Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-14-2018, 03:18 PM
DrDeth DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 35,125
why no more 1/4 ton pick ups?

I mean the small guys, the old Datsun, etc, Pick up, the "utes". Why doesn't anyone still make them to sell in the uSA? They were insanely popular back when I was in college, i drove one for decades.

I have been told that the closest are the Toyota Tacoma and Nissan Frontier , which are Class 1, but still quite a bit bigger than that old 1/4 ton.
__________________
I am not a real Doctor
  #2  
Old 04-14-2018, 03:38 PM
GaryM GaryM is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: St. Louis, MO 50mi. West
Posts: 4,604
Well, Ford is bringing back the Ranger, but I'm not sure it meets your requirements. Honda Ridgeline?

The Official "GaryM" of the Internet
__________________
GaryM
  #3  
Old 04-14-2018, 03:58 PM
Bayard Bayard is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 5,838
I thought the old Ranger and Chevy S10 were pretty handy too. Were they 1/4 ton? I've often wondered why they went out of style, too.
  #4  
Old 04-14-2018, 04:50 PM
FoieGrasIsEvil FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 16,953
There's also the "new" Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #5  
Old 04-14-2018, 04:53 PM
Ethilrist Ethilrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Saint Paul
Posts: 26,384
Minivans can carry as much cargo if needed and carry more people otherwise. If you consistently need a pickup truck because of tall or odd-sized things, or cargo that you need to toss in over the size, you probably need a bigger, sturdier truck. They only made the tiny trucks to bridge the gap from station wagons to SUV's, and once people figured out how to make better SUV's and mini-vans, the small pickup truck went out of style because it can only do the one thing.
  #6  
Old 04-14-2018, 05:06 PM
Bumbazine Bumbazine is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Outside...looking in
Posts: 3,278
There are still plenty of small pickups manufactured outside of the U.S. but most foreign manufacturers don't bother to import them, in part because of the Chicken Tax
No, I am not making this up.

We intend to keep our 1988 Ranger limping along until we can buy a new small truck at a sane price.
  #7  
Old 04-14-2018, 05:07 PM
jasg jasg is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Upper left hand corner
Posts: 4,911
Perhaps because once you add a modern driver, it is only a 1/8th ton pick up?
  #8  
Old 04-14-2018, 05:26 PM
thelurkinghorror thelurkinghorror is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Venial Sin City
Posts: 12,821
Tacoma, Frontier, Colorado, and Canyon are all roughly the same size. Not small. Mid-size is the official designation. 2019 Ranger looks to be similar.
  #9  
Old 04-14-2018, 05:32 PM
boytyperanma boytyperanma is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 5,263
Almost all single row seating pick ups have dropped off the market. The midsize pick-ups sold now are the Tacoma and Colorado/Canyon, they are only offered in extended cab or super cab. When the ranger returns it'll be a super cab style pick-up, closer to a Honda ridgline.

Even on full size trucks non-commercial sales are primarily super cabs.

People just don't want vehicles limited to 2 occupants. Any pick up smaller than a midsize is limited to 2 people if it's to have a usable bed.

People want more versatile vehicles. Being able to move people and stuff is much better than having to chose between one or the other. The market doesn't have much room left for dedicated stuff movers. The majority can't afford to have an extra single purpose vehicle.
  #10  
Old 04-14-2018, 05:48 PM
seal_cleaner seal_cleaner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Northwest Arkansas
Posts: 1,965
Tacoma is the #1 selling used truck in the US. Thinking about downsizing my Tundra to one of those. I had a ‘73 hilux back in the day, it was a real brick.
  #11  
Old 04-14-2018, 05:48 PM
scr4 scr4 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,363
How CAFE killed compact trucks and station wagons.

