a chicken coop they built into their truck. It was heavy af to begin with but the extra height to put it into his big/tall truck made it a much more difficult task. It's just stupid, really--no benefit i can see and further drawbacks seem inevitable ÂŻ\_(ă)_/ÂŻ
Forklift on one end, idiocy on another
The comparison is kinda unfair. The big truck has a wider bed, bigger tires and more power. It also seats more people. So it is able to get more load through more difficult terrain. However we can be quite sure it won't be used in that way.
I've never seen one with wear and tear and/or dirt that would indicate difficult terrain. Those only leave the city in advertisements.
Are you around forestry, oil drilling, or similar sites? Obv most are fleet stock simple (with decent tires), but the 4 door, white truck with a V8 is ubiquitous when you need 4 grouchy dudes to effectively live out of it for a whole day, plus all their equipment and food. It's hilarious how much shit these trucks hold and get anywhere with a 2 track
The tonneau cover is usually there because A) they do mostly highway mikes and want the improved mileage resulting from reduced drag, and B) they rarely use the bed, as those covers are a PITA unless you only remove it once in a great while.
I live in Central America where its mostly little trucks owned by workers, and they often drive on mud roads and hard terrain. The only people with trucks like the black one in the picture are US expats with ...particular political leanings.
that only happens when actual working people buy it used, maybe a decade down the line, to do actual work.
Lol that almost done like a chindogu ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChindĹgu )
In a way I almost prefer that to the blatant posers I see driving around with huge lifts and offroad tires looking spotless in our muddy season out here. I was at the combo laundromat/carwash the other day watching one of them wash an already clean truck while I was thinking about the massive mud puddle I'd be driving through to get home.
My brother in law has a truck like the one on the right. That backseat area is huge. You could stop and have a picnic back there during a road trip.
I can't imagine owing it. It looks dumb to me and it's far too big for normal use. But he's a cross country hauler, so it's not a big truck to him.
And they have three kids, so I doubt he gives af about pp showmanship.
Yeah.
Sure, most people with a big truck don't need one.
That said, the capabilities of the bigger truck far exceed that of the Suzuki.
The majority of trucks i see are driven by a guy in a perfectly clean dress shirt, carries a fancy bag for papers and they work an office job. Their justification is often something along a couple potholes on their rural road just outside of town (so they dont have to pay as much property taxes to fit potholes). They moved a fridge once for their kid 5 years ago so that paid for the truck in their mind.
The majority of these things are ego boosts. Hence why they tailgate, rollcoal, have loud exhausts and can be covered in sexist/racist/religious stickers. Its all about look at me for most of these trucks.
How did society even function without these big ass trucks. They are so capable and essenti.
The one on the left is used by people who need to carry things. The one of the right is used by losers.
Left one carries stuff, right one carries fragile egoes
What about people who need extra room for a child's car seat (they're huge nowadays) and also need to carry stuff the way a truck does?
Edit: I live out in the country and I'm in need of a pickup for carrying loads of stuff. Putting it in the back of my Ford Edge is highly inconvenient as it doesn't fit in one load and messed up the interior (the sides of the trunk are scratched to hell now.
And my point was simply that there are entirely legitimate uses for a pickup truck. 98% of people don't have a legitimate use case, but that didn't mean no one does.
You live out in the country, you clearly didn't grow up in the country.
I grew up in the country, we had a truck with a full sized bed and a bench. You put the baby seat in the middle of the bench, strap it down like you do in the car and a lap belt and you pick up your chicken feed with your kid in the truck. Ain't rocket science here and you don't need to have a crew cab and a worthless short bed to do things out there.
Shit dude, if you're worried about scratches to your vehicle, maybe you should move back to the suburbs.
A tax on vehicle axle weight proportional to the damage done to roads (which goes up exponentially with weight).
The pp size is inversely proportional to the truck size.
that's why I ride a bike.
I could get away with a unicycle if it weren't for my MASSIVE SCHLONG requiring support and it's easier that way than getting two unis.
I prefer walking, and use a bicycle when it's possible. So sadly doesn't check out.
Bicycle size isn't zero, you you pp size isn't infinity. It does check out.
That's a real man's truck. Air conditioned, soft suspension, big boi so scary big truck don't scare, brightest lights because corners scary, 4 seats cos wife is scary, big tyres because tools are scary, big tank because human interaction is scary.
The thought of someone getting a 4 seater truck purely because they are so terrified of their own wife that he only feels safe when she is in the back seat of a car
That's what it's like to drive a Ford F150
NotJustBikes has a great spoof of this
I drove pickup trucks for years. Most people probably don't realize is how much higher the operating cost is compared to smaller vehicles, even if they know that it's generally higher. The first hybrid I bought was a Prius about a decade ago and when I finally looked at the difference in the cost of fuel and maintenance, it was not insignificant.
