Hacker News Reader

Comment by ptero | Hacker News Reader

> US car manufacturers are doubling down on large trucks and SUVs

Manufacturers are building lots of SUVs because this is what people in the US prefer to buy. If manufacturers build tons of subcompacts instead they would have to drop prices and probably sell those subcompacts at a loss.

If you wanted to sell more small cars instead you should convince consumers to buy them (e.g., via end user incentives), which would make it profitable for car companies to build lots of them.

View on HN

Is this really surprising? The benefits of driving a large vehicle are all internal (comfort, safety of vehicle occupants, cargo capacity, range between fueling). The costs, however, are mostly external (road maintenance, emissions, safety of non occupants, space consumed for parking).

You'd need to substantially incentivize smaller vehicles to overcome these things, but we actually incentivize larger vehicles (through looser emissions standards).

I think you really touch on the core problem. All the negative externalities are eaten up by the community. The obvious solution is to stop subsidizing cars and instead start teaching the negative externalities. Ready first steps: 1. massively increase gasoline tax. 2. Get rid of all street parking.

I personally would prefer to just ban all combustion engines, but people seem to think I'm insane when I propose this.

Banning all combustion engines is too extreme, see this chart for reasoning: https://image.slidesharecdn.com/13hja01motivepowermst-141217...

The deck is stacked, though. CUV's are considered trucks for the purposes of CAFE regulation. If they were considered the cars that they really are, they would be more fuel efficient, more expensive and manufacturers would be pushing small cars a lot harder to bring those averages down.

Serious question, are you saying trucks have more lenient CAFE regulations than cars?

Yes, "passenger cars" and "light trucks" are different categories in the regulations, and have different formulas for their target fuel economy.

Yes, that's the point. It's a signal that the US, as a whole, is still very much in the mindset of building infrastructure and communities centered around the car (in fact, centered around bigger, less efficient vehicles). Sure, you have pockets that are trying to do things differently, but again, on a macro level, the US is still very much "auto oriented" and doesn't appear to be turning much around at any kind of pace of other Western countries.

I know several people who, like myself, used to drive small pickups and now drive midsize ones. We would prefer to drive small ones, but they don't make them anymore.

Among people who are willing to restore old vehicles, some small trucks are becoming classics.

They can't sell small trucks in the US because of the Chicken Tax:

https://fee.org/articles/chicken-tax-makes-trucks-expensive-...

Don't pretty much all overseas car companies build vehicles for the North American market in North America these days? That would make the tariff point moot. My "Japanese" mid-sized truck that's bigger than I really need it to be was built in Mississippi.

Actually, lots of cars are made in foreign countries, namely Mexico and Canada, but automakers like Ford and GM.

Notice how I said "North America", not "The United States"? Thanks to NAFTA, you distinction is largely irrelevant in terms of tariffs.

SUVs are subsidized relative to cars which always causes inefficiency. People have complex preferences and cost is always going to be a significant component. Distort price and actions stop reflecting actual preferences.

Advertising. People buy large SUVs because of advertising, and American car companies advertise SUVs because they turn more of a profit with larger vehicles than smaller vehicles.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com