The whole chart is rather fascinating and eye opening: Vehicle visibility
Astounding. Hummer H2 beating the Sierra by 3m is incredible. A truck designed almost exclusively to express how selfish you are and it has better viability.
This chart is eye-opening…I always thought Hummers were made by…Hummer…
GM marketing. They purchased the hummer brand from AM General. OG Hummer (later renamed H1) was based on AM General’s military Humvee design, but released to the civilian market. H2 and H3 were designed by GM for mass marketing. Can be seen in the price. H1 nearly 10x more than H2 and H3.
Also, the H1 was 10x better for what it was designed for than the H2 and H3.
The H1 was not designed for commuting to work.
I’m not sure what it was designed for. It doesn’t have a lot of space for hauling compared to its size. It’s not great for offroading. It’s a plastic money extraction machine.
The original was designed to play military at home.it was not a pickup truck or a dedicated and modded offroad machine, and yes it was a money pit. But it was perfect for pretending with a civilian version of the vehicle manufacturrd on the same line as the real thing.
H2 and H3 models were just mediocre rebranded SUVs with hints of the original hummer body lines.
Oh, neat. Thanks for all the information
The H2 was just a Tahoe with a different body on it.
Now my mind is really blown. I’m aware of this happening, just not with the H2
Thanks, embedding:
An articulated quarry hauler is barely worse than a pick-up truck
‘murca
I’d be curious to see that chart for a Toyota Yaris. I drove one for a few years and it was almost unnerving how little hood it had.
Same here. Going from a 1990 VW Passat to a 2009 Yaris was wild.
I will gladly trade my SUV in for a gently used M1
Only 20 gallons to the mile, not bad
Absolutely nobody will cut you off in traffic, though. At least nobody who wants to see the next sunrise…
what if the M1 doesn’t have a touch screen though
good
touchscreens should be banned from vehiclesIt actually does, but it’s a hundred times more useful. It helps make things go boom.
Touch targeting
This is actually a good point. And here’s a video discussing the issue.
This is misleading because being higher up you can see much better further ahead, and over obstacles and barriers. Your special awareness is much better at distances that are relevant for avoiding collisions. If something is 1.5m away its too late anyway.
The angle is also incorrect because they are putting the eyes of the driver straight in line with the hood, which is not how its been in any vehicle I’ve ever driven, the head should be higher or further forward.
The origin of the line is at head height…
Also these vehicles gain in distant visibility at the expense of everyone else on the road, blocking their views.
Also, an astounding proportion of fatal pedestrian collisions happen at low-speed, close to home where these sightlines explicitly matter.
The best way to avoid getting into an accident is to see it long before you get there. But situational awareness is not something the vast majority of drivers actually practice or have…
You don’t want to see “over” obstacles close to your vehicle when said obstacles are in fact human beings standing in front of your car.
At parking lot speeds, 1.5 meters is also not “too late,” and it certainly isn’t when you are at a standstill but need to determine if it is safe to move or if there is a small person in front of your vehicle, i.e. in the school pickup line, or in a parking lot, or your own driveway.
Ooo ooo we can do it like buses do. We’ll put a bar on the front that folds out. 3 year olds totally know what that is right? They’ll just get out of the way!
(/s)
You need one with a hand on the end, and the motor that drives it is strong enough to pimp slap people out of the way.
I have conservative family members who deliberately go for the biggest SUV with the lowest gas mileage available just to “stick it to the government.” If the government told them that they couldn’t drive a small car, they’d be out there shopping for a small car. It’s incredibly childish.
Yeah, a lot of stupid culture war crap is now tied up into the car your own.
If people actually prioritized performance, handling, visability, cost to drive, and cabin features, then a LOT of people would probably be better off with a sedan.
If you don’t need the space, you can get so much more bang for your buck with a smaller car. The $10k more you spend on the larger form factor could go toward a nicer power train and cabin luxury features.
Most other countries I’ve been to, all the trades use these, and seem to have no problem getting projects done.