CAFE is the US government requirement for average fuel efficiency of vehicles sold in the US. The fuel efficiency requirement for small trucks is much stricter than large trucks (F-150 class) - 28 mpg vs. 19 mpg for the current model year. So all manufacturers decided to just sell large trucks.
  #12  
Old 04-14-2018, 05:49 PM
Johnny L.A. Johnny L.A. is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: NoWA
Posts: 58,581
Mrs. L.A. has a 2000 Tacoma Extended Cab. Not that I'm looking to buy a truck, but there's no way I'd buy one of the new monstrosities. The Hilux/Tacoma is the perfect size.
  #13  
Old 04-14-2018, 06:56 PM
t-bonham@scc.net t-bonham@scc.net is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 13,922
Because SUVs & minivans have taken their place -- those can do much the same things, and others besides.
  #14  
Old 04-14-2018, 07:02 PM
md2000 md2000 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 13,550
Because the vast majority of pickup drivers don't need (or use) the cargo feature - the vehicle is simply a compensation for male inadequacies elsewhere. Having a small truck would defeat the purpose of driving one.
  #15  
Old 04-14-2018, 07:27 PM
kunilou kunilou is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 22,953
If you really need a quarter-ton capacity there's always this. In fact, you can get it with 4-wheel drive and even an extended cab.

The question is, if that's all you need, why would you bother with a whole truck.
  #16  
Old 04-14-2018, 07:47 PM
DrDeth DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 35,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by scr4 View Post
How CAFE killed compact trucks and station wagons.

CAFE is the US government requirement for average fuel efficiency of vehicles sold in the US. The fuel efficiency requirement for small trucks is much stricter than large trucks (F-150 class) - 28 mpg vs. 19 mpg for the current model year. So all manufacturers decided to just sell large trucks.
Ah, great cite and my answer. thanks.
__________________
I am not a real Doctor
  #17  
Old 04-14-2018, 08:27 PM
Mdcastle Mdcastle is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,034
Every pickup owner I've known has used the cargo feature at least occasionally. They're too expensive for most people to buy just to show off. The pickup you see driving empty to the office on Monday through Friday is probably full of wood chips for the garden or hauling the boat on the weekend.

A 1/4 ton pickup really isn't big enough to haul or tow much more than a minivan- would sheets of plywood or drywall even fit? So if that's all you need you might as well buy a minivan.

Last edited by Mdcastle; 04-14-2018 at 08:29 PM.
  #18  
Old 04-14-2018, 08:55 PM
scr4 scr4 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mdcastle View Post
Every pickup owner I've known has used the cargo feature at least occasionally. They're too expensive for most people to buy just to show off. The pickup you see driving empty to the office on Monday through Friday is probably full of wood chips for the garden or hauling the boat on the weekend.

A 1/4 ton pickup really isn't big enough to haul or tow much more than a minivan- would sheets of plywood or drywall even fit? So if that's all you need you might as well buy a minivan.
But none of those factors changed in the last few decades. Plywood is the same size. We've had minivans and SUVs since the 80s. Why did compact trucks sell well back then, but not anymore? The main thing that changed is the government regulations.
  #19  
Old 04-14-2018, 09:22 PM
Capn Carl Capn Carl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by scr4 View Post
But none of those factors changed in the last few decades. Plywood is the same size. We've had minivans and SUVs since the 80s. Why did compact trucks sell well back then, but not anymore? The main thing that changed is the government regulations.
Another thing that’s changed is the size of minivans. They’re not even mini any more.
  #20  
Old 04-14-2018, 09:40 PM
scr4 scr4 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capn Carl View Post
Another thing that’s changed is the size of minivans. They’re not even mini any more.
Maybe on the outside. But the 1991-1995 Dodge Grand Caravan had a cargo space of 141 cubic ft, while the current model has 140 cubic ft. Of course the latter is with seats folded, not removed. But still, present day minivans aren't any more useful as truck substitutes than minivans from 20+ years ago.
  #21  
Old 04-15-2018, 12:16 AM
DrDeth DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 35,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by scr4 View Post
But none of those factors changed in the last few decades. Plywood is the same size. We've had minivans and SUVs since the 80s. Why did compact trucks sell well back then, but not anymore? The main thing that changed is the government regulations.
They were fun, dependable, rugged, didnt look like a compact car, and pretty cheap.
__________________
I am not a real Doctor
  #22  
Old 04-15-2018, 12:41 AM
boytyperanma boytyperanma is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 5,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
and pretty cheap.
This perception was pretty much the killing blow on the Rangers. People expect to pay less for smaller trucks but they aren't actually that much cheaper to make than full size trucks. A base Tacoma and base Tundra have very similar costs.

