1157
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by dwazou@lemm.ee to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] merde@sh.itjust.works 115 points 2 months ago

why aren't they allowed now?

[-] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 83 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

us auto industry has reletively higher crash saftey requirements. part of the reason why everythings so damn big.

the kei trucks are basically rear end death traps if you hit US sized vehicles.

its why the only ones you can legally drive in some states are the ones that pass the 25 year car import law.

some areas explicitly ban it (e.g NYC i believe)

[-] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 174 points 2 months ago

EU: Your truck is unsafe because it is unusually large and has razor sharp edges at head height.

US: Your truck is unsafe because it is too small to withstand a direct hit from one of our super safe giant axe head shaped cars.

[-] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 55 points 2 months ago

No pre installed firearms... Very unsafe...

[-] AmazingAwesomator@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

the good, the bad, and the dodge ram.

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 10 points 2 months ago

Yeah, I swapped the third cupholders for the pistol holster on my dodge.

I'm thinking of buying a ford F1-9001 for my next truck. They have quick-access assault rifle holsters.

[-] militaryintelligence@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Get the Ferd F-teen Thousand

[-] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 4 points 2 months ago
[-] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 months ago

Yessss, what a blast from the past!

[-] xavier666@lemm.ee 18 points 2 months ago

"The only way to protect yourself from a giant truck is to have your own giant truck"

Now where have I heard of this logic before? 🤔

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago

With nuclear weapons.

Mutually Assured Destruction.

[-] meowMix2525@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

Well the larger trucks are exempt from the safety regulations is the reason it plays out that way. The spirit of the law I think is that they have a special use case and aren't supposed to be the default vehicle someone would be driving. But it's a loophole probably written in by the manufacturers themselves and that's just how it was billed to whatever legislator that signed it.

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

I understand now allowing them on the freeways, but they're perfect for cities with their smaller footprint and lower driving speeds. These aren't allowed in NYC, but Escalades are?

[-] tamal3@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Yeah, I wonder how many NYC traffic deaths involve pedestrians, and how many are just between drivers. This truck would be much safer for pedestrians.

[-] pfwood178@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 months ago

I don't understand how states can ban an otherwise legal vehicle

[-] br3d@lemmy.world 37 points 2 months ago

They don't make inflated profits for US companies. That's what this is about

[-] Addv4@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Cause they're not really safe to drive. Older US made cars are technically grandfathered in because as time progresses, there will naturally be less and less of them to the point where they won't be much of an issue on public roads (when was the last time you saw a model t driving down your road other than for a parade or something?). However, a lot of kei trucks were really meant to just be farm vehicles with more utility, so safety wasn't ever a real hallmark of their design. I considered buying one a while ago, but came to the conclusion that they might actually be less safe than an old S10 which wasn't really that much bigger.

[-] supernicepojo@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Safety standards for family vehicles: ok, sure

Safety standards for non-family vehicles: fascist overreach

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

I’d love to see the state of autos in the US flipped on its head.

None of us want to be killed by the Ford F150 ,000,000.

Are you right about them being unsafe? Timestamped this crash test vid here for y’all. Older video but sticks in my mind.

[-] Addv4@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Newer kei truck in the video, safety standards are different (and higher). The US only allows ones from the 90s, and while a most of them had the engine behind the cab, the cabs are often a bit top-heavy and a forward roll risk.

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

That’s a newer one and it’s still a death trap? Sigh.

Ah-mazing for private property etc. though!

[-] mdd@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

The Mini, Yaris, and many other modern cars pass crash -test standards. I do not consider them big.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Kei trucks have basically no crumple zone or front bumper. They are cab over designs, so if you hit something, you're basically the first thing that takes the impact.

[-] DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

The newer ones have all the modern safety features (crumple zone, bumper, ABS, etc). But of course we aren't allowed to import the modern ones.

[-] Damage@feddit.it 2 points 2 months ago

Even huge semis with cab overs have that issue... Here in Europe where's they're essentially all cab overs, sometimes you see some grisly scenes on the highway. Luckily they have other safety features like automatic braking and warnings.

[-] swelter_spark@reddthat.com 3 points 2 months ago

Maybe they could tweak the design a little. Make it like a Chevy Spark with a rear bed.

[-] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago

A compact car ute

[-] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Also chicken tax

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 2 months ago

If something goes max 5 kph, shouldn't it do fine on all the crash tests?

You don't have to make something bigger. Sometimes just making it slower works too.

[-] supernicepojo@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

Because they used emissions standards in the 80s to remove light trucks from the market. Which is why everything is bigger now, blowback: unintended consequences of shitty legislation.

[-] mdd@lemm.ee 13 points 2 months ago

They used the "Chicken Tax" to remove light trucks on the 80s, not emissions issues.

Ford used to skirt the law by having Transits made in Europe shipped to the US as passenger vehicles. Once in the states they would recycle the seats and replace the rear windows with panels.

[-] Hawke@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

They generally don’t meet safety requirements.

this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
1157 points (99.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

12855 readers
123 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS