SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Wednesday December 19 2018, @04:34AM
from the now-they're-buying...trucks? dept.
from the now-they're-buying...trucks? dept.
General Motors has announced it's shuttering five production facilities and killing six vehicle platforms by the end of 2019 as it reallocates resources towards self-driving technologies and electric vehicles.
[...] North American car production hit 17.5 million vehicles in 2016, and dropped marginally to 17.2 million in 2017. Interesting, but perhaps not significant.
More telling are changes in driver behaviour. In North America, for example, fewer teens are getting driver's licences. In 1983, 92 per cent of teens were licensed, while by 2014, that number had dropped to 77 per cent. In Germany, the number of new licences issued to drivers aged 17 to 25 has dropped by 300,000 over the last 10 years.
Are we over our love affair with cars?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing.
-- Elbert Hubbard
(Score: 1) by NateMich on Wednesday December 19 2018, @05:28AM (30 children)
People aren't buying cars much anymore.
Because they are buying crossovers (CUVs, tall station wagons, fake SUVs, whatever you want to call them) and pickup trucks.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @05:37AM (11 children)
"Car" is used interchangeably with "vehicle". Your point is not well taken.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @05:49AM (10 children)
Actually his point is correct.
GM said that they were killing of the car line up. Concentrating on more profitable trucks - this include large SUV. To me a compact - 6'7" there is nothing else that fits.
Electric vehicals make since, since large frames allow for more bus type of travel. So if GM becomes or sells to LYFT. They vechical can handle the added weight of processing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @06:04AM (8 children)
The demand for SUV will be sustained by farmers - they cannot take a city car across a field. In winter a 4x4 is a must, as farm roads are cleaned by Sun in the spring - or by the farmers themselves. This demand in cities is driven by outdoorsmen or just people who like SUV's suspension and tendency to flip. As an example, I needed a 4x4 myself several times, as travel in Northern California in the fall to spring season is dangerous at height, and mountain passes often demand chains (hard to use, low speed) or a 4x4.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @11:56AM (5 children)
Nah, not the reason.
SUV's/truck's popularity in citys is a combination of 1) phallic symbol and 2) herd mentality.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @04:48PM (1 child)
I've noticed that the enviro-Nazis - and the left in general - seem very fixated on the penis. Very Freudian.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 20 2018, @12:32AM
How many guns do you own?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @04:59PM
You forgot 3) Uneven regulation.
To explain, in USA the first crash and fuel economy (CAFE) regulations were much more stringent for cars than for light trucks. The result was that cars became more expensive and light trucks were a cheap way to buy a new vehicle. The car companies noticed after a few years that more and more trucks were being used like cars, so they began to civilize their truck offerings and also expanded the SUV category. Then they really pushed on the definition of "light truck" with vehicles like the Chrysler PT Cruiser (yes--that was classified as light truck for crash and mileage) so they could still build big guzzlers and have a reasonable corporate average fuel economy (CAFE). Somewhere along this slippery slope marketing caught on to the trend and glorified the truck. And here we are, the only country that I know of where there are more light trucks sold than cars.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @10:08PM (1 child)
Nope. Women. They feel safe in a larger vehicle.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Thursday December 20 2018, @06:28AM
They don't seem to feel that way about my van, even though I am quite happy to have it.
It was never designed to be a fashion statement. But will haul anything I can get into it and damn near anything I hook onto it.
Its no gazelle, not even a jackrabbit. If I were to choose an animal to use as its moniker, a musk ox or a hippopotamus.
I count on the farmers to keep the markets active so we all can continue to use these incredibly useful machines we used to make.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by toddestan on Thursday December 20 2018, @04:53AM (1 child)
Farmers account for an insignificant part of the market. Farmers tend to gravitate towards pickups, and less towards SUVs. Now, if you look at the pickup market, almost all pickups made nowadays are crew cabs and high trim line models. This is the exact opposite of the kind of trucks farmers buy - usually standard cabs and as basic as possible. The problem is there isn't much money in selling a basic truck to farmer for $20k. Now load it up as a status symbol and sell it for $60k to some urban cowboy, and that's where the money is.
Also, there's actually very few actual SUVs sold today if you go by what traditionally was a SUV - body on frame, truck-based, RWD or a real 4WD system. It's basically down to a the few of the largest models like the Chevy Yukon, and the Jeep Wangler. The vast majority are now car-based, unibody, AWD or FWD CUVs. These are mommy-mobiles, if you buy one with the intent to use it on a farm and drive it across fields you'll destroy it in no time (or just get stuck a lot).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 20 2018, @07:49PM
Now load it up as a
statusphallic symbol and sell it for $60k to some urban cowboy, and that's where the money is.There, FTFY.
(Score: 2) by aclarke on Thursday December 20 2018, @12:16PM
I'm a few inches shorter than you but still taller than most. American pickup trucks and SUVs are getting better in this regard, but for years until recently I found that they were amongst the worst to drive in terms of interior space. There still wasn't enough headroom in many cases and even though there was all that space, they put short seat rails in so the seat didn't go back far enough. Often a car like a Subaru was in practice a much more comfortable vehicle.
