The Reason Why Are Trucks Getting Bigger

The author makes a correct observation (trucks are getting bigger to circumvent emissions guidelines, not solely out of ego), but fails to address the underlying market demand: as trucks have gotten bigger, they've also gotten "meaner"[1]. Emissions requirements don't require a truck to look like it's going to beat you up.

In other words: consumer ego (wanting to drive a big, mean looking truck) is an underlying pressure in the market, even if the sufficient mover for the current size explosion is emissions dodging.

[1]: https://jalopnik.com/we-need-to-talk-about-truck-design-righ...

Lol

Truck design used to be such that you pretended to be a working man. Now, you just show everyone how big a jerk you are. There's an entire brand of truck rims that are just called "Hostile". Anyone who would buy such a thing should just be followed everywhere by the cops. http://www.hostilewheels.com/

I think the article would have done well to also discuss America's general lack of vehicle safety inspections. There's a reason people don't drive around in lifted pickups with ridiculous wheels in Germany.

They're just... wheels.

Someone somewhere is doing something I don't like! Call the cops!

It'd be hilarious if it wasn't the governing principle of America.

They are a reflection of the attitudes of the driver and their intentions every time they climb up behind the wheel. And in California they are unlawful if they protrude beyond the body of the truck, which they invariably do because that's the only reason people buy these.

Slogan of the company is literally "There's no place for mercy!"

For a very obvious case of this, observe changes in BMW vehicle designs. The new generation looks like it'll gleefuly ensure death of any pedestrian it hits.

E.g.

2023: https://www.autojakal.com/2022/04/2023-bmw-7-series.html

2002: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_7_Series_(E65)

I’ve often wondered if this has an effect on wildlife. If we perceive the front end of a truck as “meaner”, does that apply to deer as well? Curious if there is any data on the likelihood of hitting a deer with a truck vs a sedan. I assume this would be difficult to capture as areas with higher chances of hitting a deer are also the areas where drivers are more likely to be behind the wheel of larger trucks.

How do you decide what looks “meaner?” This guy fixated on the Chevy Silverado design, but I don’t see what’s wrong with it. It looks more squared off and masculine, and less curvy and feminine, which is a design trend it shares with Apple’s latest MacBook pros. Is Google’s chrome book pixel mean? https://www.zdnet.com/product/google-chromebook-pixel/

I think what you’re actually observing is the counter-reaction to all cars looking like jelly beans due to aerodynamic styling driven by emissions regulations. A squared off looking car stands out in the crowd. I drive a Toyota 4Runner, which looks like an evil Japanese robot, partly for this reason (my wife hates the jellybean trend).

Those changes are largely driven by the desire appeal to consumers in china.

https://www.wapcar.my/news/bmws-big-grilles-are-the-tastes-o...

> as trucks have gotten bigger, they've also gotten "meaner"[1].

Or to be more precise: a current trend in automotive fashion is a larger grille, and some blogger framed that tendentiously for clicks.

To be specific they can’t go beyond the fenders as tires will kick up rocks and other debris. Has nothing to do with appearance.

Deer don't avoid cars because their visual system shorts out when they see a light source shining directly in their eyes[1]. You could make the truck look exactly like a mountain lion and it probably wouldn't save any deer.

[1] https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/animals/why-do-deer-get-tr...

The higher hood is required by newer European pedestrian impact safety regulations, intended to reduce head injuries.

So the reality is 180 degrees opposite to what your claim is.

Looking like it's going to hurt you, while being safer, is not a contradiction.

Blind spots increase with truck height.

google has many studies and articles on the dangers of this but a link to get you started

https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/the-hidden-danger...

And why is it the current trend in automotive (specifically, truck) fashion?

This is a weird indirection to introduce: of course it’s fashionable. The observation is that it’s fashionable because aggression is itself fashionable, at least to the target market.

I used Jalopnik as a source, since they’re a well known car website. I’ll try to find additional sources; I seem to recall an interview with a Ford or Chrysler exec a handful of years ago where they said, point blank, that aggressive front designs are a key selling point to their customer base.

All cars are getting meaner, it's not just fault of the Chinese market. These big trucks are sold mostly in the US and they still have these ever-growing grills.

It's not just the headlights, but that might very well be the majority. There have been cases where I've had to stop for deer crossing the road at night, but they didn't look into my headlights and freeze, they just kept walking across the road. Also once I had a deer run out of the woods into the side of my car while I was driving.