There's plenty of legit reasons to need a pickup but outside of that, you're just throwing your money away. Nowadays our Sienna Hybrid minivan has a hitch receiver on it so I can hook the trailer up to it if I need to haul something big. I haven't needed a truck in a long time.
I think youâre making up crap. Or at least youâre comparing an old vehicle to a new one.
My truck costs the exact same to maintain as all of the other vehicles Iâve owned. Gas usage is worse than a Prius, but pretty much inline with most SUV.
Thereâs really not anything thatâs materially more expensive to maintain in a truck than any other car.
You can think whatevever you want. A conventional gas job requires 2 to 3 oil changes to every 1 on a hybrid, depending on if you're changing it every 3k or 5k miles. Plugs and wires, brake pads, coolant, etc. also require more frequent replacement on conventional vehicles. I would know and I've got the financial records to back it up.
If you're worried about making the cab bigger and comfier, you don't need a truck.
There are no arguments to this and no one has a point against me here. If cab space is the concern, you need a minivan or SUV.
Blanket statement with impunity incoming. Combining these vehicles is a bad idea. For safety and efficiency. If you think this is a good idea in any possible way, you're simply incorrect.
You're just buying an SUV with a truck bed attached because your little balls say you want a "manly" vehicle.
You wouldn't put a hitch on a moped. Don't put a bed on a SUV.
Extending the length of a vehicle past the point where a hitch makes it longer than a parking space should be a "first offense your company is due down immediately" kind of offense first of all. The amount of these hitches blocking sidewalks and handicap accessibility spaces is absolutely bonkers.
Why don't we have a president type of office that doesn't mess with politics or international affairs, they just have nationwide power for common sense stuff like banning pickups simply being used as passenger vehicles, curbing attempts to overgrow parking spaces, and probably a bunch of other stuff too.
Also, I have a great idea for a whole new tax. :)
Let's make an industry out of dining these people to the point where only businesses use trucks. Regular people can rent them easily enough to move between apartments or what have you, but these should never have been general use daily drivers.
Let's just crush and compact the entire pickup truck industry to an incredibly tiny fraction of what it is now.
You wouldnât put a hitch on a moped
My dude, I put a hitch on a scooter. My little trailer kicks ass. Well, it did before it was stolen, but that's besides the point.
Sorry that your ass-kicking little trailer was stolen. đ
It might still, just not for you
Trailers are great! You can tow with minivans, cars, suvs and trucks. Trailers typically are easier to load, have more capacity and can be a lot longer than a truck bed.
Contractors get most of their building supplies delivered by flat bed trucks anyways.
You are definitely wrong, there is a market for it. Itâs clearly not as big as it currently is, but there are absolutely people that families and work some sort of construction or farming job where a truck is necessary, and carrying more than 3 people comfortably is also necessary. And two vehicles is also not feasible.
I mean, fuck, I own a bar and need a pickup truck simply because how else am I gonna return 250 empty cases of beer to recycling? I ain't putting that smell in an enclosed van and if I got an open trailer, I'd need a truck to tow it anyways. (I actually do have a van, I use it in winter and rainy days for picking up full beer cases, doesn't have near the weight capacity of the truck although using the same motor and getting similar mileage)
In addition, suvs are also unnecessary and unneeded.
You want a cross country vehicle? Get a jeep or a Suzuki samurai or a Unimog. You want to flaunt your wealth and show everyone how big you are on the road? Buy a tram company and lobby your city to install it. If you can't do that, you're not wealthy enough and have no right to flex.
I agree about SUVs actually, but that's a different argument. That one is more opinionated, whereas I can't even fathom this ones being arguable.
Good old jeeps. Same mileage as a pickup truck with no load capacity.
When I had to buy a truck I didn't really care that the A/C and radio didn't work. I didn't care that the interior was stained and uncomfortable. I didn't care that the ride was rough and noisy. I didn't even care that much that it got bad gas mileage, as I wouldn't be driving it much.
I needed a truck for truck stuff. I'm not gonna buy a truck with a leather interior when I'm normally covered in dirt when I'm using it. I don't need it to look big and manly because I just need it to haul garbage and tow livestock trailers. And I definitely don't want to pay $70,000 for something I'm going to use it offroad.
Stating in your argument "there are no arguments to this" highlights up front how close-minded you are to discussion on the subject. It's perfectly acceptable to discuss things you strongly believe in while still allowing yourself to be open-minded about opposing views. In fact, I would say it is required for honest discourse to occur.