Ford was making significantly less profit on Rangers than F-150s, they calculated if they dropped Rangers they'd make up the loss if only a fraction of Ranger buyers bought F-150s instead. They were right, dropping Rangers increased sales on F-150s, which were more profitable.
  #23  
Old 04-15-2018, 12:50 AM
Drunky Smurf Drunky Smurf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Smurf Village.
Posts: 10,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by md2000 View Post
Because the vast majority of pickup drivers don't need (or use) the cargo feature - the vehicle is simply a compensation for male inadequacies elsewhere. Having a small truck would defeat the purpose of driving one.
This.

Which is why no male ever drove one when they were available.
__________________
"Small scrap nipple slap half half." -Max Black
  #24  
Old 04-15-2018, 02:36 AM
Jacquernagy Jacquernagy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by md2000 View Post
Because the vast majority of pickup drivers don't need (or use) the cargo feature - the vehicle is simply a compensation for male inadequacies elsewhere. Having a small truck would defeat the purpose of driving one.
This can't be true, can it? Surely the majority of pickup trucks in America are fleet vehicles and work trucks, I'd think? But even of the ones that aren't, I see things being hauled in the bed regularly.

It's true though that 2-seat vehicles are on the decline. The true sports roadster is basically a unicorn in America (don't know about Europe) and I virtually never see single-cab pickups other than as dedicated work trucks, usually for hauling specialty beds designed for a particular job. Even many of the big ass F-650 type heavy-duty trucks seem to have crew cabs.

I spent many months riding around in old single-cab work trucks on various summer jobs back in high school and college, and there's definitely a certain nostalgia to riding in one, with one long bench seat, speakers directly behind your head, maybe a cigarette and a large unhealthy soda for sustenance, and the knowledge that you're a righteous working dude and not some lazy ass desk jockey.
__________________
A hazy shade of winter.
  #25  
Old 04-15-2018, 03:16 AM
jz78817 jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by scr4 View Post
But none of those factors changed in the last few decades. Plywood is the same size. We've had minivans and SUVs since the 80s. Why did compact trucks sell well back then, but not anymore? The main thing that changed is the government regulations.
The bigger thing is that gas has stayed relatively cheap in this country, so gassing up an F-150 isn’t ruinous.


Also that full size pickups have become *way* plusher and easier to live with as an only vehicle. Back up to the ‘90s, the top trim level on e.g. an F-150 was the XLT Lariat, which basically got you power windows/locks and available two tone paint. There also was no crew cab; the extended cab didn’t even have rear half doors. There certainly weren’t any King Ranch, Limited, or Platinum trims loaded up with leather seating and all of the tech toys.
  #26  
Old 04-15-2018, 03:33 AM
Capn Carl Capn Carl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by scr4 View Post
Maybe on the outside. But the 1991-1995 Dodge Grand Caravan had a cargo space of 141 cubic ft, while the current model has 140 cubic ft. Of course the latter is with seats folded, not removed. But still, present day minivans aren't any more useful as truck substitutes than minivans from 20+ years ago.
The original Caravan came out in 1984, not 1991. It rode on a 115” wheelbase and weighed 2910 pounds. The current Caravan has a 121” wheelbase, and weighs 4306 pounds.
  #27  
Old 04-15-2018, 05:47 AM
pullin pullin is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: N Texas
Posts: 2,642
Just a WAG, but one cause may be that pickups have become the second car in a family -- and thus need seating for four. Adding the additional seats (and belts, and airbags, etc.) likely would push the weight of the small pickups beyond their maximum capacity (GVWR).