Let’s ignore the lack of crush zones, air bags, seat belts, re-enforced door panels and cabin pillars, for a moment. (The lack of any safety features is why they are mostly illegal to operate on roads in the US.)
How far do you think that roller skate could pull my empty 24,000lbs tandem axle tilt bed trailer? Or even my 4000lbs trailer? On a highway at highway speeds.
Fair point. Though if they weren’t needing to go up against oversized trucks, it wouldn’t be as much of an issue.
Japanese Kei trucks are pretty rad, but they don’t fly with US highway safety regulations. They’re meant for slower roads / slower collisions speeds.
That said, most American trucks do not need to be remotely as big as they are.
Good point.
Not to mention longer term cost of maintenance and insurance.
“15 minutes could save you
15% or more100% on car insurance”(by leaving the scene of the accident as rapidly as possible. ‘Geico’? No no, ‘Guy, Go’.)
Ya know it probably says something that the concept of “cabin luxury features” made we want to burn the inside of a car. Ill stick to my lack of cupholders in my 30 year old car thanks, but seriously when I see the interior of modern cars they make me want to rip into them with wire cutters. Bunch of useless crap like lane assist, cruise control, and addaptive road assist, powered stearing is the only luxury I need.
Fun fact I am only 24, I just am tech literate in the way that causes me to think 90% of technology is worthless crap that shouldve never been created and needs to be recycled.
Cruise control is hardly luxury, most cars have had it for a while
I love cruise control. Get on the highway, set it and go. Ideally find someone driving the same direction and speed, and follow along behing them. No more stressing that I’m going to get a speeding ticket.
Im mostly joking that most of the cars ive owned havent had cruise control. Gotta love old base model jeeps.
True. I’m mostly saying that you could probably take that cash and upgrade to a nicer car that isn’t covered in creaking injection molded plastic inside, or something with nicer seats and upholstery.
AKA decent materials, and not the cheap garbage you get on a base model American SUV.
I get that its just the concept disgusts me, but then again my Scottish ancestors would rise from the dead and kill me for wasting money on such superfluous things. Profligacy is quite literally killing the planet, ya aint gonna catch me wasting money on stupid pointless shit too often. My grandmother though aint bound by such ancestral limits and it annoys me.
I’m almost 40 and a lot of my cars in my teens and 20s were from the '80s and '90s. Almost everything I’ve owned has had at least a rudimentary cruise control although there are some ('80s Bronco II, '95 Miata, early '90s 240sx, 99 Impreza Wagon) where it was broken or I just never used it.
All that said, I LOVE the radar controlled cruise control on my current vehicle. I’ve used it for at least 20,000 miles of driving at this point. Interstate, highway, city, you name it… Pretty much any time I want to maintain a steady speed over 28 and there’s not a lot of stop and go traffic. I hate thinking about life without it now (and I hate using standard cruise control without radar)!
I’m with you. I want my car to have three pedals, a steering wheel, and a stick. Air conditioning, heat, and one cigarette lighter socket. That’s it.
Or a hatchback or a station wagon…
Oops, nobody makes station wagons anymore. We stopped making them because, uh, people stopped buying them. Yeah, that’s the ticket. People stopped buying them because we stopped making them.
The Americans don’t, but Volvo, Benz, Audi still do.
Toddler core behaviour
I had a student get just the worst giant diesel truck that was constantly breaking down so she could “stick it to the libs”.
Girl was 18. Future of the nation?
Yeah, at some point we’re going to have to crank up gas prices
budgeting and foregoing food to own the libs
Ironic, considering how much gasoline is taxed.
Barely at all?
It depends on where, but it can be quite a bit. Typically goes towards road maintenance and whatnot.
They’ve been getting confused after Elon turned into a giant-ass bigot, so now some of them are considering Tesla.
GOP judge declaring NHTSA unconstitutional in 3… 2… 1…
Humans have quite literally invented cars that are better at killing people, especially children.
“I don’t want children to die in accidents,” say people as they drive huge masses of metal that might do just that.