In my personal experience, I have one of these vehicles with a comfortable and spacious cab. It allows me to have one vehicle for all the tasks that come with a sheep and pig farm, and also allows us to transport our large family comfortably to and fro. I would like my family to be comfortable while riding in our vehicle, which is equally able to perform various work functions related to farming and transport a family. Why would we purchase and maintain two separate vehicles for these purposes when a single option exists?
Corn, wheat, and other farmers have separate vehicles to accomplish the tasks necessary for their farms, e.g. a combine harvester, seeder, iriggator, etc. I know they also have large spacious trucks as well, but my point is that it is feasible to expect an agricultural business owner, or any buisness owner, to have different commercial equipment for different tasks related to their industry. Besides, whereas all the people who need pickups for their business have them, not all pickup owners need their vehicles for business. I see many, many large pickups parked in residential areas of the city and around the suburbs. The closest most of those people get to agribusiness is going to the grocery store. That's the second point, if you don't absolutely need a large truck for business, you shouldn't use one for your everyday driver. Imagine if big rigs were affordable for most everyone and people used them for daily driving.
While I absolutely despise the rise of dumbass suburban cowboys, making it to require a business to own one is kind of stupid. I mean growing up in farm land, you do often need a truck to do things like grab manure or lime, picking up feed, or the occasional carcass.
You could tax based on vehicle weight and vehicle type instead of a stupid, outdated gas tax and that could actually put a curb on this type of dumbass penis extender behavior. Maybe lesson it depending on where you're registering it, farmland zoned and registered under gets less tax but I honestly think that unless you fix the stupid bro country, wanna be cowboy culture that leads to this suburban cowboy dumbfuckery, you're honestly not going to make much of a dent even with taxes.
We had a quad cab Nissan Navarra (Frontier) working forestry. Four guys in the cab. Saws, petrol, oil, gear, tools, wire and fence posts in the bed. Fantastic vehicle, got everywhere. Could haul serious weight when needed. It was a tool that became a battered jalopy. Weâd leave it in the yard every night. Iâd take the train home, my mate cycled and the other two guys somehow squeezed into a Smart car as they shared a lift. We were all insured to drive it on public roads 24/7 but none of us saw the point. Great vehicle in its arena but a hindrance and inconvenience outside of it.
While I would be in favor of making vehicle sizes regulated we already have that but thanks to the requirement of dealerships and the lobbying from the big 3 tmcars here in America have minimum sizes rather than maximum sizes so if anything I believe it to be more ideal to break regulations so cheap affordable cars can finally be legal to build, sell and import
It's a hatch back with a strapon.
For manly men.
This is stupid. Why should a blue collar worker with a family have to buy and drive two different vehicles just because of your personal preferences. Building two vehicles is no doubt worse for the planet than making one slightly less efficient vehicle. This is especially true if we are talking about EVs which are the future of trucks this size.
The bed on the left probably gets used more.
But the one on the left wouldn't pass US fuel economy standards, which are based on vehicle footprint since 2012.
That's the reason the Ranger etc were discontinued for a while, and when they returned were bigger than the old F-150s.
It's so the reason the small cargo vans (Nissan NV200, Ford Transit Connect, and Ram Promaster City) were all discontinued in the last 2 years. CAFE standards increase over time, and it's easier to just make bigger cars.
Its also in my opinion, a complete failure of the EPA and a disconnect from what it's true goals should be. The marketing trends show that bigger vehicles (which have more leneient standards and can guzzle more fuel) have been sold more and more since these standards, all to the benefit of oil companies selling gas to fill the bigger tanks and the benefit of auto makers enjoying higher price margins on bigger vehicles. Once again the hand of capitalism and the "free market" prioritizing profits over everything.
Everyone blames EPA while forgetting two things.
The manufacturers chose to do this; no regulations prevent them from making a vehicle like the one on the left that meets the new standards. They're just evading the standards.
Politicians of all walks allow regulatory capture, so almost all regulations are influenced by the people that should be regulated, making them useless or easy to evade.
Its also in my opinion, a complete failure of the EPA and a disconnect from what itâs true goals should be. ... Once again the hand of capitalism and the âfree marketâ prioritizing profits over everything.
I see a contradiction here.
Somebody designed a regulation without using their brain (or using to wrong ends), but apparently capitalism is to blame.
But you can still legally buy older Kei trucks in the U.S.
And they're affordable.
https://boekiusa.com/inventory/new-jersey/paterson/all-vehicles/available
Not too many dealers specialize though.