Until last year, I had a full-sized Dodge 1500 quad-cab. It's empty weight was 5800 lbs. It's max weight (GVWR) was 6700 lbs. This left a remaining load capacity of 900 lbs. -- exactly the same as my wife's Camry. Add 4 people and luggage and it's likely there's no capacity left. My guess is that 2-seat 1/4 ton pickups wouldn't sell well, and a 4-seater would have such limited capacity they'd be rendered useless.

Last edited by pullin; 04-15-2018 at 05:47 AM.
  #28  
Old 04-15-2018, 09:19 AM
racer72 racer72 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 6,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryM View Post
Honda Ridgeline?
The Ridgeline is classified as a half ton pickup. It weighs as much as many heavier pickups too, mine weighs in at about 4200 pounds empty. My old 93 Toyota extended cab pickup weighed only 2800 pounds and that included a fiberglass canopy.
  #29  
Old 04-15-2018, 09:43 AM
Leo Krupe Leo Krupe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
The bigger thing is that gas has stayed relatively cheap in this country, so gassing up an F-150 isn’t ruinous.


Also that full size pickups have become *way* plusher and easier to live with as an only vehicle. Back up to the ‘90s, the top trim level on e.g. an F-150 was the XLT Lariat, which basically got you power windows/locks and available two tone paint. There also was no crew cab; the extended cab didn’t even have rear half doors. There certainly weren’t any King Ranch, Limited, or Platinum trims loaded up with leather seating and all of the tech toys.
This is a lot of it. The biggest reason you hear is "cheap gas," but that's only a part.

It's luxury coupled with utilitarianism; that is, the marketers decided to turn the work truck into the family all-in-one (I'm sure huge profits entered into that decision), and people bought into the mentality.

A lot of it is of course image (again, thanks to the marketers). Every Jeep, pickup, and SUV ad shows the vehicle going offroad in an almost Dakar Rally way. The vast majority of consumers use their "offroad" vehicles as daily grocery getters, and never really get off the pavement. (I'm not saying all, because there are construction trucks, farm trucks, etc., but the average American consumer has no intention of dirtying up their truck any more than they have to. It's about image, not practicality. Why else buy an $80,000 Escalade, or even a Bentley Bentayga, at a cool $229,000?

A final reason no one mentions is the weight of Americans. I have a theory that Americans love bigger trucks is because of our weight.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/america...80s-startling/

Quote:
There's no doubt about it: Americans are getting heavier and heavier. But new U.S. estimates may still come as a shock -- since the late 1980s and early 1990s, the average American has put on 15 or more additional pounds without getting any taller.
So it comes down to a variety of factors:

1) Cheap gas
2) Marketing the macho image (and paradoxically, more luxury--imagine that: soft machismo)
3) Americans are getting fatter
And we can't forget 4) current style (station wagons were once emblematic of the American family)
  #30  
Old 04-15-2018, 10:11 AM
Bayaker Bayaker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: A town on Galveston Bay
Posts: 222
Were there really many(any?) quarter-ton trucks per the OP? All of the small Datsun/Toyota type trucks I was familiar with back in the 70s, '80s and 90's were half-ton, and I was around a lot of construction sites and knew many of their owners back then. I owned a 1985 Mitsubishi Might Max that was 3/4 ton and, IIRC, if you looked at the GVWR the payload was really 1850 lbs.

All that aside, I think the CAFE requirements really did them in for all the reasons already stated. Making the trucks bigger and with more bells and whistles, they are more attractive to most customers without having to be super fuel-efficient.
  #31  
Old 04-15-2018, 10:12 AM
guestchaz guestchaz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: boise idaho
Posts: 1,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drunky Smurf View Post
This.

Which is why no male ever drove one when they were available.
I directly challenge and defy your stereotype.

I drove a chevy s10, the most basic trimline you could get too, for twelve years. I loved that truck. Never once had a problem other than a worn out fuel cap.

