this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
531 points (95.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

9809 readers
1 users here now

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

This community exists for the following reasons:

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

Rules

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

All these children are invisible to the driver...

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 167 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

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

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

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

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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

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

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

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

[–] CoderKat@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

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

[–] meowMix2525@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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

[–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

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

[–] BigNote@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

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

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

[–] amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Tedrow@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 47 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (33 children)

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

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

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

[–] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 32 points 1 year ago

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

[–] Neato@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

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

load more comments (31 replies)
[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

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

[–] BingoBangoBongo@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

no one lifts without leveling.

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

[–] Retro_Unlimited@infosec.pub 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

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

[–] explodicle@local106.com 26 points 1 year ago

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

[–] Mitchie151@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago

If Americans had to pay the same petrol taxes that Europeans do, they'd soon go for the tiny cars.

load more comments (6 replies)