I don’t have a “wrong or not” claim to make. Only that trucks are manifestly more aggressive looking than they historically have been. Whether it’s a reaction doesn’t really factor into it.

> And why is it the current trend in automotive (specifically, truck) fashion?

Because European pedestrian safety requirements all but demand big bulbous front ends, it's uneconomical to design that much of a car or SUV twice and a fugly grill is the solution OEMs have deemed most effective at prettying that up. The trucks are all but forced to copy the same rough shapes because "brand identity" and "design language".

Aggressive styling and goes over the decades. You can make these cars look however you want with a little bit of black plastic and fake chrome with no impact on safety. The actual underlying shapes and dimensions that you are muddying the waters by conflating with aggression are driven by technical requirements.

This doesn’t follow at all: the American pickup truck industry isn’t dominated (or even particularly influenced) by European demand. They’re a tiny and shrinking part of the EU market[1] with plenty of domestic competition (with markedly less aggressive designs).

American pickup truck design is overwhelmingly influenced by American market trends, since that’s where they’re being sold. And the domestic market likes aggressive designs, and does not particularly care about pedestrian safety[2].

[1]: https://www.autonews.com/sales/pickups-europeans-say-thanks-...

[2]: https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/the-hidden-danger...

Where I live - which my wife still questions our decision - the giant mean trucks aren't just giant and mean, but they are outfitted with what sounds like a freight train horn, and many myriads of flood lights.

Nobody knows why this is, because most people live in subdivisions and not farms, where you might feasibly need giant mean trucks with flood lights. And yet the big mean, loud, bright trucks are quite popular.

Why did you censor “sack”? That’s not even a foul word.

I've also had a deer run into the side of my car!

I think they know cars are dangerous, but they don't perceive the speed and don't do a good job of extrapolating where the car will be. And why should they, they're deer. So they just bolt across the road knowing it's dangerous when a car is coming (hence why they're bolting) but often misjudge.

thank goodness we have these tiny technological devices called cameras, that can be installed in the front and rear of these mean bad trucks, so that the driver can see inside the blind spots.

now those poor babies, children and vertically challenged adults will be safe as safe can be... yipeee

Sometimes people are different than you and enjoy different things and it doesn’t inherently mean they’re bad.

Perhaps try adjusting to your new location instead of blaming the locals?

> Nobody knows why this is

But isn't that sort of an easy thing to generalize? (forgive me). It's not about need. It's about want. Everyone surrounding you has a big truck, you need one too. You buy a bigger truck than them, now it's up to everyone else to step and make theirs bigger, meaner, louder, etc. You spit coal out of your exhaust? Cool, now I spit more. Pretty simple human behaviors, unfortunately.

Of course they're just wheels. The GP is remarking on the aesthetic of aggression that's being used to sell them.

Most of the newer trucks have front facing cameras because of that. I have a "Mid Size" truck which sits fairly high. Since it doesn't have front cameras, I often back into parking spots so I can make use of my rear view camera to assist.

I dunno about meaner… (that's a personal feeling) there was a time cars acquired a bug-like appearance and depending on people some fear bugs more than others and could be interpreted as “meaner”; however it was mostly just an ‘organic look’ trend. To many others bugs look cute, so...

I didn't detect any blame in the GP's comment, nor the claim that "I dislike it and therefore it's inherently bad."

The more accurate reading would be that the GP thinks that it's bad, and that's why they don't like it. But even still, the comment doesn't appear to contain blame, only bewilderment.

My comment was not about the height of the hood, but the overall styling.

> And why is it the current trend in automotive (specifically, truck) fashion?

It isn't just trucks. Someone posted a picture of a BMW sedan with a really big grille in this very thread. The Toyota Camrys* even has a similar design: https://www.cars.com/articles/how-the-2018-toyota-camrys-tri....

> The observation is that it’s fashionable because aggression is itself fashionable, at least to the target market.

It's just a big grille. I think the "aggression" aspect is more in the eye of the beholder (or the trolling concept).

> I seem to recall an interview with a Ford or Chrysler exec a handful of years ago where they said, point blank, that aggressive front designs are a key selling point to their customer base.

Assuming that's true, are you interpreting the word "aggressive" correctly? It has many senses besides "hostility", e.g.:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aggressive:

> 3 : strong or emphatic in effect or intent

> aggressive colors

> aggressive flavors

Tesla's low-poly truck comes to mind.

But there are also the dudes who get fake testes to hang from the back of their trucks, eh?

It's a variation of "grow some balls": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/grow_some_balls

How long before LED headlights can simply shine around the deer (thus not blinding them), as they do for oncoming vehicles. On second thought that would mean the driver doesn't see the deer; maybe not the best idea!

Lots of people don't like bugs, but I've never heard someone describe a bug as "mean" in the sense that "mean" is describing the appearance of these pickup trucks.

I guess you could say "big mean bug," but that's because "big mean" is a separate idiom in US English for "nasty looking." But we're talking about an aggressive aesthetic, which is both separate from nastiness and purely human in origin (unlike a bug that provokes a disgust reaction in someone).

Where do you get aggressive from? Both just look like regular style cars to me.

Seems kind of crazy, adding a front camera (which the driver might not even look at) rather than just scaling down the front so they can see pedestrians with their eyes.

I know that. I just don’t understand why you’d censor it. This isn’t Club Penguin.

You need to check in somewhere

I don't think it is meant as a censor, but to be illustrative.

Whoever responded about a BMW sedan isn’t me. I’m talking about US pickup trucks, since that’s what the original post is about.

The “aggressive” in the exec’s comment is my paraphrase, because I’m still looking for the original. It might have been “angry” or “violent,” for all I remember. Either way, the implication was clear: the trucks are meant to project hostility, not flamboyance.

Illustrative of balls? That’s a new one.

> Nobody knows why this is, because most people live in subdivisions and not farms, where you might feasibly need giant mean trucks with flood lights. And yet the big mean, loud, bright trucks are quite popular.

Tail fins used to be a big things on cars, but no one knows why that was, because cars don't fly. /s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_tailfin

I feel like this could also just be based off a "biased" sample set. Like you're more likely to notice a large truck with fog lights, meanwhile the Ford Maverick is sold out for the entire next year and it's fords nicest looking, smallest hybrid truck

> the American pickup truck industry isn’t dominated (or even particularly influenced) by European demand

It is, however, influenced by European regulations to the extent that American pickup makers desire a) to sell in the European market at all and b) desire to minimise re-engineering costs.

It's also perfectly valid to hold an opinion and have preferences contrary to those around you.

And these opinions aren't about shoe style, they have consequences on the broader society, and thus are open to criticism for their societal impacts.

Tricked out trucks aren't my thing. But I can see the appeal of buying a rugged vehicle and tricking it out.

To the extent that I have an axe to grind with the big truck owners, it's because some (not all, and not always) these big truck drivers:

- Drive aggressively in urban areas - Blast their excessive lights which is a hazard for cars in front of them - Are intentionally disruptive with their giant horns

Put more plainly - assholes seem to be drawn to such things. But I don't think they create assholes.

But for sure, where I live, there are a lot of disruptive assholes with big trucks.

> Whoever responded about a BMW sedan isn’t me. I’m talking about US pickup trucks, since that’s what the original post is about.

The point is it seems to be a general trend not exclusive to pickup trucks, which some blogger tendentiously latched onto get clicks by stirring up controversy and exploiting pickup truck hate.

Even minivans look meaner.

2002: https://images.iconfigurators.app/images/vehicles/reference/...

2012: https://cfx-vrf-main-imgs.imgix.net/2/4/f/1e950ff3b9d6acc23e...

2022: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/licensed-image?q=tbn:ANd9...

If that were the case, shouldn't it have been 's@@ck'?

This is definitely anecdotal and subjective, but I'd say the vast majority of trucks I've seen look really angry.

My unscientific guess: there was some sort of big angry truck trend that the people who style these things got stuck on, and the Maverick sells like hotcakes because it is styled for underserved "I want a little classic looking truck" market.

Doubly unscientific guess: A little electric Maverick would sell incredibly well.

Purely meaningless anecdata, but I've only known two people that put truck nutz on, and they were both women who did it because they thought it was utterly hilarious

> This is a weird indirection to introduce: of course it’s fashionable. The observation is that it’s fashionable because aggression is itself fashionable, at least to the target market.

People in this thread keep dancing around it but I think nobody has outright said it yet. Maybe it's as simple as: aggressive, belligerent truck styling is uniquely fashionable in America because American culture is getting more and more aggressive and belligerent. Maybe I'm browsing too much r/PublicFreakout, but in the last few years, there's been a visible rise in road rage, people berating service workers, belligerent angry protesting, people trashing businesses over minor transgressions, people losing their shit on airliners, and so on. The public is turning into "that guy in the bar constantly looking for a fight." It shouldn't be surprising that trucks styled such that they look like they're about to bludgeon you are more and more fashionable. Admittedly, this is more of a political statement based on anecdotes than one that comes out of research and data, but hey, this is HN, not Nature.