I've been waiting with fear and excitement for the inevitable reintroduction of the small truck here in the states. Excitement because I knew as soon as the end of the small truck manufacturing was announced it was inevitable that it would be back and fear because I'm pretty certain a great deal of the utility of the small truck will be done away with through "improvements"
__________________
"I find your lack of candy disturbing" Darth Desserticola
  #32  
Old 04-15-2018, 10:34 AM
jz78817 jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,072
the "x-ton" thing is obsolete anyway. The official way is to sort them by FHA Class.

edited to add:

Quote:
Originally Posted by guestchaz View Post
I directly challenge and defy your stereotype.

I drove a chevy s10, the most basic trimline you could get too, for twelve years. I loved that truck. Never once had a problem other than a worn out fuel cap.

I've been waiting with fear and excitement for the inevitable reintroduction of the small truck here in the states. Excitement because I knew as soon as the end of the small truck manufacturing was announced it was inevitable that it would be back and fear because I'm pretty certain a great deal of the utility of the small truck will be done away with through "improvements"
I think Drunky Smurf was being sarcastic. the person that was a reply to tends to come up with some real gems when the subject is cars/trucks.

Last edited by jz78817; 04-15-2018 at 10:36 AM.
  #33  
Old 04-15-2018, 11:00 AM
Broomstick Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 26,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by guestchaz View Post
I've been waiting with fear and excitement for the inevitable reintroduction of the small truck here in the states. Excitement because I knew as soon as the end of the small truck manufacturing was announced it was inevitable that it would be back and fear because I'm pretty certain a great deal of the utility of the small truck will be done away with through "improvements"
Same here.

I'm still driving my 19 year old Ford Ranger (extended cab with "suicide doors" and fold down back seats that I can squeeze into but the average size man can't) and I love that truck. The sound system was nice, but I haven't bothered to fix the CD player or clock (taken out by a lightning strike) and the cruise control seems to be iffy so I've just stopped using it entirely (my husband was actually the heavy user of cruise control). Yes, most of the time it's a second car (with a really, really big "trunk") but I have used it for occasional light hauling. It is basically a two-seat car. A small adult or a child can fit in the back, as I said, but most of the time half of the behind-the-seat area is taken up with emergency gear or tools (currently, new truck battery I've yet to install, jumper cables, tire inflater, spare wiper blades, gallon of windshield washer fluid, first aid kit, several sturdy canvas bags, plastic bags, a tarp, bungees, 100 feet of rope, fire extinguisher, tool kit, flashlights, umbrella, spare socks, spare gloves, snow brush, squeegee, ice scraper, paper towels, hacksaw, and probably some other stuff - I really need to do some spring cleaning and re-organizing)

But I'd dread replacing it with something full of electronics like touchscreens and other gizmos that, to my mind, are secondary to actually driving a vehicle. A back-up camera might be nice but, really, I have a good view out the back, better than many newer cars and SUV's. We did get better mirrors for each side which are a must for those times the bed is full up to the cab roof height, which seems to me a much better use of funds than some in-cab electronic gizmo. Frankly, I find the power locks and windows and extravagance, but I admit to old-school tendencies (my car has crank windows and non-power locks).
  #34  
Old 04-15-2018, 12:09 PM
DrDeth DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 35,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacquernagy View Post
This can't be true, can it? Surely the majority of pickup trucks in America are fleet vehicles and work trucks, I'd think? But even of the ones that aren't, I see things being hauled in the bed regularly.
No, it's not true, he's just taking a dig at truck owners. Altho, in the case of those oversized jacked up trucks, he may have a point.
__________________
I am not a real Doctor
  #35  
Old 04-15-2018, 12:13 PM
Dr_Paprika Dr_Paprika is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South of Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,640
In Canada truck sales have exploded - something like 60% of new sales. I don’t consider myself “a truck guy”, but I bought a Honda Ridgeline and like everything about it.
__________________
"A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man"
  #36  
Old 04-15-2018, 01:17 PM
Sam Stone Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 26,992
Peoplw who claim that trucks are just useless macho toys are probably biased in that they live in a city, so only see the trucks that city dwellers buy.