But the one on the left wouldnât pass US fuel economy standards, which are based on vehicle footprint since 2012.
Bigger cars consume more fuel.
Yes, but the regulation is a "amount of fuel per weight of vehicle". In absolute terms it's more.
It's like when you're buying produce. $10 for 10 strawberries ($1.00 per berry) and $15 for 20 strawberries ($0.75 per berry). The $15 option is "only" $0.75 per berry, but it's also just more money in total.
A lot of people who buy trucks these days just need something that can tow a travel trailer or a boat to their favorite camp site a few times a year. It's not that they need a truck on a day to day basis, but they might need the towing capability on occasion. That's why these trucks are a weird combination of luxury sedan (with their leather seats and high end interiors) and pickup truck. Most of the time they use it like a regular car, but sometimes they might need the towing capability.
If itâs a âfew times a yearâ situation that really seems better suited to renting.
Rental companies, at least in America, have policies against using their vehicles to tow things.
In addition the truck in front has to be imported to the US and there's weird regulations about purchasing them so you can only buy used. As far as I know you can't import a new model. If a car is newer than 25 years old it can not be imported unless it meets the requirements of US Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/importing-vehicle/importation-and-certification-faqs
Part of the issue there is that for a large number of people the 'few times a year' are major holidays when everybody else wants to tow their house-sized RV and boat to the lake for a day or two. The rental fleet just isn't big enough to service the surge demand.
Or maybe they've got the money
Pff my fckn subi can do that and fit in a standard car park
Your Subi wouldn't be able to pull some of these American travel trailers. Many of them are absolutely massive, they're like a luxury condo on wheels.
We have no sense of reasonable proportion here in the US. Everything must be unnecessarily large and unwieldy, gaudy and exorbitant. Bigger is always better here in the good 'ol US of A.
Literally planning to buy a truck for when I need it and I'd still make it a daily driver if needed.
Functional design is the only proper design.
One is a work tool and for men, the other one a toy and for little boys.
The one on the right is an âEmotional support vehicleâ.
The one of the left is awesome
Thatâs a great sentence⌠well done. Itâs really tickled me.
If it's an actual work truck, that backseat is filled with tools that you can't have out on the bed. I do doubt it's a work truck though.
Hence why most smart labourers and contractors use a cargo van. No pesky seats blocking access and taking up space. Lots of customizeable room in the back for storage and shelves. Tall vans you can even walk inside and use a workbench. Many vans also have a decent towing capacity. Bed height is typically lower on a van, making heavier items easier to load. A lot of the same items people typically fit in truck beds can fit in the back of the van with the added benefits of being out of sight of thieves, being protected from weather and dirt, possibly even being heated or cooled if required.
Stop using logic, can't you see how great muh cyber truk is?!Âżâ˝
Cargo van: UAZ Loaf
It's not like the beds are the same size. Length sure, but don't you know that girth is what mattera for your dick replacements?
Not including the wheel well the Isuzu should be about 47 in. The F-150 is about 42. Including the wheel well it's like 50 on the Isuzu and 52 on the F-150. The Isuzu will have more usable bed space and the wheel wells don't go up very far so they're pretty usable going like 2 inches up.
Sure, sure, but that ruins the joke.
But one of these is actually using their truck bed.
The only thing I can say in favor of the one on the right is carrying capacity (weight). I associate with equestrians, and hauling a horse (1000-1500 lbs each) in a trailer (4-13k lbs, depending) (I know the truck isn't holding it all, but it has to pull and stop it). The truck needs the engine power and torque to do that, while at the same time have enough weight and tire contact to stop with all that extra weight.
Working construction type things, and picking up builder materials? Hands down the one on the left. Hauling anything beyond the bed of the truck? Absolutely the one on the right.
In Europe we just haul trailers (even horse trailers) with normal cars, of course with a stronger engine for special uses like horses but even a VW Golf is allowed to pull up to 1800 kg (= can pull a bit more than that).
I bet most US-americans with a truck aren't even using their truck bed often - likely rarely enough for a normal car + trailer to be way more practical - and also much more efficient, but ig efficiency barely matters with your fuel prices. To stick with the VW Golf example: a modern VW Golf needs 4/4.5/5 l per 100 km (city/combined/highway), a ford F-150 needs 10.7/12.4/14.7 l per 100 km.
Yeah 100% most people with trucks are for vanity. It makes them feel cool. It's also a status symbol, because right now the price of trucks like that start at $70k. We have an O2 model Ford f350, and if we wanted to replace it with an "equivalent" model of this year we'd be out $95k.
