Live data from Hacker News

The US Wants to Close an ‘SUV Loophole’ That Supersized Cars

wired.com

101–104 of 104 posts

Re: The US Wants to Close an ‘SUV Loophole’ That Supersized Cars

#101
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never understood the purpose of high beds on a pickup truck. Maybe for carrying ATVs on bad roads? If I were regularly carrying large or heavy loads in a pickup truck, I think I’d much prefer a low bed for ease or loading and unloading and for a lower center of mass.

Unlike SUVs, pickups don't have an adjustable suspension (pneumatic or hydraulic springs) so if you had a low bed on an empty pickup, it would have likely compressed the shocks completely under a heavy load, or, alternatively, you'd had shocks so stiff that they would not move without load at all. Most people who carry heavy loads in their trucks prefer neither and opt for the "lifted" look due to the long shocks, wh…

I wonder why. You can buy adjustable-height suspensions for pickups, but they don’t seem to be factory options. This feature exists for plenty of passenger vehicles.

Surely some truck maker could make, and charge more for, a pickup truck with a low bed, excellent handling at any load condition, and the ability to carry increase ground clearance as needed for off-road use.

A bit of searching suggests that the Dodge Ram, the Rivian R1T, and, hypothetically, the Tesla Cybertruck have adjustable suspensions.

Re: The US Wants to Close an ‘SUV Loophole’ That Supersized Cars

#102
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike SUVs, pickups don't have an adjustable suspension (pneumatic or hydraulic springs) so if you had a low bed on an empty pickup, it would have likely compressed the shocks completely under a heavy load, or, alternatively, you'd had shocks so stiff that they would not move without load at all. Most people who carry heavy loads in their trucks prefer neither and opt for the "lifted" look due to the long shocks, wh…

I wonder why. You can buy adjustable-height suspensions for pickups, but they don’t seem to be factory options. This feature exists for plenty of passenger vehicles. Surely some truck maker could make, and charge more for, a pickup truck with a low bed, excellent handling at any load condition, and the ability to carry increase ground clearance as needed for off-road use. A bit of searching suggests that the Dodge Ra…

A passenger car is usually under 6000 pounds itself and rarely has more than a couple hundred pounds payload. A truck like Sierra 2500 that I most often see lifted, is over 10000 pounds with the payload. A reliable air suspension for that kind of weight is likely too expensive to get any customer demand on a work vehicle and unreliable one is to expensive for the warranty. That would be my guess.

Re: The US Wants to Close an ‘SUV Loophole’ That Supersized Cars

#103
post #62

People wanted rear wheel drive, American made, V8 powered cars. Detroit stopped making those, so people compromised and bought pickup trucks and SUVs. Now Detroit will be forced to stop making those. Just let people but what they want.

You don't want a V8 powered RWD car. Car manufacturers spend huge amounts of money to make you want a V8 powered car. When everyone has an EV, TV ads show cool new EV's and make you look backward for even thinking about burning gasoline you will want an EV.

To be clear, I am talking about large cars, not sports cars. I'm referring to Crown Vic sized cars, not Camaros or Mustangs. I didn't see any ads for the Crown Vic in its last years of production. (That was the last of the cars I am referring to.)

When Chevrolet discontinued the old Caprice & Impala in 1996, it was because journalists were ridiculing them for making them, not because they did not have customers. There were police departments begging to fund more years of production in addition to more than a year of back-orders from civilians. GM cancelled those orders because MBAs who could not change their own oil did not want to be made fun of for producing a car people wanted. Those cars sold used for more their new retail price for almost a decade.

This is a problem across the auto industry. One big auto maker exits a class of vehicle, and everyone wants to follow. Find me a coupe utility vehicle like the 1987 El Camino, a compact pickup like the 2004 S10 pickup, or a full-size American made car like the 1996 Caprice. There is plenty of room in the market for someone to make one model of each of these. Just make them like they used to: simple, easy to work on, and reliable. MBAs can not bring themselves to do it.

If they tried to build a coupe utility vehicle, they would have to turn it into a performance car (like the SSR) because performance cars sell for more money.

If they tried to build a compact pickup they would have to make it the size of a full size truck (like the Colorado,) because full size trucks sell for more money.

If they tried to build a full size car, they would have to turn it into a luxury car with 500+ horse power (like the Charger,) because those sell for more money.

The problem is that none of those contraptions they would produce would sell in the volume of a reliable, low-end vehicle. So they would shut down the production line after two years.

Instead of making cars we want to buy, they are chasing the newest trend, losing billions of dollars on electric cars that we can not afford.

I called out Bob Lutz one time when he said GM was committed to making fuel efficient pickups. At the time the 17 MPG Colorado had recently replaced the 25 MPG S10. I said if they wanted fuel economy, they would bring back the S10 electric, the 25 MPG S10, and clone the 1970's Volkswagen pickup that got 35 MPG on diesel.

Post reply on HN