825
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 191 points 5 months ago

I'm sorry, why the fuck aren't these street legal in more than half of the states? The article says something about safety, but these are street legal all over Europe where we have stronger safety regulations.

Also there's something I can't put my finger on about the journalist choosing a hero image of the van losing its cargo.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 111 points 5 months ago

Probably because it's not safe to drive them around giant pickups who can't see over their hoods

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 83 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Europe and Japan all have freight trucks driving around, so I don't buy that. The fact that many states won't allow these is American truck manufacturing protectionism, nothing more. It's the same reason you can only get a 3/4 or 1 ton truck from Ford, Chevy, or Ram (chicken tax).

[-] YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

It's all about the chicken tax.

[-] jaspersgroove@lemm.ee 10 points 5 months ago

Cab over engine freight trucks with excellent visibility, not jacked up chevys where your view of the ground starts 20 feet in front of you

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

And that's precisely because the option isn't readily available here. We can argue merits of different countries versus the US, but at the end of the day it is what it is unless something changes at the legislative level.

When say a contractor goes to purchase a work vehicle, the option is either a van, which have pathetic motors and hauling capabilities, or a pickup from one of the big 3 that can be outfitted with a utility body. Sometimes you can score one of those Isuzu cabovers, but they're typically outfitted with a full sized box on the chassis, and they're far and few between, and often more expensive. Vans are also stupid expensive, especially 4x4 models, because of the van life crowd. The options really are much more limited than other parts of the world, and I truly believe it's to keep prices high and the money vacuum humming. Plus, you can find an older utility body truck for a fraction of the cost of a used van (I just did this 6 months ago; granted I'm in California, so my experience may not be the norm).

I ended up buying a Ram 2500 when looking for a work truck. I would've loved a 25/35 class van, but I need 4x4 (mountains, snow), and because of the premium those models fetch due to demand from the van life people, that wasn't an option.

And I dunno about other people, but I know what's in front of my truck at all times. It really isn't that hard to mind your surroundings.

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 5 months ago

The front view from a freight truck is better than that of a f150.

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Sure, but as I responded to someone else, show me a viable option that's readily available in the states for a contractor or someone delivering heavy stuff that has the power and 4x4 to do the thing at a reasonable price. I'm all for getting some of these European/Japanese solutions over here, but they simply aren't available or affordable, and so we're stuck with oversized pickups and under powered vans until something changes.

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 14 points 5 months ago
[-] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

I'm sorry, their problem is that the massive trucks are somehow in danger because they weren't designed to handle being hit by a vehicle less than half its size?

What a ridiculous statement.

[-] Live_your_lives@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

That's not what they are saying at all. They're saying small vehicles aren't even safe in crashes with other small vehicles, let alone with bigger vehicles.

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They took a street legal Smart ForTwo…

Then crashed it into a little electric truck and a golf cart…

And they want stuff to be as safe as the Smart car.

[-] blazera@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

This is how we got in this mess, an arms race of trying to feel safe around larger and larger hunks of metal on the road. Americans just have to endanger everyone else for their own peace of mind.

[-] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

And yet Smart cars are legal.

[-] caffinatedone@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Smart cars had to pass US crash test standards and have the appropriate safety equipment. The kei trucks that you can currently import and use are 25+ years old and wouldn't have even passed US standards back then. Your legs are the crumple zone in these things.

I assume that new ones would have a chance, but it'd be expensive for a manufacturer to modify and certify for the US market. Small cars haven't sold well here, and the profit margins are slim.

Maybe with the recent size and price increases in autos here, well see some movement. I'd love a modern Honda kei to go with my element.

[-] Sentient_Modem@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

The crumple zone thing is a bit grey as the USA sells and allows trucks like the Isuzu NPR/Chevy Cab Over.

[-] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

I get all that, but the individual I replied to only related small size to safety. I was merely pointing out that size isn't a factor.

I appreciate your post, and agree completely! A Kei truck would satisfy all my requirements for a utility vehicle.

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 months ago

Ya. Everything’s expensive, so people buy the cheapest thing [with four wheels]. I don’t want folks on the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum to think these are a safe option.

If(?) a ‘90s Honda sedan is safer but the Kei is new and looks cute, for the same price many will choose the less safe option.

Eight Californians die on our roads every day here and I can’t wait for some solutions. I really do empathize with everyone you readers care about (no oil companies, no just-for-funsies-truck manufacturers) - I hate the thought of crumpled and crushed human bodies.

[-] FalseMyrmidon@kbin.run 9 points 5 months ago

What makes you think it's not safe?

[-] neuracnu 13 points 5 months ago

Thin steel frame, no air bags, no crumple zones.

Check out the crash tests: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roLcNwRi1Sk&t=40s

[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 5 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=roLcNwRi1Sk&t=40s

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

Just added something about that - articles & crash tests over the years. Was interested in little vehicles myself. Intrigued seeing them on college campuses.

[-] Altofaltception@lemmy.world 52 points 5 months ago

Speed restrictions.

Kei trucks were designed for use in dense Japanese cities, which is why they also work in European cities. They are nimble but have a low top speed. You're not going 70 mph around a street corner for instance.

It would work in places like NYC for the same reasons, but remember that most of the USA is suburban or rural. You need vehicles that are capable of going fast if you're going to get on a highway.

A possible workaround is to have a separate class for these, like mopeds or scooters, which are road legal but are not highway legal.

