Vanitas vanitatum, omnia vanitas.
I would say that a non insignificant portion of pickup truck owners, don't even need a pick up truck to begin with.
People spend $50k because they want that truck, not because they need it.
The cheapest Model S you could buy back in 2012 was ~$70,000, while the Leaf started at half of that in 2010, ~$35,000.
We buy cars that provide more than our needs so we aren't left needing in case we come across something that goes beyond our expectations.
Always buying just what is necessary right now in a bid to be efficient leaves no margin for error and will end up being inefficient in the long run.
I don't deny that driving a Ford F-350 is great in its own right, though. That thing screams 'Murica, and all the better if it gets us out of an unexpected rut every so often.
People got by just fine with sedans. Most folks who own a giant pickup drive it in the exact same way as a Honda Civic and have no actual need for a pickup. It's very apparent in how tall these vehicles are now. If you are actually hauling goods, you don't want clearance to be that high.
"*I dont even own a car - but everyone I know who has a pickup truck is never picking up ANYTHING...
Thats like me walking around with a large empty suitcase.
'OH... Are you going on a trip??'
'No, but I look like someone who *COULD*'
If you've read the article, you'd see its because these vehicles don't conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
They look like utility vehicles to me, but then again I had a miata and a grom...
https://www.nhtsa.gov/importing-vehicle/importation-and-cert....
(This doesn't make Kei trucks safer, but it might have the same paradoxical effect as helmets on cyclists[1].)
[1]: https://slate.com/technology/2023/01/bike-helmets-cyclist-de...
They don't. I used to own an F-350 for a race team and when I sold it for a Corolla I had a long argument with my insurance agent as to why the Corolla was going to cost me more to insure.
Despite their outrageous cost to own (which you would think would primarily be the driver of insurance fees), apparently large trucks are both stolen much less and get in fewer accidents due to their size. Hard to argue with the insurance company on the stats there.
IIHS and NHTSA have figures that are generally consistent with my speculation[1]:
1. Overall car occupant deaths have nearly halved since 1975, but have risen by 25% in the pickup category.
2. Trucks have fewer rollover accidents as a category, but those rollovers that do occur make up a far larger percentage of occupant deaths.
3. Consistent with (2), truck drivers appear to drive without seatbelts more often than other categories do (based on overall incidence in accidents), and suffer higher fatalities as a result.
This is the correct solution with auto insurance in America. You should never stay with the same company more than 3-5 years, just like you should never stay at the same job longer than that. Loyalty is penalized in America, and you can get a better deal by jumping ship. Always shop around for better rates when your auto insurance policy is due for renewal.
You can't, though: “half-ton” pickups start much lower than $50k and near universally have a 1,500+ lb cargo capacity (the half-ton designation is historical and almost never actually meant what it seems to, quater-ton is even worse.)
Seems more competitive with the $27K Hyundai Santa Cruz, with similar cargo capacity (by weight), 40 MPG mileage, US new vehicle standards compliance, but trading off a shorter bed length for a second row of seating.
Where!? I just priced a few 2010 F-150s at $30-40k.
Edit: Don't be grouchy and just downvote. If you really think a Kei truck with a 1000 pound payload and 60mph [optimistic] top speed is comparable to a full size pickup, explain why. It's the same payload as a Corolla, not a full size body-on-frame pickup. And even then, that completely ignores towing, which is a very common use case for full size trucks today. A Corolla would do -that- better, too.
Kei cars are neat, but be realistic.
If they aren't, you can replace them with a cheaper, safer, more fuel efficient vehicle that meets US safety standards and is easier to maintain and register than a Kei, and probably at a comparable or far cheaper initial price than the Kei.
If they are using it for a practical purpose, you can't replace it with a Kei.
Either way, a Kei is probably the wrong choice for most US buyers.
(There are newer import-legal minitrucks that don't have the registration hassles, like Nissan Clipper, which makes the range of situations where the Kei makes a lot of sense outside of particular brand attachment even narrower.)
> There are newer import-legal minitrucks that don't have the registration hassles, like Nissan Clipper
I'm confused - the Nissan Clipper is a Kei truck/van. Kei isn't a brand, it's just a description of a specific style of car (low weight, engine size etc incentivized by the Japanese government).
Often people living on large properties and in rural areas have vehicles that never hit public roads, and Kei car class vehicles or their equivalent get used every single day. Just think about the logistics of living down a long road on 30 acres - getting the mail, taking garbage bins out, moving tools, water, animal feed, debris, etc. Large trucks don’t even fit through some gates and Polaris/atv/small vehicle is often the best solution.
No you can’t
It’s like people who spend thousands of dollars on a wristwatch. They don’t do that because they need to know what time it is.
(1) https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/americas-cars-trucks-ar...
I would happily buy a kei truck, but something like an older Toyota Tacoma is my best bet right now.
If I could reasonably get and register a Kei truck in my state it would be the perfect replacement, literally all I need is some hauling space for big trash cans, and the occasional Home Depot run.
