Slate isn't building the truck for us

[E90400K]

While trucks do statistically spend most of their time doing non-truck stuff, 2/3 of owners reported using their trucks frequently or occasionally for towing/hauling and only 1/3 reported doing so rarely or never. Yes 1/3 is certainly very significant, I'm not sure I'd call a 2/3 majority 'an exception'.



While I did edit for clarity and brevity, even what you quoted very specifically talked at the end about people using their truck the same as so many other lighter duty but no more fuel efficient vehicles, yet being singled out negatively for doing so. L So I have zero idea where you came up with this demonstrably false claim.



Speaking of exceptions and things that aren't ideal, the average commute distance in this country is 15 miles each way. Over 50 miles each way is an extreme long distance commute, and is a choice that only affects a very small percentage of the workforce. The average commuter in a gas powered large pickup truck would have to get just 8 mpg to burn through as much gasoline as a 60 mile commuter in a 32 mpg car.



It has meaning... Just not the meaning that many people try to put on it. It simply means that most trucks spend most of their time not actually doing truck things. This has never been in dispute. It does not, however, mean that most trucks do not actually get used to do truck things.

Truck things...

It has wheels and it rolls under its own power. That's a truck thing.

Good Lord.

 

[E90400K]

When I commute in my 4-door, earth-killing, 15-MPG, Hummer H3T, I keep all my smelly-@$$ household garage in the bed and tow a portable concrete mixer, just so I can justify owning a pickup truck.

For some reason no one at the office parks near it.

 

[AZFox]

What the auto industry pundits tell us is that 4-door trucks are preferred because they combine two vehicles into one. That way you don't need a sedan and a separate pickup. They tell us this is a "shift in consumer preferences".

IMHO they're peeing on our legs and telling us it's raining.

I think it's actually a shift in various interests that aren't the consumer.

 

[KevinRS]

This again? Christ.

How many Honda accords are daily'd with a lone driver and an empty trunk? You just can't see the empty trunk, so it doesn't bother you.

Lol.

What's the MPG of a honda accord compared to a F150. What's the parking like in the two? I mean yes, logically people would either carpool or ride motorcycles, but both can be impractical.

What the auto industry pundits tell us is that 4-door trucks are preferred because they combine two vehicles into one. That way you don't need a sedan and a separate pickup. They tell us this is a "shift in consumer preferences".

IMHO they're peeing on our legs and telling us it's raining.

I think it's actually a shift in various interests that aren't the consumer.

Yeah, it ends up "Jack of all trades, master of none" It would be one thing if it was the family's 1 vehicle, so it needed to be 2 in 1, but otherwise it might be better in most cases to have a 5 seat car, and the second vehicle be a 2 door truck.

 

[E90400K]

What's the MPG of a honda accord compared to a F150. What's the parking like in the two? I mean yes, logically people would either carpool or ride motorcycles, but both can be impractical.


Yeah, it ends up "Jack of all trades, master of none" It would be one thing if it was the family's 1 vehicle, so it needed to be 2 in 1, but otherwise it might be better in most cases to have a 5 seat car, and the second vehicle be a 2 door truck.

The MPG is immaterial to the discussion. Your issue is the truck is "running empty" and not carrying or towing anything. It's the same issue for the Accord if only one seat is occupied and the trunk is empty. The Accord's rear seats are not folded down and the trunk and rear seat space are not full of stuff.

Both vehicles are under utilized, that is the point. But for some illogical reason the pickup shouldn't be under utilized at any time, so it is wasteful. It's an illogical position to take.

What is worse, my 6-cylinder Honda motorcycle that gets 33 MPG and has only two seats and 119 liters of luggage capacity or my 15 MPG H3T with 4 seats and 5'6" x 4'2" bed?

Lol.

 

[KevinRS]

The MPG is immaterial to the discussion. Your issue is the truck is "running empty" and not carrying or towing anything. It's the same issue for the Accord if only one seat is occupied and the trunk is empty. The Accord's rear seats are not folded down and the trunk and rear seat space are not full of stuff.

Both vehicles are under utilized, that is the point. But for some illogical reason the pickup shouldn't be under utilized at any time, so it is wasteful. It's an illogical position to take.

What is worse, my 6-cylinder Honda motorcycle that gets 33 MPG and has only two seats and 119 liters of luggage capacity or my 15 MPG H3T with 4 seats and 5'6" x 4'2" bed?

Lol.