Driving a truck and not wanting children to die in accidents are in-fact not in conflict with each other. Or are you implying that truck drivers do want them to die?
Driving a truck and not wanting children to die in accidents are in-fact not in conflict with each other.
Then design trucks which are not as deadly to pedestrians on impact.
Large vehicles are inherently going to be more dangerous to pedestrians than cars. If you make a truck the size of a car then it no longer functions in the role it was intented for. Why is everyone so focused on trucks anyway? The nose height on most vans is compareable and on semi trucks it double the height of a pickup yet nobody seems to be complaining about those.
The convenience of drivers is not more important than human lives.
Cars kill people every year. Trains and buses too. Ban those as well?
Thanks for the strawman, I can burn it for fuel when winter comes.
I see that you reference Sam Harris in a recent post. Thank you for making it clear that you’re not worth listening to, bye.
No, but it clearly isn’t important enough to them to influence their choice.
So you think people should not buy trucks because they might be in the 0.1% of truck drivers who end up killing a pedestrian with it? What about the people who have a legitimate use for the bed?
No, they shouldn’t because even in vehicle to vehicle collisions SUVs kill 4 times more people than cars. Source
The people that have a legitimate use for such trucks should be required to apply for a exception and/or have a CDL.
Because in fact almost no one actually needs those trucks. Source [1]
Most people can use a trailer or rent a truck for the 1-2 times per year they need it.[1] I work at a hardware store, specifically in the construction materials department. In 2 years of working there I had literally 1 person use their truck bed to haul a pallet of concrete bags, everyone else either used vans or a trailer. And just 2 weeks ago I had the first customer that used a pickup truck (Mercedes X-Class) to tow a 2.5t trailer to transport paving slabs.
So no, even trades people don’t need those trucks, so why the fuck should a normal “civilian” have those and be 4 times as likely to kill someone??
Why do little cars have to withstand a collision with a huge truck but trucks just get bigger and bigger? The new Hummer is over 9,000lbs (4,090 kg)
At 60 MPH the Hummer EV has the same kinetic energy as a 1993 Honda Civic Hatchback going 120mph.
Trying to imagine my old Civic doing that …… holy shit that engine is winding up, glowing red hot, and I probably needed rocket boosters!
Forced induction will get your old Civic to 120mph in a jiffy. 😆
The only 93 Civic that hit 120mph was falling out of a plane at 35000’.
Holy shit
wtf in Europe that thing couldn’t be driven with a regular class B drivers license
Commercial license requirements for full sized trucks over a certain size and weight would be an excellent solution. In addition to the increased effort and cost to get one, commercial licenses are way easier to lose.
It depends on the state, but it usually is. It’s just very high, like a gvwr of 26k lbs.
Thing is, a CDL covers a bunch of stuff you really don’t need to know for something smaller than that, like air brakes. That said, some kind of graduated licensing is called for, here.
Motorcycles, too, while we’re at it. It’s insane that you can go through MSF and then immediately buy a literbike.
In ny US state motorcycles have a special motorcycle license. Maybe that would be a good starting point for a large vehicle permit that is more than a regilar license.
I agree. It’s felt weird each time I’ve rented a moving truck and was able to drive it myself. They are giant and I’m not used to driving something so big plus no visibility out of the rear of the vehicle. And on top of that, they are so massive that mistakes will hurt more and will be harder to notice while they are happening.
Though even normal licenses are too easy IMO. I haven’t been tested or trained on driving in decades. Most people don’t know how 2 way stop signs work, I’ve even had a cop wave me through when it was their right of way. The bar should be higher for getting and keeping a license and lower for losing it. And “but people need cars to get to work and such” addressed with better mass transportation and city planning.
The cybertruck is like 7k lbs.