If they made them electric I'd already be getting one!
I've hauled bikes, lumber, furniture, rocks and soil for landscaping. Unfortunately, it's no good on the highway, so long distances are out, and your knees are the crumple zone, so I drive the same way I bike...hyper-vigilant and try to anticipate danger. Still worth it.
Not trying to persuade you, I just love to talk about my truck!
They're useless for most consumers.
Edit: flat bed pickup trucks that is, not lorries.
Regardless, the comparison was between Kei trucks and pickup trucks.
> Larger cars aren't inherently safer.
Yes they are, you're probably better off in a crash without a seatbelt in a bus than in the highly safety rated mini the bus crashes into. Newton matters.
I would like to see a citation on this. Car doors have gotten larger partly because there is so much more stuff going on there than 20-30 years ago, mostly a bunch of new electronics. They are also larger because, well, the cars are larger.
> ... you're probably better off in a crash without a seatbelt in a bus than in the highly safety rated mini the bus crashes into.
This is obviously not a fair comparison. I would be safer in a tank as well. Fact is, a current generation Toyota Camry is effectively safer than an early 2000s F-150.
E.g. [1] has a decent overview of the side impact saga for the Euro NCAP since 1997. I'm less familiar with how the American version has kept up.
In any case most mass market American cars target the Euro NCAP's safety tests, so it affects car design across the pond too.
> [...]mostly a bunch of new electronics.
I can't think of any electronics in doors than weren't there in 1995.
Powered windows have gotten more common, but if it weren't for safety considerations the thickness of doors should have reduced since then, as all the electronics involved are smaller now.
> Fact is, a current generation Toyota Camry is effectively safer than an early 2000s F-150.
Probably, but some quick internet searching reveals that if you add the weight of one person to the modern Camry it's probably heavier than the 2000s F-150, or thereabouts.
What I was referring to is that crash safety tests don't account for crashes between differently sized vehicles.
That's probably intentional, as regulators don't want to cause an arms race towards ever bigger cars.
1. https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/53189/19-0278-the-development...
Electronic locks, speakers, electronic bits of heated mirrors, airbags, etc. were absolutely not that common in the average 90s car.
Also, car dimensions are generally larger because we ourselves have become larger and taller. This becomes exceedingly obvious when comparing European cars in the past 40 years. If we look at the last 15 years, the trend is to make larger, more spacious cars, to the point where most firms are betting on SUVs over sedans.
> What I was referring to is that crash safety tests don't account for crashes between differently sized vehicles.
They do, though. What would be the point of testing a car safety measures only against cars of its size? In fact, there are plenty of videos out there of crash tests between sedans and trucks.
> That's probably intentional, as regulators don't want to cause an arms race towards ever bigger cars.
Uh? Manufacturers have been steadily increasing the size of cars in the past 20 years. Each Camry generation is larger than the previous one, and has nothing to do with regulators, it’s just that buyers want spacious cars.
Yes, but we're not talking about what's more common, but about how recent regulatory changes affected car design.
You can look up luxury models of mid or late 90s cars, and they had all those features. Now look at the same models today.
> car dimensions are generally larger because we ourselves have become larger and taller.
This is mostly due to changed regulations. Look at e.g. a 1980 model of a Toyota Corolla:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Corolla_(E70)
If you wanted to make a car with the same outside dimensions today you could barely cram two people in it, due to all the mandatory crumple zones etc.
Of course consumer demand is also part of it, but in some cases car manufacturers are still making 1980s design cars today (e.g. the 79 series Toyota land cruiser), they're just outlawed in Europe due to safety, pollution etc. regulations.
> In fact, there are plenty of videos out there of crash tests between sedans and trucks.
I'm talking about official safety ratings, e.g. this in the Euro NCAP:
https://www.euroncap.com/en/vehicle-safety/the-ratings-expla...
Although as that page explains the particular bias I had in mind was "fixed" in 2020, now it's a 1400 kg mobile trolley, so heavier cars are tested somewhat more realistically.
Well, no. You said that cars are larger because of safety regulations.
But the obvious rebuttal to this is that larger cars have been trending upward for decades, and the most obvious proof of this is the decline of the sedan in favor of the SUV.
> You can look up luxury models of mid or late 90s cars, and they had all those features. Now look at the same models today.
These were larger cars than the average as well. The 90s Mercedes E-Class doors were significantly larger and heavier than the ones in a Toyota Camry.
A current generation Mercedes E-Class is also larger than the one from 30 years ago, mostly because it has gone through a significant increase in interior space. Again, this is not something only Mercedes has done to their line, all automakers have gone down the same route.
> If you wanted to make a car with the same outside dimensions today you could barely cram two people in it, due to all the mandatory crumple zones etc.
That car is roughly the same size of a Volkswagen Polo, which fits 4 people, and holds pretty much the same volume in the trunk. The Polo has an five star EURONCAP rating. Hell, even the SMART Fortwo is a pretty safe car, and it's mostly plastic.
Yes, small cars exist and are safe too, but people just like larger cars better.