Go out to farm country where all the trucks are, and you'll see the reasons why trucks have evolved the way they have, and why they are still so popular.

The 'standard' truck used to be a 3 person, bench seated, 1/2 ton pickup. For 90% of its time it probably had one person in it. But as family farms have been upgraded or replaced with larger farming operations, more jobs require multiple people and/or larger hauling requirements.

When I worked on a small farm in the 70's, I drove a '67 Chevy half-ton with a three-on-the-tree manual transmission. It had an AM/FM radio and a heater. The bed was used for hauling hay that you would pitchfork in and out yourself, or maybe a load of gravel to fill something, or manure for fertilizing or we would put box railings and walls and haul pigs or something. All work that can be done with a small truck and one or two people.

Today, those same activities occur, but on a larger scale and often with a crew of 3-4 people. Machine loading means you can handle more material, etc. And then people found that with a crew cab and modern conveniences, the truck makes a nice people hauler, and a bigger truck can haul a nice sized trailer. Also, improvements in fuel economy work to make trucks larger as well.
  #37  
Old 04-15-2018, 03:21 PM
JRDelirious JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 14,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayaker View Post
Were there really many(any?) quarter-ton trucks per the OP? All of the small Datsun/Toyota type trucks I was familiar with back in the 70s, '80s and 90's were half-ton, and I was around a lot of construction sites and knew many of their owners back then. I owned a 1985 Mitsubishi Might Max that was 3/4 ton and, IIRC, if you looked at the GVWR the payload was really 1850 lbs.

All that aside, I think the CAFE requirements really did them in for all the reasons already stated. Making the trucks bigger and with more bells and whistles, they are more attractive to most customers without having to be super fuel-efficient.
Yes, the familiar compact pick-ups like the S10 and Ranger were small half-ton types (as mentioned, it was not really a reflection of true capacity). Quarter-ton would be things like an IH Scout or Jeep CJ where your cargo space was achieved by not bolting in a rear seat.

And as the linked article explained, the CAFE standards as they have been applied in the US have the effect of disincentivizing truly light pickups because of how the classes of vehicle are defined for CAFE purposes; tie that with how the larger vehicles yield better margins for the carmakers, and it's advantageous to sell them "with more bells and whistles" so that they can be daily family rides instead of just for the farm or worksite. As Broomstick points out, it is unlikely the market would support bringing back the sort of no-nonsense utilitarian vehicle they used to be.
  #38  
Old 04-15-2018, 04:21 PM
guestchaz guestchaz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: boise idaho
Posts: 1,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post


I think Drunky Smurf was being sarcastic. the person that was a reply to tends to come up with some real gems when the subject is cars/trucks.

Ah, well if that's the case then I will have to amend my statement somewhat...
in some manly fashion that escapes me at the moment...

I keep seeing references to the ridgeline, wasn't that the "truck" that was a really a unibody car? The one that you couldn't really put much of a load of anything in the back, because it flexed the body just enough when you did, that you couldn't close the doors?
__________________
"I find your lack of candy disturbing" Darth Desserticola

Last edited by guestchaz; 04-15-2018 at 04:22 PM.
  #39  
Old 04-15-2018, 05:14 PM
jz78817 jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by guestchaz View Post
Ah, well if that's the case then I will have to amend my statement somewhat...
in some manly fashion that escapes me at the moment...

I keep seeing references to the ridgeline, wasn't that the "truck" that was a really a unibody car? The one that you couldn't really put much of a load of anything in the back, because it flexed the body just enough when you did, that you couldn't close the doors?
I don't recall it being that flexy. most of the criticism against it was that it looked like a Pilot with the rear part of the roof notched out. which is more or less what it was.

The new Ridgeline (2018+) while still unibody is a bit more "trucky" looking and has been much better received. plus it has some pretty nifty features in the cargo bed.

unibody isn't really a big disadvantage for a class 1 truck. The old Jeep Comanche was unibody as well.

