• DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    “MUH FREEDOM. FUCKIN COMMIES”

    I can just see the pavement princess brigade seething because their next emotional support penismobile won’t be exaggerated anymore and they will actually be able to see pedestrians and cyclists.

  • DerArzt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Man, I’m not all that interested in owning a truck or an SUV but there are so few Sudan’s out there that fit folks like me over 6ft tall. (If anyone has suggestions please share, and no public transportation isn’t an option where I live)

  • demizerone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Yay we will have the return of small trucks. These behemoths are good for towing and work, but not everyday driving.

    • Shapillon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Most of the behemoths aren’t even good as utilitary vehicles…

      I’ve got a 15yo Renault Kangoo which could beat almost any oversized suburban pedestrian flattener in all metrics except price.

  • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 hours ago

    For the first time ever, manufacturers would be required to study the impact of test dummies hit outside of vehicles. The rules would likely change the design of what America drives permanently.

    That’s all the article says about the actual rule changes. Based on this information alone, I know very little about what will actually change.

    I feel like the NHTSA should do way more if they can and argue for limits on light truck sizes in their length, height, weight, and perhaps classification.

    • grudan@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      The other thing it mentioned was the “head-to-hood” test. AFAIK car manufacturers are only required to meet the collision safety requirements for collisions involving the same class of vehicle. Vehicles in different classes are not made to impact with each other, making, for instance, a sedan to pickup truck collision much more dangerous for the sedan driver. The only way they can still meet those safety requirements is to make the front of the SUVs and trucks much much smaller and probably lower.

      Edit: I was thinking of the AP article about this.

    • USSMojave@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 hours ago

      For the first time ever, manufacturers would be required to study the impact of test dummies hit outside of vehicles

      But that will reveal a LOT of corroborating information for what we know, which is how dangerous they are. It’s a good thing to have more data

    • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Well, for one thing, an M1 Abrams main battle tank has better front sightlines than most trucks on the road today.

      And it isn’t even that much more dangerous to get hit by because of the giant flat-face front impact planes of the trucks. Used to be if you got hit by a car it would roll you up over the hood, now you just die.

      I have to imagine that will impact the testing and design at least somewhat.

      Edit: fixed the image link

      • turmacar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Not sure about the second part, tanks are built to go over things. Their “negative slant” seems more likely to push things under than a car’s hood or a truck/SUV’s flat face.

        • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Oh sure if you get run over by a tank you’re going under the treads and it’s lights out for you. No question. My point was though, with sedans or older smaller trucks, the point of impact would hit around waist level on most adults and you’d be thrown up and over the hood, which would bleed off a lot of the lethal impact damage. These days the full weight of the truck is going to hit you in the chest and shoulders and you’re not getting thrown anywhere but forward and under.

          If you’re a child, you’re pretty screwed either way, but modern big trucks are way, way more dangerous in a frontal impact than they used to be just based on the shape of the things. That big flat face is like getting slammed directly into a wall at 80mph.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I suspect the only “change” that will happen is a large amount of money changing hands so they don’t have to bother.

      Double the price of petrol. That will make Americans desire small cars again.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 hours ago

    There should really be a redistribution gas tax, another dollar per gallon on gas which then goes back split evenly to every American. Incentivizes less gas usage while avoiding the regressive nature of a sales tax. Canada has something like this.

    Ruinous politically so it would never happen but it would be a good plan.

    • Grappling7155@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      It’s the carbon tax and carbon rebate in Canada. When paired with a carbon tariff, it’s a great market friendly solution to reduce emissions. Beware though, it really really triggers regressive petrosexual conservatives and the ones in Canada keep trying to trigger an election over it so they can get rid of it ASAP and pollute more.

    • Lobreeze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      I’m Canadian… avoiding tax??

      Hahahahahaha I want what you’re smoking.

      We literally get taxed on tax

  • MehBlah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    But how will all of these guys compensate for their average or less than average penis?

  • CondensedPossum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    “One of the last frontiers of vehicle safety” If you’re going to post this sort of stuff where people can see it, maybe you could cover it with Content Warnings and Propaganda tags?

    • ghen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      As was designed by the people who actually wrote those laws, the lobbyists. More profitable cars to sell as America moves farther and farther away from reality with car prices.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    My dream car: An EV version of the 1955 Nash Metropolitan, seen here in this silly ad photo:

    (Sorry, it’s hard to find pictures that give a true indication of the smallness of the car. Also, mine would be the red and white two tone variety.)

    • UnpledgedCatnapTipper@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I just want a tiny electric hatchback, like, Honda fit sized, that has like 150+ mile range, and doesn’t use an outdated charging standard. I’ve considered a Nissan Leaf but they are still sticking with the chademo charger port, which is way less common.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Yes!

      Even that was in an era or needlessly ego-boosting giant cars, going utilitarian to get a better product, better lives on average, even save resources - amazing (but with the cardinal sin of not being expensive enough and thus not as financially profitable).

      For the same reason I would love to get a normally viable car of much smol.

      Like a bit more modern version of Figaro:

      Or a sexy mid-engine Autozam:

      Kei cars are qewl!

  • rsuri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    16 hours ago

    As it is the US has no pedestrian safety standards at the federal level. I’m pretty sure if GM wanted to put out a truck with running chainsaws all over it then it would be perfectly legal as far as the NHTSA is concerned, although some state regulators might have a problem with it which is probably why it doesn’t happen in reality.

