this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
910 points (98.6% liked)
The Onion
4703 readers
1050 users here now
The Onion
A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.
Great Satire Writing:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah but you can just rent a truck for that last 10% with the savings from not buying the truck, and still have cash left over.
I mean... I still had to buy the van. And vans aren't cheap.
Overall I prefer owning the van because I'm mostly hauling tools and dive gear, but for people who haul plywood or tall objects more often than me a truck makes more sense.
Vans hold lots of little things very well. They're not great for real big things.
Oh - and I really miss having a tailgate as a working surface.
Sure, but we are getting to the point where 99% of truck owners do not have needs that your van or a hatchback sedan couldn't handle 90% of the time, all while using less fuel and being safer for everyone else on the roads.
And when they need to haul 1 ton of dirt they can order it with delivery in a dump truck, because you never need just 1 ton anyway.
So for the final 2-3 trips a year that actually needs a pickup they can rent for like 200 bucks total.
I think small trucks make a lot od sense, but they're virtually impossible to find now.
Ever notice how the old Ranger, S10, and Dakota left the market at the same time. Then a few years later the "small" models came back larger than the 2000s full-size trucks, which had gotten ludicrously large?
There was a change in the CAFE standards that accidentally led to this mess. Lots of manufacturers were classifying vehicles incorrectly to cheat on their emissions numbers. The freaking PT Cruiser was classified as a truck by Chrysler.
So the CAFE standards were changed starting in 2012 to be based on vehicle footprint. It closed one loophole, but created a massive new one. Trucks are inherently less fuel-efficient than more aerodynamic vehicles with different engines and transmissions. Making a small truck that met CAFE standards was really, really difficult. And on top of that, CAFE gets stricter over time, so it gets even harder.
You know what's easier than solving the efficiency problem? Increasing the vehicle's footprint to improve the score. By making trucks bigger and bigger, they don't have to make them more fuel efficient.
It's actually why the Ford Maverick has the hybrid engine as the standard and the traditional engine as the "upgrade." With the hybrid as the standard they meet CAFE.
The hybrid Maverick is probably the vehicle I'd own right now if they weren't impossible to buy when I was last vehicle hunting. They're affordable, get 40 miles per gallon, have 4 doors, and a small bed. It checks every box for me.
But I'm pretty happy with my NV200. Though all the manufacturers have also stopped making small cargo vans now (Transit Connect, RAM ProMaster City, and NV200 are all discontinued), because their footprint is no longer large enough to meet fuel economy standards.
If those were the only people who bought trucks then I doubt anyone would have a problem with them.
Oh man you threw me back to some great memories of my old man. We had a minivan when I was a kid and he built a little slide out/folding table that perfectly so he could work on it like a tailgate. I used kneel in the back seat facing backwards and watch him do whatever. Man that thing was amazing for camping too.
Dude was a pretty handy guy so not sure if that's something you'd think about doing, but that shit was so cool and I haven't seen anything like it since.
We rented a Uhaul box truck when we demoed an old hot tub. As a bonus, the truck was so cavernous, we also cleaned out the entire garage that day.
$50 + gas.