Excellent point.

I don't know about that - you can track the F150 over time and a 1980's F150 of pickup carrying pickup fame is significantly more aggressive looking than a 2022 F150.

Sure: there's a general trend towards cars projecting hostility. But again, this feels like a distraction at the best: pickup trucks, especially American ones, are exceptional in adopting the trend. The fact that we can pick out another kind of car that also does it doesn't disrupt the pattern.

It sounds like you're taking personal umbrage at the fact that people don't like these pickup trucks. I think it's worth taking a step back: I don't mind pickup trucks; I'd even go as far so say that I appreciate them for their place in the US's culture and history. But that doesn't mean I can't observe a trend, one that dovetails with latent anti-environmentalism, general disdain or disregard for pedestrians and other road traffic, &c.

I live in a rural area.

And I'm sure not all big truck owners tailgate. But when I am being tailgated, it is almost always by a big truck.

So it is I think many people shape their view of these vehicles. It could be a tiny percentage of the owners or large trucks, but we remember these interactions of bright lights, a cloud of coal, loud horns, and someone tailgating an inch behind us.

Ah, that's awesome! :)

> How do you decide what looks “meaner?”

Yes, they are designed to look mean.

https://www.musclecarsandtrucks.com/2020-gmc-sierra-hd-desig...

> ‘Powerful’ and references to powerful things was a theme that the GMC exterior designer referenced multiple times to describe the exterior direction for the 2020 GMC Sierra HD.

> “I remember wanting it to make it feel very locomotive… my first week in Detroit I was driving through downtown and seeing the fist of Joe Louis, and remember thinking that’s what this truck should look like – a massive fist moving through the air.”

or this bit:

> “The front end was always the focal point. The rest of the truck is supporting what the rest of the truck is communicating… we spent a lot of time making sure that when you stand in front of this thing it looks like it’s going to come get you. It’s got that pissed-off feel, but not in a boyish way, still looking mature. It just had to have that imposing look,” explained the GM designer.

---

I don't see any fix for this arms-race besides legislative. Bigger, more dangerous vehicles are threatening to smaller, greener vehicles, and we need to be greener.

While there are EV trucks coming, those EVs require like 3X as much battery materials as a normal-sized vehicles, and even normal-sized vehicles are too large for the dominant commuting use (single-passenger). That massive battery use is a concern since supply is constrained by real-world limitations.

Also, the larger vehicles create urban planning problems -- bigger vehicles means bigger lanes and parking spots, which hurts walkability. Again, we're back to climate change concerns.

But if you've got the money, the downsides of an oversized vehicle are wholly externalized to the other road users.

I don't really see any feasible way to solve this besides legislation. At the very least, large vehicles should be punished more heavily for highway infractions because they represent a larger risk to other road-users. Speeding in a truck is intrinsically more dangerous than speeding in a car - the larger mass, poorer bumper compatibility, and larger cross-section are a risk for others on the road.

But because of the culture war issue, no mainstream politician is going to ever have an adult conversation on the subject because it will come back to "why do you hate farmers/working men/whatever you latte-sipping urban liberal elitist".

Do those actually work? How widely are they deployed? Newer LED headlights seem particularly blinding to me as a driver on the other side.

It's true for every class of vehicle.

For example, consider the Mazda Miata -- perhaps the most "feminine" car imaginable.

1990s: https://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/1997_ma...

Now: https://cdn.drivingline.com/media/21637/drivingline-2016_maz...

For almost every single car model that has existed for more than 10 years, the old model is friendly, open, soft, "feminine." For the new one, the design language is angular, closed, hard, and "masculine." There's no way to say for certain why this is the case. In my opinion: aesthetic design of products reflects the id of the consumer. Our id has changed.

Source? Everything I've heard is that the exact opposite is required -- that hoods are designed such that pedestrians will roll over them, and higher hoods increase hip injuries.

The "meaner" look isn't just about aesthetics, but about physical size, which is increasing. The MacBook analogy seems flawed because the change in the design of the MacBook doesn't actually make it harder for me to avoid killing pedestrians while using it.