Last edited by jz78817; 04-15-2018 at 05:15 PM.
  #40  
Old 04-15-2018, 05:31 PM
Jacquernagy Jacquernagy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo Krupe View Post
It's about image, not practicality. Why else buy an $80,000 Escalade, or even a Bentley Bentayga, at a cool $229,000?
Hah, that reminds me of the Fly Fishing Bentley that I once saw someone post about on FB. I joked that if I had one, I'd put a "Salt Life" sticker on the back. (A popular sticker among.....well, I'll just call them the "frat guys of fishing", the offshore saltwater Gulf Coast party boat crowd. Beer, music, large groups, and wild fights with gigantic fish on heavy-ass rigs.) Serious fly fisherman would consider it slumming, hence the joke. You have to be a fishing geek to really get it.
  #41  
Old 04-15-2018, 06:23 PM
Leo Krupe Leo Krupe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacquernagy View Post
Hah, that reminds me of the Fly Fishing Bentley that I once saw someone post about on FB. I joked that if I had one, I'd put a "Salt Life" sticker on the back. (A popular sticker among.....well, I'll just call them the "frat guys of fishing", the offshore saltwater Gulf Coast party boat crowd. Beer, music, large groups, and wild fights with gigantic fish on heavy-ass rigs.) Serious fly fisherman would consider it slumming, hence the joke. You have to be a fishing geek to really get it.
Is that what Salt Life is about (I could google it, but it's not that important)? I thought it was the new "Ron Jon's Surf Shop" or "Salty Dog Cafe" touristy crap. I live pretty far inland, about 1,000 miles away from any US coast, so surfing or saltwater fishing isn't exactly a native experience. Still, I see many, many "Salt Life" stickers. Now, there are the take-offs, like "Got Life" in the Salt Life font, or any semi-serious parody.
  #42  
Old 04-15-2018, 07:08 PM
MichaelEmouse MichaelEmouse is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,096
I suspect that, along with certain other goods like restaurant portion size or TV screen size, the smaller, cheaper option gives you 50% as much benefit while costing 75-90% as much as the larger option so very few people would pick it.

This seems to be a trend among some goods. I can't quite figure out what they have in common which makes them behave like that. Saying that they must have high fixed costs and low marginal costs seems accurate in an abstract way but doesn't really describe what happened, when and why that change has occurred. Is it fixed costs which are higher than before, marginal costs which are lower, both?

Last edited by MichaelEmouse; 04-15-2018 at 07:10 PM.
  #43  
Old 04-15-2018, 07:49 PM
FoieGrasIsEvil FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 16,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by seal_cleaner View Post
Tacoma is the #1 selling used truck in the US. Thinking about downsizing my Tundra to one of those. I had a ‘73 hilux back in the day, it was a real brick.
If your Tundra has the 5.7L V-8 motor, you're going to really appreciate the uptick in MPG's. I don't know about the brand new 5.7 motors going into the Tundra now, but man, that i-Force (powered by Apple!) 5.7L is thirsty as hell.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #44  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:22 PM
jz78817 jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
If your Tundra has the 5.7L V-8 motor, you're going to really appreciate the uptick in MPG's. I don't know about the brand new 5.7 motors going into the Tundra now, but man, that i-Force (powered by Apple!) 5.7L is thirsty as hell.
there was this car site I used to comment on a lot where this guy would brag relentlessly about the "magnificent 5.7 liter 32 valve iForce V8" in his Tundra.