Regardless of truck size, I don’t think tractor trailers are going anywhere. Even if we made trucks smaller those would still be out there
Smaller trucks would still get in accidents though, and I imagine they would be less deadly
Man, if only we could separate freight from commuter traffic. Like, imagine if all those tractor trailers were on their own separate road, but make it out of, IDK, metal or something so it can withstand the weight better. You could even just have metal right under the wheels, to reduce costs. But what do I know, I’m just some pie in the sky nobody who doesn’t know what he’s talking about
That sounds like a neat idea—here’s a wild thought, what would happen if we tried the same thing with passengers? Eh, you’re right, sounds positively un-American.
Not to mention it would reduce all the underride crashes.
All these improved vehicle safety standards are generally for bumper-to-bumper collisions, not windshield-to-truck-bed. Frontline released a well-done 2023 episode on it. Highly recommend.
Edit: md link
Unless you’re going to run train tracks to every business in existence, freight will need to be moved using a semi at some point.
I think getting semis off the highway where they’re going 60-70 mph would make a big difference in highway safety though. And you could have less semis going from depots to stores if stores were smaller and more frequent, such that deliveries could be made via cargo vans rather than semis.
Tractor trailers are heavily regulated with training, licensing, driving hours and sleep break logging etc. Are they really a significant source of pedestrian collisions?
You should check out the safety stuff with them and cars. You’ll stay near one on the road again.
I really just want small cars to make a comeback
Even if we made trucks smaller those would still be out there
If we made them smaller there’d just be more of them on the road. There’d also be higher prices for everything to compensate for the extra expense of having those extra trucks and bodies to pilot them.
Cars are getting a lot heavier now that EVs are becoming mainstream.
I mean they’re getting heavier, but not, like, whole number multiples heavier. An electric might be some 60% heavier than a comparable gas car. But the aforementioned hummer is more than 5 times heavier than even a heavy electric “utility vehicle”. That’s more than 400% heavier.
Huh? Are you saying heavy electric utility vehicles are less than 2k lbs? I think you’re math is a bit off, or I’m misunderstanding you. 9k lbs is heavy but it’s only around 2k lbs heavier than it’s gas counter parts (most SUVs are around 6.5-7k lbs). Most electric cars are 1-2k lbs heavier than their gas counterparts already. Batteries are not light.
I’m saying smaller cars are usually lighter than bigger cars, even when the smaller cars are electric. And the car I was comparing to was the Chevrolet bolt “electric utility vehicle” that’s trying to be an electric SUV. Which is 1600 kg.
Where a Ford fiesta that’s almost the same size is still 1100 kg.
Edit: corrected units to kg.
Chevy Bolt (electric) is approx. 3,600 lbs. Ford Fiesta (gas) is approx. 2,500 lbs. I think your numbers are kilograms. Sorry to be pedantic, just trying to get correct numbers. But what you’re saying is basically correct. Most small EVs are still lighter than midsize and bigger ICE cars. If you want apples to apples: the 2024 Chevy Equinox EV is 5,000 lbs, whereas the 2024 gas version is approx. 3,400 lbs.
Oh, shit, you’re right. I was looking at kilograms. Thank you.
But yeah, the point stands that small cars are lighter and safer than big cars, especially for the things they hit.
Because chuds keep buying them so manufacturers keep making them
As it is the US has no pedestrian safety standards at the federal level. I’m pretty sure if GM wanted to put out a truck with running chainsaws all over it then it would be perfectly legal as far as the NHTSA is concerned, although some state regulators might have a problem with it which is probably why it doesn’t happen in reality.
You’re in the process of describing a Cybertruck, just the misfitting panel ‘teeth’ aren’t rotating
I have a Honda Fit (compact 4 seater) and absolutely LOVE the little car, plus it’s easier to park. But holy shit looking for a compact is hard! Everything is a fucking SUV or truck these days! Just count the number of sedans vs SUVs next time you’re out and about. My favorite cars, the 2 door Mini Cooper and VW Buggy, aren’t even made any more.
Even the small cars have been progressively getting bigger over time, it’s horrible
Some of that is crumple zones and airbags, but yes there’s pretty much nothing for “small” cars (10 to 14 feet long) in the US.