[-] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 52 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That work around is what most states that explicitly legalized kei trucks have done, they can't enter roads over 55mph. It's a reasonable concession, you probably don't want to take one over 50mph anyway.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Most places in the US are connected by 55 mph roads. I'd be hard-pressed to get anywhere but the city center in most places I've lived if I couldn't use those roads.

Farm equipment and bikes use those roads all the time, and they go even slower, so I don't think being able to keep up with traffic is a valid concern.

[-] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 16 points 5 months ago

Note that I said over 55, rural connection roads should still be traversable since most are 55. Basically limits them from entering the interstate highways.

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago

Southern California is entirely navigable by surface streets, but also too, there are plenty of vehicles going only 55 in the slow lanes, which is the speed limit for trucks anyway (though few pay attention to it). I have a '72 camper that can barely do 50, and I take it on the freeway several times a year.

[-] Grangle1@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

I live in one of the most rural states in the country, where loads to haul are generally large and the posted speed limit on the highway is usually 75 mph, and the de facto highway speed is usually 5-10 mph above that. No truck that can barely push 70 is gonna keep up with that. On top of that, you're dealing with ice and snow on the roads half the year, so you'll need to be able to deal with that too.

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 16 points 5 months ago

In Illinois, at least, your motorcycle has to be 150cc to ride on the interstate. A Chinese GY6 scooter might be able to do 50MPH with a tailwind. You'd get killed on the interstate on one of those, yet, fully legal to do it.

[-] Altofaltception@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

You'd get killed on the interstate on one of those,

You guys in Illinois are crazy though. I learned very quickly how much that 55 MPH limit is a guideline and not a hard limit.

[-] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Depends on what part of Illinois you’re talking about, I’m from southern Illinois and we typically only go about 60/65 on highway and 75/80 on interstate. Chicagoans will honk and pass me while I am doing 80 through 2 lane construction zones, literally happened a couple months ago as I was driving to O’Hare for an overnight flight

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 2 points 5 months ago

A long, long time ago, I used to drive from Kenosha, WI, to Wilmette (and later Northfield), IL, for work, down I-94, in a 1986 Honda CRX. Up until about Tower Rd., I was doing 105MPH every day, and people were passing me like nothing.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

thats honestly a problem that can be solved with a small turbocharger and a slightly higher msrp, its not like they are ever getting close to the price of one of the huge ones.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 51 points 5 months ago

Protectionism.

[-] MeatStiq@lemmy.world 30 points 5 months ago

Here in the states we have ~~legal corruption~~ lobbyists which the auto manufacturers pay to keep cheap vehicles from being used. And then the lawmakers claim safety concerns as the reason.

[-] Addv4@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They're not really safe. They are generally front heavy, so there is a risk of rolling forward, no crumple zone safety stuff, more often than not the front suspension is under the seat and if that breaks it would shoot up into the cabin, and on top of everything they are pretty slow. They have more in common with an off road Polaris than a traditional truck, which is to be expected because they were mostly designed to be farm trucks. I'd much rather be in an older s10 than a kei truck in the event of a crash (and s10's aren't very safe). I think I lot of why they are so popular these days is because there aren't really any light trucks anymore, and these are an alternative.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 5 months ago

We should take a step back: why do we need all those safety standards in the first place? The reason is that we have such gigantic vehicles in the first place, and smaller ones simply cannot be safe on the same road. Level that all down and suddenly Kei cars are as safe as they need to be.

[-] Addv4@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Not really. I compared it to an older Chevy s10 for a reason. Those were relatively small trucks that, while not always the most reliable, are still a pretty decent option for most people. Kei trucks are a smidge smaller, but are better on gas and frankly less safe. I don't think this is a "get rid of bigger vehicles and this goes away" but of a "Kei trucks aren't really any safer than an off-road golf cart and current regulations allows them on the road". We need the safety regulations so less people die on Auto accidents, and kei trucks don't really have to comply with even the basic ones.

[-] TAG@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

The problem is not even big trucks. It is medium speed collisions with barriers. Kei trucks typically don't have air bags or a crumple zone. They are designed for low speed driving on open roads.

[-] treadful@lemmy.zip 6 points 5 months ago

I'd still own one if they were just banned on highways. The risk is probably pretty low on low speed city streets, where these would be most useful.

[-] Addv4@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I actually considered it when I last looked for a new vehicle but besides being too expensive for what they are ($10k for a 90s cheap truck) they made a lot of compromises on them. For instance, on most the struts and springs are right under the seats, so if that breaks it would come right up into your legs. If the truck is rusty and going over bumps, that is a non zero possibility.

[-] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

They don’t meet the us safety standards. It could mean a lot of things like lacking 5mph bumpers, air bags, abs, etc.

Doesn’t mean they aren’t safe.

[-] OfCourseNot@fedia.io 2 points 5 months ago

Where exactly are these legal in Europe? I've never seen one, we have small-ish trucks (that get bigger every iteration) but not this tiny, that I know of. Pretty sure they're not legal in my country at least.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Different crash standards in US and Europe. Most companies don't even bother getting cars tested (designed?) in both because the market demands are so different.

[-] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Traditionally they've been banned because they don't do well in crash testing, as they don't have crumple zones or airbags. Here's some testing from 2010 by the insurance industry arguing that they shouldn't be on highways.

[-] childOfMagenta@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

For the hero image, that could possibly just be an attempt at a "fun" way of showing that they can carry a lot by mean of hyperbole.

"Look at that tiny truck, it's bursting with boxes!"

this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
825 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59227 readers
2889 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS