>So, Why Are We Sad?
I feel like the question in the title is just... forgotten about, lol. I guess the reader is supposed to know it's because it's not available in the U.S.
Toyota's new $10k pickup
71–80 of 137 posts
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM TL;DW: In 2008 CAFE introduced a formula that calculates the required MPG based off of the track times the wheelbase (basically the rectangle formed by the tires). Trucks are less aerodynamic than sedans, so small trucks can't be made that get sufficiently low MPG to meet this standard, and thus even though a smaller truck would use less fuel than a larger truck that meets…
Am I missing something or is this regulation as dumb as I think it is? It seems to have the effect of replacing a bunch of small trucks on the road with giant trucks that get much worse mileage overall.
It's dumb, but also don't forget that any law that will disproportionately hurt Ford is going to be a non-starter; over 650k F-150s sold in a year.
[edit]
Ford existing necessitates allowing pickups, it doesn't necessitate forcing them to be large. I'm just pointing out that any regulation that makes pickups unsaleable altogether is not going to work.
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM TL;DW: In 2008 CAFE introduced a formula that calculates the required MPG based off of the track times the wheelbase (basically the rectangle formed by the tires). Trucks are less aerodynamic than sedans, so small trucks can't be made that get sufficiently low MPG to meet this standard, and thus even though a smaller truck would use less fuel than a larger truck that meets…
Am I missing something or is this regulation as dumb as I think it is? It seems to have the effect of replacing a bunch of small trucks on the road with giant trucks that get much worse mileage overall.
I think it is which results not only in huge trucks using much fuel but also killing people more than small ones would. Many things in US politics move in mysterious ways.
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#74In other words, a pickup truck! Not a giant SUV masquerading as one, with a 5ft bed and 5-passenger luxury car cab, with price to match. I'm old enough to remember normal pickup trucks, affordable for actual "work" use, with bench seating for three, full 8x4 bed with half ton cargo capacity and not much else.
I want a 15+ year old truck with this exact configuration as beater for dump and hardware/Lanscaping runs. They are virtually impossible to locate.
Toyota used to have a pickup called "pickup" that was awesome. Small, light, but a full-sized bed. minimal with little to break - manual transmission, crank up windows, bench seat, etc.
I guess they rely on full-sized american pickup habits and creative financing to get folks to buy more expensive and bulkier trucks.
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#75Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM TL;DW: In 2008 CAFE introduced a formula that calculates the required MPG based off of the track times the wheelbase (basically the rectangle formed by the tires). Trucks are less aerodynamic than sedans, so small trucks can't be made that get sufficiently low MPG to meet this standard, and thus even though a smaller truck would use less fuel than a larger truck that meets…
Am I missing something or is this regulation as dumb as I think it is? It seems to have the effect of replacing a bunch of small trucks on the road with giant trucks that get much worse mileage overall.
Ding ding ding.
These laws are written by the same people who think you shouldn’t be in charge of your own life.
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#77I mean, $10000 is almost enough to ignore just how ugly that thing is. I just don't see the comparison to the 70 series or Hilux, except vaguely, maybe similar to La Croix's relationship to water. To be clear, I find the effort they put into "styling" it ugly; if they committed and made a utilitarian vehicle without the style-effort, it likely would look great.
Toyota has always trended on the ugly side, but when you factor design with reliability and price (pick 2 out of the 3), they have a winning combination.
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A vehicle's primary use is take people and objects from point A to B, and do so reliably Car longevity increased a ton in the last several decades years, and so "something that moves" isn't as central a motivation for new car sales anymore. If they just need something that moves, buyers can find countless used cars that still run and will keep doing so for hundreds of thousands of more miles. It's tough to compete…
Dude the delta between new and used cars right now is virtually nothing. You can get a 2012 tacoma with 200k miles on it for like 28k or a brand new 2023 tacoma for 35k. New is a better deal just based on the projected mechanical life of the car. Dont need fancy features to sell it
The projected longevity of trucks is actually going back down again, which is why the older ones are holding value. The modern ones are full to the brim with computer/DRM enforced anti-repair measures so that the dealership can profiteer.
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#79Wish we could have shit like this in the US but we can't because the EPA and regulators are too busy making bank.
It is not the EPA emissions regulations that caused the problem of gigantic, expensive trucks. It’s a combination of NTSB safety requirements for price and CAFE fuel efficiency requirements for size.
Re: Toyota's new $10k pickup
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM TL;DW: In 2008 CAFE introduced a formula that calculates the required MPG based off of the track times the wheelbase (basically the rectangle formed by the tires). Trucks are less aerodynamic than sedans, so small trucks can't be made that get sufficiently low MPG to meet this standard, and thus even though a smaller truck would use less fuel than a larger truck that meets…
Am I missing something or is this regulation as dumb as I think it is? It seems to have the effect of replacing a bunch of small trucks on the road with giant trucks that get much worse mileage overall.
It's beyond dumb and currently all stick and no carrot. By that I mean - at least in CA - a huge state bureaucracy including visual inspections that essentially precludes any real modifications to vehicles - unless you see a referee in which case it is a crapshoot on approval. We would IMO be better served by larger tax incentives on electric, and reduce the CARB bureaucracy enormously - insist on a simple tailpipe test "as it blows". Ridiculous standards have effectively forced small, high compression, often turbo charged, engines on consumers which run extremely hot (observe the heat shielding on newer subarus intended to prevent the engine mounts from burning out). Such engines, while fuel efficient, will never last the 300k miles we saw previously, without extensive messing with - by that I mean engine pulling, gasket full gasket and ring replacement type operations. If you want longevity, the older style toyota, lower compression, engines - which run cool and are marginally less fuel efficient (available in most other places in the world) will last in the 1m mile range.