←back to thread

The Reason Why Are Trucks Getting Bigger

(toddofmischief.blogspot.com)
173 points yasp | 7 comments | 11 Aug 22 13:06 UTC | HN request time: 1.02s | source | bottom
Show context
woodruffw ◴[11 Aug 22 13:50 UTC] No.32425520[source]▶
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...

replies(11): >>32425537 #>>32425714 #>>32425802 #>>32425929 #>>32425964 #>>32425982 #>>32426067 #>>32426432 #>>32426978 #>>32427017 #>>32427614 #
rayiner ◴[11 Aug 22 14:17 UTC] No.32425982[source]▶
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).

replies(6): >>32426387 #>>32426603 #>>32427070 #>>32427595 #>>32427642 #>>32429182 #
1. caradine ◴[11 Aug 22 15:54 UTC] No.32427642[source]▶
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.
replies(2): >>32427708 #>>32429123 #
2. gumby ◴[11 Aug 22 15:59 UTC] No.32427708[source]▶
> 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.

replies(2): >>32428444 #>>32434454 #
3. caradine ◴[11 Aug 22 16:46 UTC] No.32428444[source]▶
And how many people have been killed by MacBooks in the past year?
replies(1): >>32429209 #
4. rayiner ◴[11 Aug 22 17:31 UTC] No.32429123[source]▶
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.
5. gumby ◴[11 Aug 22 17:37 UTC] No.32429209{3}[source]▶
Apple hasn't released FSD for the laptop line yet, but their industrial design is already improving safety in this area.
6. heywoodlh ◴[12 Aug 22 03:33 UTC] No.32434454[source]▶
> 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.

replies(1): >>32434856 #
7. gumby ◴[12 Aug 22 04:57 UTC] No.32434856{3}[source]▶
Yet another case of them not taking pro users seriously.