Since the fuel efficiency standards are based on the vehicles footprint, going a few inches bigger allows for a slightly more powerful but also slightly less fuel efficient engine. So the car is roomier, more powerful, and doesn’t get penalized for lower mpg.
Small trucks are penized for not being fuel efficent enough. I really wish that lead to smaller electric or hybrid trucks like the Maverick, but people have been conviced that those smaller efficient trucks are bad.
I wish the standards were not based on size, but by vehicle type. Same end result for trucks being popular, but at least smaller trucks would be viable alternatives to sedans again.
Or hell, just base it on straight up fuel efficiency. If there’s a small car that’s already more fuel efficient than everything else on the market, there should be no disincentive to sell more of them, even if that fuel efficiency doesn’t improve over time.
A larger vehicle is only better if it’s being used to move more people (that would otherwise be using another vehicle). Maybe instead of mpg (miles per gallon) it should be pmpg (person miles per gallon), where it not only depends on the vehicle itself but how many people are expected to ride in it regularly (which the manufacturer can add seats for but is more dependent on the owner).
Going by seats would encourage the already annoying four door pickup trend since it means every truck needs to be longer to compensate. I mean, wouldn’t a smaller two seater truck that gets better mileage be an improvement over a full size four door truck?
A small two door pickup that gets mileage close to a similarly sized hatchback would be awesome. But it would be hard to do in the US right now because of mpg standards being tied to size, which are also the reason so many tiny cars are underpowered to squeeze out that last few mpg.
That’s what I meant about it being more dependent on the owner rather than the number of seats. You can’t tell at the point of sale how many people each buyer is going to be transporting regularly, but it plays a huge role in how efficient that vehicle will ultimately be.
A four seater truck is horrible if it’s just the owner riding alone in it, but pretty good if it’s full and being driven instead of 4 single occupier trucks.
Though a 4 seater sedan is even better, so I was referring mostly to higher occupancy vehicles, like vans that can seat 7+. One of those could replace two sedans if filled to capacity. Or a 50 seater bus, or a 300 seater train (or whatever capacity mass transit options have).
For the first time ever, manufacturers would be required to study the impact of test dummies hit outside of vehicles. The rules would likely change the design of what America drives permanently.
That’s all the article says about the actual rule changes. Based on this information alone, I know very little about what will actually change.
I feel like the NHTSA should do way more if they can and argue for limits on light truck sizes in their length, height, weight, and perhaps classification.
Well, for one thing, an M1 Abrams main battle tank has better front sightlines than most trucks on the road today.
And it isn’t even that much more dangerous to get hit by because of the giant flat-face front impact planes of the trucks. Used to be if you got hit by a car it would roll you up over the hood, now you just die.
I have to imagine that will impact the testing and design at least somewhat.
Edit: fixed the image link
Not sure about the second part, tanks are built to go over things. Their “negative slant” seems more likely to push things under than a car’s hood or a truck/SUV’s flat face.
Oh sure if you get run over by a tank you’re going under the treads and it’s lights out for you. No question. My point was though, with sedans or older smaller trucks, the point of impact would hit around waist level on most adults and you’d be thrown up and over the hood, which would bleed off a lot of the lethal impact damage. These days the full weight of the truck is going to hit you in the chest and shoulders and you’re not getting thrown anywhere but forward and under.
If you’re a child, you’re pretty screwed either way, but modern big trucks are way, way more dangerous in a frontal impact than they used to be just based on the shape of the things. That big flat face is like getting slammed directly into a wall at 80mph.
The other thing it mentioned was the “head-to-hood” test. AFAIK car manufacturers are only required to meet the collision safety requirements for collisions involving the same class of vehicle. Vehicles in different classes are not made to impact with each other, making, for instance, a sedan to pickup truck collision much more dangerous for the sedan driver. The only way they can still meet those safety requirements is to make the front of the SUVs and trucks much much smaller and probably lower.
Edit: I was thinking of the AP article about this.
For the first time ever, manufacturers would be required to study the impact of test dummies hit outside of vehicles
But that will reveal a LOT of corroborating information for what we know, which is how dangerous they are. It’s a good thing to have more data
I suspect the only “change” that will happen is a large amount of money changing hands so they don’t have to bother.
