The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs • Hacker News Board

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#471

Post by tinyplanets » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:24 PM UTC

rjrjrjrj wrote: post #50

protocolture wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok and? My vehicle is as safe or safer than older lighter vehicles currently permitted on the road. Why should the goalposts run off into the distance? Surely I have now met the common definition of "safe". At what point is it enough? This just brings back to Jealousy or some kind of Tall Poppy syndrome again.

A larger vehicle is more of a hazard to others than a smaller vehicle, and the safety features you describe don't change that. But, as you're in Australia, I'm not sure your definition of "large" matches the story's or mine. North America has a whole class of huge ass vehicles that are relatively rare elsewhere in the world. Are you driving an Escalade, F-150, or similar?

You're wasting your breath. This guy isn't going to give up his brodozer.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#472

Post by stouset » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:24 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #59

WA state recently passed a law about e-bikes/e-motorcycles to deal with the issue of younger teens on these kinda moped-style e-bikes going very fast around town (and often riding quite recklessly). The law is reasonable, but it strikes me what a double standard there is for biking vs driving. For biking, there's a danger that's noticed, and we quickly pass a law that straight up bans that type of bike for those ride…

Yep. And the refrain is always about “dangerous” behavior by cyclists, despite the fact that deaths and injuries to others from those on bikes are essentially a rounding error. The vast majority of what danger there is is borne by the riders themselves and not by bystanders.

Meanwhile, nobody bats an eye over the fact that motor vehicles are a leading cause of death in this country and the brunt is often borne by others.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#473

Post by tinyplanets » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:25 PM UTC

avalys wrote: post #11

There are many factors driving this: 1. Fuel economy regulations that scale regressively with vehicle size, that incentivize automakers to build and market larger vehicles that are easier to hit regulatory targets. 2. Rollover and crash worthiness regulations that require thicker A-pillars and more robust roof structure. 3. Towing performance. The large pickup manufacturers are in an arms race to beat each other’s po…

Okay, then sell your huge diesel pickup. Or is it just too much fun!

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#474

Post by cyberlurker » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:25 PM UTC

forgetfreeman wrote: post #423

tinfoilhatter wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if you need to tow a trailer / camper. Maybe there's a reason different kinds of vehicles exist? To fulfill different requirements of their drivers?

You're going to have a hard time hiding the entire SUV and Light Duty truck market behind an airstream, especially considering neither have transmissions capable of hauling one. Statistically almost nobody tows anything. Of those that do the vast majority tow stuff that comfortably falls within the pulling capacity of a Subaru Outback (or a VW Golf hatchback if you're really feeling rude). Nobody's trying to take any…

Those cars already exist. They are made in China and banned for sale in the US.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#475

Post by coryrc » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:27 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #391

coryrc wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can drive those off-road away from where people live, or you can get properly trained and insured for driving such a dangerous vehicle where people outside vehicles will be present.

Is that a joke? A Tahoe isn't hard to drive. Every regular auto insurer will write policies for them.

They aren't hard to drive on the freeway. They are hard to drive without running over people in neighborhoods. The leading cause of death in children 0-14 is automobiles. https://www.kidsandcars.org/frontovers/media-resources

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#476

Post by tinyplanets » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:27 PM UTC

As I'm sure the commentors here from outside of the U.S. can plainly see - it's going to be a long road to get regulations in place to somehow incentivize smaller vehicles (and that's assuming we ever have a functioning government again). For Americans, a lot of our self-image/worth is tied up in the vehicles we drive. I suppose it's a combination of cultural history (hyper-individualism) and decades of marketing and advertising from auto manufacturers.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#477

Post by decimalenough » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:27 PM UTC

simplyluke wrote: post #262

The problem is that other countries have seen nearly identical trends in vehicle market share trending towards larger vehicles and have seen sustained declines in pedestrian fatalities. John Burn-Murdoch went deep on this in the FT a couple of years ago (archive link at bottom). > Most of the explanations commonly put forward for why US roads remain so deadly focus on broad structural factors such as vehicle size or…

While vehicle sizes are indeed trending upward in Australia and Europe, giant SUV and especially giant truck penetration in both countries is still far behind US levels, and particularly in Europe are unlikely to ever reach the same figures (good luck parking your Ford F-9000 Testosteroneo in Rome or Paris).

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#478

Post by bfrog » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:28 PM UTC

Sitting in a modern pickup is worse than a school bus for visibility. You cannot see in front of the truck at all. Real blue collar work seems to mostly have moved to work vans like the sprinter which have much better visibility, much more friendly height for storing, can still tow, etc.

Pickups are 1000% pointless now

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#479

Post by chris_money202 » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:28 PM UTC

I drive a 2004 truck, it's not as big as the newer trucks but it's still pretty big. My 2004 truck also has 0 sensors on it and no cameras. If I were driving a newer truck, I believe pedestrians would be safer because of the added safety sensors and cameras.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#480

Post by MoonWalk » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:29 PM UTC

estebank wrote: post #383

MoonWalk wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only does that not have anything to do with texting, but it has nothing to do with the roads. That's about giant vehicles hitting people above the waistline. If you hit someone with a tall-ass truck in Portugal, I'm pretty sure he's going to fall over just like he would in the USA.

> Not only does that not have anything to do with texting, but it has nothing to do with the roads. From both the NYT video and their article: > And that increase is unique to the US. Most other wealthy countries haven't seen a similar surge, suggesting that possible culprits, like the raise of smartphones, don't tell the whole story. --- > If you hit someone with a tall-ass truck in Portugal, I'm pretty sure he's go…

I didn't see that statement in the (door-shaped) video, so I'll take your word for it.

> How popular do you think the tall-ass trucks are in Portugal?

Not very, which is why I was mystified by your question. Why would we NEED special sanctions for non-Americans?

Not addressed (as far as I saw) are the penalties for texting & driving in different countries. In the USA, they're basically nonexistent.

But let's say there's no difference, and no difference in the prevalance of this behavior. Texting is still going to be far more deadly behind the wheel of a giant barge. In fact, the vehicle difference serves as a multiplier for the deadly outcomes of it.