I agree, carmakers could have influenced the regs. Still the wrong answer to discourage smaller/more efficient vehicles.
âI wonder if Ford is doing the same thing that happened with compact cars that came out in the 1960s. These cars, the Falcon, the Valiant, and the Corvair either became larger or got replaced by larger cars.â
No, Ford ignored a poor selling truck in the Ranger, which reduced sales further. Note that the Ranger is available in several markets, just not the USA.
The market place discourages Rangers over medium TacomasâŠespecially when they get the same mileage. Besides, like all cars, compact Corollas just get bigger too just to move our ever expanding fat asteroids around.
What makes trucks immune from the âbigger is betterâ syndrome that follows all cars around ?
1 Like
Weâve seen a large number of new high-quality small cars over the last few years, at the same time the compact trucks continue to go away. Itâs not some overall trend, the trend in cars is in the opposite direction.
With the revolving doors between big business, East Coast government, Harvard, Yale, and big banks, itâs hard to believe big business is being pushed around.
Who said theyâre being pushed? Maybe they did the pushing.
Some of the significant reasons for changes in size had to do with safety and comfort. When you ordered a 4wd in an earlier compact pick up, you got a narrow track roll over queen. Wider trucks are safer when elevated for 4wd. 4wd is a huge part of the truck sales. With out that as an option, you just canât compete. The early ones were really unsafe and rode very poorly. Comfort and safety equals biggerâŠin compact trucks.
Naw. I think itâs the âmineâs bigger than yoursâ syndrome. It went from Explorers and Yukons to Navigators and Escalades and on to Excursions and Suburbans. All to get a loaf of bread or a new pocketbook in a rig bigger than the person next door.
When Ford realized selling Rangers was competing with themselves at a loss in profit they did what every corporation does, Ford lobbied Congress. They lobbied for a tweaking of CAFE standards to eliminate the competition. Of course, GM and Chrysler were likewise throwing parties for their Congressmen and â$uggestingâ a similar tweaking. They succeeded. The public lost.
Chevroletâs 1947 effort
was trashed to prevent loss of sales of the larger more profitable model.
Has anyone considered it might actually be what consumers want? Has anyone considered it might just be the decision that maximizes the car companiesâ profits? Yes, you might prefer a compact truck instead of a midsize truck, but thatâs not exactly market research, is it?
Personally, Iâm just looking for my next vehicle to be something that can tow a 1,200-1,500 pound camper trailer (a pop-up or teardrop camper â I havenât decided which yet). Chances are, even if there were compact trucks on the market, a midsize truck might be the better option. Heck, for that matter, a used police cruiser might be even better than a compact truck. Personally, I donât see the point of selling really small trucks. Either you need a midsize truck or youâd be better off with a fuel efficient compact car. Compact trucks are the worst of both worlds in that they are under-powered without the power to tow or haul heavy items, but they get worse fuel economy than a compact car of comparable size. A compact truck has the capacity of a large car with the fuel economy of a larger car, with the power of a tiny car.
A minivan can do everything a compact truck can do and more. A car-based SUV might do it even better.
A car based SUV is another product of designing to fit CAFE standards. And a minivan may be quite utilitarian but it cannot replace a pickup. Try to put a back hoe load of gravel in a Caravan.
RodâŠjust remove the rear seats and hire a very skilled operator. If you donât mind a tear in the head liner, I know my former boss and neighbor could do itâŠat least he would like the challenge. I 'm still recovering from a sore back when he asked me to sit on one piece of culvert the other day, while he âtappedâ in the other piece in place with his excavator.
Besides, IMO, full framed, short wheel based, narrow, rear drive ANYThIng have shown to be uncomfortable, unsafe and hard to handle compared to slightly longer/ wider trucks. They are a dying breed. A 4wd Ranger WILL roll over more readily then a midsize ANY OTHER truckâŠand ride worse just before doing so.
The roll over rating of the 4wd Tacoma improve when it went bigger.
@ Rod Knox âChevroletâs 1947 effortâ
Interesting but looks a lot like a Nash. I think I might agree with some of the commenters that at that time, cars were already a lot smaller that ten years later. People wanted a reasonable sized first car. The small car like the Falcon and Corvair, seemed to hit the folks that wanted a second car for around town. So small cars didnât really gain popularity until the market was ready for two car households.
Is it regional, cultural, climatic? I donât know, but for some of us a pickup is a necessity. And a small truck would do just fine, the simpler the better. A 1960 Falcon Ranchero would work.
Its 144 cu in engine and 3 speed manual transmission needed no power steering or power brakes. Of course the optional heater and AM radio wouldât be too extravagant for me. Who could ask for anything more?
Whitey, have you ever hauled cordwood? Hauled tree trunks out of wooded areas? Hauled loam? Or stone? Or gravel? Hauled carpet tiles saturated with water from a hot water tank failure? Iâve done all of these with compact pickups, and I would not want to try any of them with a minivan.
I can haul more wood, more loam, more gravel and the like, as well as load and unload it more easily with a utility trailer on my 4runner or even towed with my wifeâs Rav. And, I can haul more of it as my trailer has a weight capacity of 2k lbs. Also, towing 2k lbs with a vehicle rated for it, and it doesnât have to be a truck, is much easier on the vehicle then loading it up with 2k lbs. However you argue it, the most most effective and most efficient way to move stuff, is not with a small pick up, but with a utility trailer. Now, an intermediate truck, itâs a different matter as you can load and tow more easily with the 6 to 8 cyl they come with instead of the wimpy 4.
Itâs not the govt., itâs the market that has spokenâŠno WIMP trucks.
Rod Knox-Sweet!-Kevin
Yeah. I had to move a 600 lbs grader blade in for repair. The low height of the trailer made it much easier to drop in with my tractor bucket. The loading ramp makes it much easier to roll my generator or mowers or move friendâs golf cart etc. then you ever could with a compact truck while still doing all of the traditional stuff. Being aluminum, car size wheels with torsion bar suspension and a load rating of over 2 k lbs, it cruises easily at any highway speed. Load a smelly itemâŠI donât have to live with the smell for the next three weeks. Just disconnect and drive away.
@Rod_Knox and MB,
A minivan roof might get in the way of hauling gravel without a trailer, but have you looked at the payload capacity of small trucks? They could never haul a bed full of something as heavy as gravel safely. Besides, a minivan can pull a small trailer with a small load of gravel. You might be able to fit more gravel in the bed of a compact truck than you can haul on a trailer behind a minivan, but I donât think you could safely haul in a compact truck more than you could in a trailer.
You can get the utility of a compact truck bed by adding a utility trailer to any vehicle capable of towing.