Yes MPG is material to the argument. In my view it is the whole point. I never meant it was a waste of the truck bed to not fill it all the time, it's a waste of gas to drive a low MPG 4 door truck with just a driver, on a daily freeway commute at 80 mph.
If the truck gets the same MPG as an efficient commuter vehicle, sure, drive it. But they don't. These I see are burning probably 3 gallons each way on their daily drive, while another choice would only burn 2 or less.

 

[Driven5]

It would be one thing if it was the family's 1 vehicle, so it needed to be 2 in 1, but otherwise it might be better in most cases to have a 5 seat car, and the second vehicle be a 2 door truck.

Oh sure, that might work for a single parent small family. But a 2-parent family generally needs 2 family-capable vehicles. With 4 doors that truck becomes a multi-purpose family hauler, and can easily make complete (financial) sense for somebody to commute in too.

The average worker drives 12k-15k mi/yr. Let's call 12k of that 'non-truck' use that could reasonably be done by a more efficient vehicle. With at 20mpg (combined) truck and $3/gal (current US average is less than that) for gas, that's $1800/yr in gas. Figure insurance alone probably costs around $1200/yr, and take out another $100 for average annual registration. With the remaining $500/yr difference used exclusively on fuel to actually drive the commuter car, it would need to get 72mpg (combined) fuel economy. If the commuter vehicle were a sedan getting only 32 mpg (combined), it would have to replace >23k mi/yr of driving to do the same. That's more than many, if not most, 2 driver households drive combined. An EV might be able to do it with home charging, but even assuming the purchase price of a 3rd vehicle isn't a financial strain, the 3rd vehicle fuel 'savings' still wouldn't actually cover it's own additional maintenance and depreciation. The lower the annual miles driven goes, or lower the commuter economy goes, the worse the financial picture for the third vehicle gets. Never mind many homes not comfortably accommodating 3 vehicles either. I suppose it's easy to call people in different life situations 'wasteful' when it's not your money, space, and time being 'wasted'.

Apparently it's also ok for people to save money but 'waste' gas by living farther from work, but not to save money but 'waste' gas by commuting in a multi-purpose vehicle. If people just lived close enough to their work, their total fuel consumption would be so low that the fuel economy wouldn't even matter... Isn't it ironic?

 

[E90400K]

Yes MPG is material to the argument. In my view it is the whole point. I never meant it was a waste of the truck bed to not fill it all the time, it's a waste of gas to drive a low MPG 4 door truck with just a driver, on a daily freeway commute at 80 mph.
If the truck gets the same MPG as an efficient commuter vehicle, sure, drive it. But they don't. These I see are burning probably 3 gallons each way on their daily drive, while another choice would only burn 2 or less.

You wrote, "...with nothing in the bed... an empty bed, ...2/3... have a solo driver... and the paint looks like it's new."

That means you think pickups should be unkempt, beat up, crap-hauling work vehicles with people sitting in every seat in the cab.

Just let people drive what they want. Perhaps the 2/3rds you see are people who can only afford one vehicle for their family needs, which includes occasional use of a pickup bed. To them, perhaps the 1-gallon difference in consumption is less than the carrying costs of a second more fuel-efficient 4-door sedan. Oh, and they like to keep their vehicle clean and nice looking.

It is really none of your business what other people choose to drive and how they choose to utilize what they drive. That is all I'm pointing out.

 

[E90400K]

Oh sure, that might work for a single parent small family. But a 2-parent family generally needs 2 family capable vehicles. With 4 doors that truck become family-hauling capable, and even makes (financial) sense to have the second parent commuting in it too.

The average person drives 12k-15k mi/yr. Let's call 12k of that 'non-truck' use that could reasonably be done by a smaller more efficient vehicles. With at 20mpg (combined) truck and $3/gal (current US average is less than that) for gas, that's $1800/yr in gas. Figure insurance alone probably costs at least $1200/yr, and take out another $100 for average annual registration. With the remaining $500/yr difference used exclusively on fuel to actually drive the commuter car, it would need to get a combined fuel economy 72mpg. Sure an EV might be able to home charge for that, but even assuming the purchase price of a 3rd vehicle isn't a financial strain, it still wouldn't cover maintenance and depreciation. It's easy to call people wasteful when it's not your money on the line.

Apparently it's ok for people to save money but 'waste' gas by living farther from work, but not to save money but 'waste' gas by commuting in a multi-purpose vehicle. If people lived close enough to their work, fuel consumption would be entirely irrelevant... Isn't it ironic?

Exactly. Well said!

 

[E90400K]

Next up... Minivans, should they be washed and ceramic coated?!

 

[RedJoker]

Next up... Minivans, should they be washed and ceramic coated?!

Since the answer is an obvious 'Yes', I don't know why we would even need to discuss this.