Double the price of petrol. That will make Americans desire small cars again.
Doesn’t matter, still need an SUV to fit the family. Not everyone here is living the SINK/DINK life.
Every time I see a movie from the 90s and older, and they show a parking lot, I get sad. Everyone used to drive reasonably sized sedans. Family vehicles were wagons. Fuck SUVs and trucks.
My dream car: An EV version of the 1955 Nash Metropolitan, seen here in this silly ad photo:
(Sorry, it’s hard to find pictures that give a true indication of the smallness of the car. Also, mine would be the red and white two tone variety.)
Yes!
Even that was in an era or needlessly ego-boosting giant cars, going utilitarian to get a better product, better lives on average, even save resources - amazing (but with the cardinal sin of not being expensive enough and thus not as financially profitable).
For the same reason I would love to get a normally viable car of much smol.
Like a bit more modern version of Figaro:
Or a sexy mid-engine Autozam:
Kei cars are qewl!
I just want a tiny electric hatchback, like, Honda fit sized, that has like 150+ mile range, and doesn’t use an outdated charging standard. I’ve considered a Nissan Leaf but they are still sticking with the chademo charger port, which is way less common.
I want a neat little 600cc kei car. I haven’t had any luck finding one.
If you want one that’s more than 25 years old, you can get those legally imported to the U.S. from Japan.
https://www.japan-partner.com/keicars.html
How stupid a law is that?
Some states won’t register kei trucks. They aren’t fast enough for freeway use or something like that.
“MUH FREEDOM. FUCKIN COMMIES”
I can just see the pavement princess brigade seething because their next emotional support penismobile won’t be exaggerated anymore and they will actually be able to see pedestrians and cyclists.
As was designed by the people who actually wrote those laws, the lobbyists. More profitable cars to sell as America moves farther and farther away from reality with car prices.
There should really be a redistribution gas tax, another dollar per gallon on gas which then goes back split evenly to every American. Incentivizes less gas usage while avoiding the regressive nature of a sales tax. Canada has something like this.
Ruinous politically so it would never happen but it would be a good plan.
It’s the carbon tax and carbon rebate in Canada. When paired with a carbon tariff, it’s a great market friendly solution to reduce emissions. Beware though, it really really triggers regressive petrosexual conservatives and the ones in Canada keep trying to trigger an election over it so they can get rid of it ASAP and pollute more.
I’m Canadian… avoiding tax??
Hahahahahaha I want what you’re smoking.
We literally get taxed on tax
Bumper height needs to be standardized so they match up properly. One of the biggest safety issues is how modern SUV bumpers don’t align with cars bumper bars.
My Sequoia is like 2.5x the size of my Honda fit. If I ever hit my Honda while pulling into the driveway I’ll total it.
I fully agree with your statement.
Do you like your Sequoia? I have been thinking about trading in my Explorer for one. Or an Expedition.
Know this is a hate thread about SUV’s, but those of us with large families don’t have any other options.
I have a 2012 platinum it’s amazing. I get 12-15mpg…lol yea I have a 5 person family with the 7 seater Sequoia.
Maybe this is the point, but that might cause SUVs to be prohibitively unsafe, because their center of momentum would be so high relative to impact height. For example, if an SUV with one of these low bumpers hit a barrier, it would probably perform a front flip over it 😂
It’s out of control. I drive a 2019 Kona and I moved to that from my 2013 Elantra. Last time I was at the dealer was looking at the new Konas and they’re bigger, too big for me.
The most jarring thing is when I was picking up a prescription for my cat, and on the way home I was driving next to a plain vanilla, factory-stock GMC truck whose hood was literally taller than my entire car. And I don’t drive a miata or some other sub-compact, I drive a freaking Nissan Leaf, so about the size of your average sedan.
Since then it’s like a switch flipped in my brain, and I can’t unsee just how insanely huge modern-day pickup trucks have gotten.