he always went silent when people (usually me) pointed out that the pushrod 5.7 V8 in Ram trucks was more powerful and got better fuel economy.
  #45  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:23 PM
thelurkinghorror thelurkinghorror is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Venial Sin City
Posts: 12,821
If you're looking for "used" Tacomas and Tundras, prepare to be shocked at how much they go for. Same with Chevrolet, and probably GMC.
  #46  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:25 PM
Jacquernagy Jacquernagy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo Krupe View Post
Is that what Salt Life is about (I could google it, but it's not that important)? I thought it was the new "Ron Jon's Surf Shop" or "Salty Dog Cafe" touristy crap. I live pretty far inland, about 1,000 miles away from any US coast, so surfing or saltwater fishing isn't exactly a native experience. Still, I see many, many "Salt Life" stickers. Now, there are the take-offs, like "Got Life" in the Salt Life font, or any semi-serious parody.
No, it absolutely has become that....it's migrated into the Midwest at this point. It's part of a general trend of pop-country kitsch, like something that Georgia/Florida Line would sing about. (Florida, various parts of it, are a big holiday hangout for Midwest/Southern folk in general, though they seem to favor Ft. Meyers, Tampa, and Pensacola over the eastern shore of Florida, which makes sense from a geographical standpoint.) Others might go to Gulf Shores or anywhere else in the Gulf of Mexico area, even if they don't fish. Big big spring break/drunken-debauchery destination for high school and college students. You can probably buy "Salt Life" stickers at any number of tackle shops in the Midwest where there is no saltwater fishing to be found whatsoever.
  #47  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:30 PM
Jacquernagy Jacquernagy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 833
Today's heavy pickups are truly amazing vehicles to drive, though...from the standpoint of quality, a comfortable driving experience, and even fuel efficiency, they're outstanding. When I go to Nova Scotia, I always rent a Ram 1500 or a Silverado 1500...they have the muscle to handle irregular rural roads and very steep hills near Cape Breton, they're very comfortable to drive on the highway, and they handle spectacularly well in close traffic also - I can easily parallel-park in downtown Halifax with them. The backup camera helps a lot with that.
  #48  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:36 PM
jz78817 jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelurkinghorror View Post
If you're looking for "used" Tacomas and Tundras, prepare to be shocked at how much they go for. Same with Chevrolet, and probably GMC.
I bought a (lightly) used 2011 Ranger in 2014. it only had about 15,000 miles on it. two years later, I saw similar trucks with 50-70k miles listed for a couple thousand dollars more than what mine was listed for.
  #49  
Old 04-15-2018, 08:58 PM
SmartAleq SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 4,359
There are a couple things about a small pickup truck that make them uniquely useful. You can put a yard of mulch or a half yard of soil/compost in the back and load it in with a front loader--you cannot do this with a van of any sort. Plus, a van of any sort has carpeting and seats in the back, which few people want to have covered in mulch or compost. You can clean out the bed of the pickup with a hose--not so easy with a minivan.

The pickup is rear wheel drive and you can beef up the shocks so it'll carry a lot more weight than you'd think. Minivans are front wheel drive, and if you put too much weight in the back they lug horribly and become extremely hard to drive with all the weight on the trailing wheels.

If you need the pickup bed to stay dry you can get a cheap fiberglass or aluminum cap to put on it that you can take right back off if you need to haul something tall or gross. Minivans don't have this option.

Rear wheel drive pickup has a greater towing capacity than any front wheel drive with the same size engine.

A compact pickup with a 4 cylinder engine is very easy on the gas and is a lighter weight vehicle than a minivan, especially if you don't have a cap on the back. They're easy to set up as a camper too, just set a couple 2x4s (or in the case of my '92 Dakota, 2x6s) across the wheel wells and cut a bit of plywood to fit and boom, it's a bed with storage underneath and you can still schlep the dogs back there. If the dogs are making noise you have the option of shutting the window in the back of the cab.

Small pickups are the bomb and we need more of them. They make excellent delivery vehicles too, you can park them in tiny spots and get around busy inner city streets easier than a fullsize.
  #50  
Old 04-15-2018, 09:22 PM
jz78817 jz78817 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,072
Quote:
The pickup is rear wheel drive and you can beef up the shocks so it'll carry a lot more weight than you'd think
shocks don't carry weight. nor are they supposed to. they're dampers. the springs carry the weight.

Last edited by jz78817; 04-15-2018 at 09:22 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017