• 2 Posts
  • 2.31K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle







  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.workstoHumor@lemmy.worldHistory repeats itself.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    But accidents in Canada are going down even though we buy just as many trucks so maybe the trucks aren’t the issue.

    From an environmental perspective, mid size and full size get the same fuel economy.

    90s trucks were pretty much exactly the same size, just not as tall.

    Crew cab long bed are available on ¾ ton (250/2500) format and up so that’s not what people are buying if they don’t do truck stuff anyway.







  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.workstoHumor@lemmy.worldHistory repeats itself.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Which was a reply to someone saying they want something like the second one from the left, which is an engine forward truck with 60% bed, which has never existed.

    A Jeep FC-170 was 60% bed, but that’s like saying “Just get a Hino and have someone make a bed for it and daily drive it”.

    The only thing that’s higher than 60% and that could still be considered a non commercial offering is a VW Bus Transporter at 61% bed since the nose is flatter (engine at the back) but it still doesn’t match “the second from the left” as asked by that other person.

    I don’t know where they found the 64% bed truck and outside of commercial offerings (so it doesn’t have to meet regular safety standards) there’s no way to get a modern version of a truck with 60% bed unless it has a ridiculously long bed.