Yes, they are designed to look mean. That's what the fashion of the larger grill is for.

https://www.musclecarsandtrucks.com/2020-gmc-sierra-hd-desig...

> ‘Powerful’ and references to powerful things was a theme that the GMC exterior designer referenced multiple times to describe the exterior direction for the 2020 GMC Sierra HD.

> “I remember wanting it to make it feel very locomotive… my first week in Detroit I was driving through downtown and seeing the fist of Joe Louis, and remember thinking that’s what this truck should look like – a massive fist moving through the air.”

or this bit:

> “The front end was always the focal point. The rest of the truck is supporting what the rest of the truck is communicating… we spent a lot of time making sure that when you stand in front of this thing it looks like it’s going to come get you. It’s got that pissed-off feel, but not in a boyish way, still looking mature. It just had to have that imposing look,” explained the GM designer.

Maybe we just have very different ideas about what aggression looks like, but the average 1980s F-150 looks downright homely to me. It basically comes equipped with a farmer in overalls and a wide-brimmed hat.

The 2022 F-150, on the other hand, has much more front-facing chrome, a much larger (and higher, and therefore dangerous to pedestrians) bumper, and much larger headlights. Some of these are probably good features! But they certainly feel more aggressive to me.

Becoming common on most VAG cars for example, even Skoda (their budget-ish brand) - see the video here https://www.skoda-storyboard.com/en/press-kits/skoda-superb-....

I think they're pretty effective; they cut out the light beam exactly where the other car is. There might still be reflections from other surfaces though.

"To the extent" being operative. It'd be good to have numbers substantiating this, because all signals indicate that US truck manufacturers have very little presence in European markets.

It has since been edited, so apparently that was the point.

> the change in the design of the MacBook doesn't actually make it harder for me to avoid killing pedestrians while using it.

Actually the profile of the current MacBook Airs when closed is less “sharp”, reducing potential velocity and penetration as you swing it around wildly while walking down the street.

It definitely feels like society as a whole has gotten more impatient, entitled and angry since the pandemic. Maybe it was all the time spent at home rather than interacting with strangers and taking part in society. I mean we're still not to pre-pandemic levels of socialization I'd say.

EDIT: Whether this has anything to do with current car design trends is a different question though :P

> US truck manufacturers have very little presence in European markets.

If they have any presence at all then they are subject to European regulations of one form or another.

Mystery solved! Wonderful investigation, all.

For the units they deliver to those markets. You haven't demonstrated that the US models are being adapted to European requirements, rather than companies selling European adapted models. My understanding as a lay-person is that the latter is much more common, since the European market requires adaptation anyways (more diesel engines, more manual transmissions, different driver side, &c.)

And how many people have been killed by MacBooks in the past year?

There’s also lots of assholes in BMW M3s, tricked out Hondas and other Japanese cars, and motor cycles.

All vehicles are getting bigger, for various reasons including safety regulations. A 1985 BMW 3 series had a curb weight of 2,400 to 2,600 pounds. Today a BMW 3 is up to 3,200 to 4,300 pounds. A Tesla model 3, which is in the same class, is up to 3,500 to 4,000 pounds. The top end of both cars actually hits the bottom end of the current F150 range, which is about 4,100 pounds.

> Sure: there's a general trend towards cars projecting hostility. But again, this feels like a distraction at the best: pickup trucks, especially American ones, are exceptional in adopting the trend. The fact that we can pick out another kind of car that also does it doesn't disrupt the pattern.

I don't know why you're so invested in salvaging that blogger's clickbait, against pretty compelling evidence. If it's a general trend, it makes no sense to read it as especially significant when applied to pickup trucks.

> It sounds like you're taking personal umbrage at the fact that people don't like these pickup trucks.

No, I just don't think it's a good idea to take clickbait or some random hot take as showing some kind of essential truth, especially in an area where there are biases to profitably exploit.

Are the operators expected to drive by looking at cameras, or by looking out of their windows?

> ‘How do you decide what looks “meaner?” ‘

If you’re a pedestrian crossing in front of one of these or sharing a narrow residential street while riding your bicycle you might feel it. Last time I felt this was when I was in a shopping center parking lot and someone, parked gangster style (facing the wrong way in a no parking zone), pulled out much too quickly (it’s a frigging shopping center parking lot) in front of me on my motorcycle.

The curb weight can rival a light armored Humvee. And the grill is very high, promising to plow you under the vehicle.

Add lifters, 20+ inch rims, battering ram grill attachments, and all black trim…then you’re looking at the grim reaper of vehicular death.

Apple hasn't released FSD for the laptop line yet, but their industrial design is already improving safety in this area.

Pickup trucks are the most popular vehicles in America. How many lives would be saved if everyone switched to jellybean cars? What’s the benefit relative to the cost?

Don’t forget that “green” EVs are also extremely heavy. At 4,300 to 5,000 lbs, a Model S is squarely in the same weight class as a Ford F-150. When you get hit by a 4,500 pound vehicle, whether it looks “mean” or like a jellybean doesn’t make much difference.

Certainly. Just relatively fewer where I live now, compared to the trucks.

Depending on where I've lived in the area, I've experienced the japanese cars more, or the BMW's more. BMW's weren't as bad when I lived in a rich town, but any flavor of SUV was really bad. If I had to pick a brand which was particularly preferred by assholes then, it would have been Lexus.

What aesthetic? It seems like it's just the manufacturer's name. Having names that evoke some sort of exclamation like that is pretty common in the automotive aftermarket (Behemouth Drivetrain, Killer Bee Motorsport, etc). If you're predisposed to hate them of course you'll read meaning that isn't there into it but there's nothing "hostile" about those wheels. They're just marketing to the monster energy decal crowd.

The fact that violence is a pervasive theme in automotive marketing is the problem, not an excuse.

It's not obvious to me how "I don't really see any feasible way to solve this besides legislation." is any more or less of an adult conversation. The models involved - economic, societal, climate, etc. - are very large and complex and the behaviors and outcomes can evolve for all kinds of reasons. To me, "we must throw everything out and legislate" is simply a call to arms to abandon the discussion in favor of coercion to enforce, unconditionally, the proposition of a specific contingent. This is literally the definition of elitism and it doesn't strike me as very elegant.

Exceeding the asshole-ery level of M3 drivers is a high bar, so, sure.

(Saying this as a former M3 owner!)

What compelling evidence? Is there something more than a BMW model that I'm missing?

The Jalopnik article is indeed a random hot take. But that doesn't mean the underlying claim ("pickup trucks are designed to be visually aggressive, and are marketed to their target customer base on that basis") is factually incorrect. I'm not aware of any bias that that's exploiting, other than the general aesthetic displeasure I see at a car that looks like it hates everything outside of it.

> Doubly unscientific guess: A little electric Maverick would sell incredibly well.

Doubtful, but you'll find out soon I guess.

https://youtu.be/CkoquiSnqbk

Oh, absolutely biased! But not just trucks. Works for all kinds of other things. Sports cars too. Nice things. Athletic skills. Etc. People like to one up each other.

So, that's not all truck owners. Just thinking (anecdotally) that lots of "mean" truck owners buy them in part because of one-upping/status-seeking behaviors and wants rather than "I need to tow 12k pounds" requirements.

In my town (just outside NY City), seems like the status vehicle of choice is a 911. Buy one if you want to fit in with all your rich buddies!

It's _technically_ subjective, but it's clear to anyone with eyes that these cunty trucks are designed to appeal to bullies.

They work but not in the US, where they are illegal (the HW is capable of "anti-daze" but SW is locked out for the US cars).

> reducing potential velocity and penetration as you swing it around wildly

This is a shame. Armor-piercing Macbooks used to be a viable option for home defense. Apple isn't the same company they used to be.

Yet another case of them not taking pro users seriously.

It is a prisoners dilemma, people want safety from all the dangerous cars, so they buy a bigger car to feel safe, this makes other people want even bigger cars than your car so they don't end up being crushed by you. The end result is less safety and more deaths and injuries.

I don't think homeliness and aggression are negatively correlated. Look at a cauliflower eared fighter. You have an association of that kind of truck with farmers, but it could just as easily be rednecks with rifles. Doesn't have anything to do with the design.

The front of the truck is sharper angled, the hood is actually forward so it appears like a shark; the grille takes up a larger percentage of the front of the truck.

The modern F150 is rounder, with a smaller percentage devoted to the grille, and has a flat front. If you size up the 1980 F150 to the same size, it would be much more aggressive looking - you can actually see this because the 1980 truck, when lifted, looks positively mean.

You’re arguing possibilities, when all that matters is the cultural conception. Of course homeliness is not intrinsically tied to non-violence; all that matters is that the American conception of Farmer Joe is a homely, non-violent one. And Farmer Joe drives a beat up 1984 F-150.