    • modeler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      You’re in the process of describing a Cybertruck, just the misfitting panel ‘teeth’ aren’t rotating

  • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    I have a Honda Fit (compact 4 seater) and absolutely LOVE the little car, plus it’s easier to park. But holy shit looking for a compact is hard! Everything is a fucking SUV or truck these days! Just count the number of sedans vs SUVs next time you’re out and about. My favorite cars, the 2 door Mini Cooper and VW Buggy, aren’t even made any more.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Some of that is crumple zones and airbags, but yes there’s pretty much nothing for “small” cars (10 to 14 feet long) in the US.

        • snooggums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          Since the fuel efficiency standards are based on the vehicles footprint, going a few inches bigger allows for a slightly more powerful but also slightly less fuel efficient engine. So the car is roomier, more powerful, and doesn’t get penalized for lower mpg.

          Small trucks are penized for not being fuel efficent enough. I really wish that lead to smaller electric or hybrid trucks like the Maverick, but people have been conviced that those smaller efficient trucks are bad.

          I wish the standards were not based on size, but by vehicle type. Same end result for trucks being popular, but at least smaller trucks would be viable alternatives to sedans again.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Or hell, just base it on straight up fuel efficiency. If there’s a small car that’s already more fuel efficient than everything else on the market, there should be no disincentive to sell more of them, even if that fuel efficiency doesn’t improve over time.

            A larger vehicle is only better if it’s being used to move more people (that would otherwise be using another vehicle). Maybe instead of mpg (miles per gallon) it should be pmpg (person miles per gallon), where it not only depends on the vehicle itself but how many people are expected to ride in it regularly (which the manufacturer can add seats for but is more dependent on the owner).

  • workerONE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Why do little cars have to withstand a collision with a huge truck but trucks just get bigger and bigger? The new Hummer is over 9,000lbs (4,090 kg)

    • krippix@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      wtf in Europe that thing couldn’t be driven with a regular class B drivers license

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Commercial license requirements for full sized trucks over a certain size and weight would be an excellent solution. In addition to the increased effort and cost to get one, commercial licenses are way easier to lose.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I agree. It’s felt weird each time I’ve rented a moving truck and was able to drive it myself. They are giant and I’m not used to driving something so big plus no visibility out of the rear of the vehicle. And on top of that, they are so massive that mistakes will hurt more and will be harder to notice while they are happening.

          Though even normal licenses are too easy IMO. I haven’t been tested or trained on driving in decades. Most people don’t know how 2 way stop signs work, I’ve even had a cop wave me through when it was their right of way. The bar should be higher for getting and keeping a license and lower for losing it. And “but people need cars to get to work and such” addressed with better mass transportation and city planning.

      • Jojo, Lady of the West@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I mean they’re getting heavier, but not, like, whole number multiples heavier. An electric might be some 60% heavier than a comparable gas car. But the aforementioned hummer is more than 5 times heavier than even a heavy electric “utility vehicle”. That’s more than 400% heavier.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Huh? Are you saying heavy electric utility vehicles are less than 2k lbs? I think you’re math is a bit off, or I’m misunderstanding you. 9k lbs is heavy but it’s only around 2k lbs heavier than it’s gas counter parts (most SUVs are around 6.5-7k lbs). Most electric cars are 1-2k lbs heavier than their gas counterparts already. Batteries are not light.

          • Jojo, Lady of the West@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            I’m saying smaller cars are usually lighter than bigger cars, even when the smaller cars are electric. And the car I was comparing to was the Chevrolet bolt “electric utility vehicle” that’s trying to be an electric SUV. Which is 1600 kg.

            Where a Ford fiesta that’s almost the same size is still 1100 kg.

            Edit: corrected units to kg.

            • ililiililiililiilili@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              Chevy Bolt (electric) is approx. 3,600 lbs. Ford Fiesta (gas) is approx. 2,500 lbs. I think your numbers are kilograms. Sorry to be pedantic, just trying to get correct numbers. But what you’re saying is basically correct. Most small EVs are still lighter than midsize and bigger ICE cars. If you want apples to apples: the 2024 Chevy Equinox EV is 5,000 lbs, whereas the 2024 gas version is approx. 3,400 lbs.

              • Jojo, Lady of the West@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                Oh, shit, you’re right. I was looking at kilograms. Thank you.

                But yeah, the point stands that small cars are lighter and safer than big cars, especially for the things they hit.

    • HBK@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Regardless of truck size, I don’t think tractor trailers are going anywhere. Even if we made trucks smaller those would still be out there

      Smaller trucks would still get in accidents though, and I imagine they would be less deadly

      • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Man, if only we could separate freight from commuter traffic. Like, imagine if all those tractor trailers were on their own separate road, but make it out of, IDK, metal or something so it can withstand the weight better. You could even just have metal right under the wheels, to reduce costs. But what do I know, I’m just some pie in the sky nobody who doesn’t know what he’s talking about

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Unless you’re going to run train tracks to every business in existence, freight will need to be moved using a semi at some point.

        • pemptago@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          Not to mention it would reduce all the underride crashes.

          All these improved vehicle safety standards are generally for bumper-to-bumper collisions, not windshield-to-truck-bed. Frontline released a well-done 2023 episode on it. Highly recommend.

          Edit: md link

  • rhythmisaprancer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    This seems like it could lead to significant innovation in vans in North America, or set least US/Canada. Van pickups, van sedans, van Goghs? After the initial temper tantrums, I think people will buy whatever comes out of the design phase. There used to be a lot of “beef” about emission control devices, but not so much anymore. Those folks moved on.