We use our truck almost 100% for hauling horses. I occasionally have to drive it just to the doctor or something because my wife usually has the car at work. (I work from home).
Honestly, the price and overall size of these trucks is insane, and it bugs us to no end. The only reason the price is this high is because the manufacturers know these idiots need to show their "status".
Interesting, I knew you guys used those can things with the horse right behind you, or the smaller trailers which are lighter. I didn't know you got upgraded motors. Do you also get bigger tires and brakes with that upgrade?
Something very few people think to consider here isn't whether or not you can pull the thing, but whether or not they can stop it.
300 lb tongue weight on that golf. One horse in a one horse trailer is really fucking pushing it, 4 is out of the question
If I had to buy a pickup truck I'd buy a Suzuki Carry and call it a day
No no, OP, you see, how will I transport four fully grown corn-fed american patriots around?
A normal car?
No, I need to transport these four fully grown corn-fed american patriots while also transporting a bunch of material that I can't have in the cab of my car.
A trailer?
Don't be ridiculous, it's too heavy, a normal car couldn't tow that.
A slightly better car?
No, that's insane, it's much too heavy, and besides, I need to transport three metric tons of stuff, all outside of my vehicle, which means I need a trailer and I can't keep any of it in the back of my normal car.
A beefy cargo van, with a covered cabin, and a divider?
No, see, you simply don't understand, all my loads need to be uncovered. I'm transporting, uhh, loose gasoline? Not in a barrel, just loose in the bed, and 400 2x4s, and, uhh, gravel. I don't want a semi, because you need to be licensed for that and I would rather pay more to have a personal vehicle which is capable of all of this at once rather than pay for a delivery. I also need good ground clearance, because I'm going into the unpaved american wilderness with these large uncovered loads. I'm not antisocial, I just need to transport this to my off grid homesteading compound in the middle of nowhere, with my four platonic corn-fed american patriot roommates, or my fifteen sons and daughters which I've already pledged to my friends' other fifteen sons and daughters. How do I pay for all this? It's all super cheap, I swear, I'm just an honest normal rural farmer, and I work a normal job as a military defense contractor, or running IT for some wing of some megacorporation, or maybe I just have inherited money. Everyone wants to be me, but I'm the only person who's allowed to use this truck and say it's totally acceptable because this is a totally legitimate use and I'm just exercising my normal freedoms.
This is all normal, and fine.
But only one of them won't have you seated in direct eyeline of all the super-high beams that everyone else is driving.
You can always install your own super-high beams on the small one and then you don't have to drive around in a car that shouts tiny pp.
just install a military grade laser
I love the little guy, but your legs are also the crumple zone.
But only one of these vehicles makes you feel like a big boy.
When you can barely fit into vehicle, it makes you feel giant.
ironically when i'm on my bike on a raised bike path next to a road i feel more powerful than people in cars, simply because my head is significantly above them. Also helps that i'm almost standing up, whilst people in a car are generally somewhat reclined.
Testicular cancer is not a game
two trucks by lemon demon???????
The small truck will have very little towing capacity due to its low weight. While many owners of these size trucks don't tow anything with them, they do serve a necessary purpose beyond bed size. Boats, horses, trailers full of gravel, etc require much heavier vehicles when towing for safety.
You absolutely don't need anything this big to tow most of that stuff, most farmers I know do fine with a ute half as tall. The only case I can think of where one of these gigantic US-sized SUVs could be necessary is with an equally gigantic caravan.
Yes, a tiny 15 HP tractor from the 1950âs can tow a big trailer around a farm no problem. What it canât do is tow it at much more than 2 mph. Owners of these trucks can tow a 20 foot boat down the freeway at 80 mph. Now whether or not they use them for loads like that (they rarely do) is another issue.
Almost none of you have the slightest clue what you're blathering about.
fuck both of them anyway
I mean I'm all for hating cars, but why the small one? That one seems reasonable at least.
It's all about pulling. The big one is rated to pull a boat, a big boat, and the little one isn't. The big one implies you have other toys, like jet skis or a boat or an RV.
Little guy.... your just hauling what you can fit in back.
Sure, the big trucks can tow. But that falls apart when you look at any various study about truck owners. Only a small fraction use the bed, towing, etc.
You don't need a big vehicle to tow. You just need a good engine.
In Europe, we're towing just fine. Our biggest cars are half the size of this monster. It wouldn't even fit on our streets, literally.
Thanks for the Land Rover Range Rovers, Audi Q5s, and BMW X3s.
And one can only do 45 and carry 800 lbs at best. The other a couple thousand, tow a large trailer at 70 easily.