A couple years ago I sat in the back of the latest Chevrolet Colorado truck, and there wasn't enough headroom for me to sit there. What the heck? In a new-design truck? Surely it ought to have been designed for, you know, a "crew" of reasonably burly guys to go to a job site. I guess if you need to do "real work" you're supposed to buy a "real truck" but with that seemingly designed-for-failure attitude I walked away and scratched it off my list.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Sulla on Wednesday December 19 2018, @05:56AM (13 children)
I don't like crossovers and am not a fan of SUVs and most people who own trucks don't need them but when you need it and don't have it you sing a different tune. Since i have been able to afford them (2013) I have had a truck because at this point i cam't imagine the inconvenience of living without one. Be it moving 2k miles from Alaska to the lower 48, doing yard work (transporting dirt/gravel/rock), fixing up my house (lumber, plywood, etc), helping friends move, towing other vehicles the family owns, going out and getting multiple christmas trees, I see no reason to deal with the inconvenience of not having one. I use it enough for its intended purpose to make the extra cost in gas cheaper than constantly renting. Time saved in not "making due" with a smaller vehicle is well worth the stress and aggrivation. I can get 27mpg highway if i drive careful and 15-17 if i am real careful in the city.
Having driven some other vehicles recently i have found road noise to be terrible on a lot of small cars and i havent had that issue with my f150s. I really liked the camry i owned, and still would if the wife hadn't wanted a van, but its not a real option for transporting plywood and 16ft house siding. Minivans arent a competitive option because they have the same or worse gas mileage as trucks (dodge caravan im looking at you).
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @09:57AM (6 children)
That's what a trailer is for.
(Score: 2) by schad on Wednesday December 19 2018, @03:27PM (5 children)
Most cars and crossovers/small SUVs have tow ratings of no more than 1500 pounds. That's about what most smaller trailers weigh by themselves. It's generally fine to go over your tow rating for occasional short low-speed drives. But if it's something you're going to do regularly, if you have to go more than a few miles, or if you'll be on the highway, it's extremely dangerous.
Even most full-size SUVs are typically rated at no more than 6000 pounds. In practice, the hitch receiver, payload, and axle weight rating limits mean the actual limit is probably no more than 3500 pounds.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @04:11PM (4 children)
"...1500 pounds. That's about what most smaller trailers weigh by themselves. "
/
/
You're not even close. I'd fail you for the academic year if you were in my class, because you're spewing bullshit while being too lazy to check
basic facts.
A U Haul enclosed trailer weighs 850 pounds.
https://www.uhaul.com/Trailers/4x8-Cargo-Trailer-Rental/UV/ [uhaul.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Sulla on Wednesday December 19 2018, @04:59PM (3 children)
Uhaul is a bad comparison because they are aluminum. A new/used alum trailer will cost 3k for even the most basic one. If you need to be able to tow vehicles you can do it with a minivan or small car but is dangerous and will cause premature wear on the vehicle doing the towing. My 16ft trailer weighs 1500 empty, bought it for moving cross country because it was the same price as renting. To rent a trailer every time you need to do something also runs 20/day +tax +more if long distance.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @06:37PM
It's funny how the self righteous "educator" claims he or she would fail you for the semester for spouting bullshit without checking for facts when it's obvious he knows jack shit about trailers other than what UHaul (WTF?) puts on their website. I had a boat trailer that was easily 1,500 lbs empty. Welded iron.
(Score: 2) by aclarke on Thursday December 20 2018, @12:19PM (1 child)
Since we're comparing trailer weights, my welded steel double axle flatbed with a wood deck weighs 739kg, or 1630lbs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 20 2018, @07:53PM
Is not the "tow weight" rating the rating of weight on the hitch, not total weight of trailer?
I.e., a 1,500lb tow weight would mean 1,500 pounds pushing down on the hitch?
Since the trailer wheels take the majority of the weight (if the load is properly distributed) the weight on the hitch can be much less than the total weight on the trailer (and on its wheels).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by istartedi on Wednesday December 19 2018, @08:12PM (5 children)
If you're *routinely* transporting plywood and 16 ft. siding then of course you need a truck. OTOH, I'm not a contractor and rarely need to do such things. When I do, I'll rent a truck and rental is dirt cheap vs. having to fill up a truck all the time. Not to mention, I enjoy being able to park and negotiate curves without flipping. My hatchback can even handle light DIY hauls. I recently put a few 12 ft. deck boards in there. I only had about 3 feet hanging out the back because I was able to get the boards past the fold-down seats. I wouldn't want to do it with a new car, but mine is 11 years old now and has been doing all kinds of light hauls. A 1/8 cord of wood fits in there, no problem. I could always have a full cord delivered if I really need it, by a guy with a truck who really needs it because... he makes money delivering wood.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday December 19 2018, @09:19PM (4 children)
What kind of hatchback do you have? First one that came to mind was outback because I read outback instead of hatchback my first read through, its gas mileage averages 24. My v8 F150 gets an average of 20. My v8 has abnormally high mpg, but the ecoboosts are getting that in a full size pickup. If we assume 12k miles a year, my pickup costs me an extra 100 gallons of gas a year over the outback. 300-400 bucks in gas is greatly worth the added convenience for getting tasks done without needing to worry about renting a truck, trailer, or paying for delivery. If we are talking a vehicle that can average 30mpg, then you are saving 200 gallons a year over a truck. The differences become more sizable at this point but if you have ATVs, a boat, or are going through a home renovation I would still rather pay an extra 600 bucks that year than deal with the hassle of renting or delivery.
My family size is currently at 5+dog. We could all get into a hatchback but really what you need at that point is a van. Pretty much all the minivans out there at this point (odyssey gets 23mpg @ 30k starting, sienna gets 22mpg @ 34k starting) get the same gas mileage as pickups and are the same starting price. The F150 is 8 inches wider than the outback, so an extra ~2.5 inches per kid to fight over. Fitting and getting around three car seats is significantly easier in my extended cab longbed pickup than it is in my wife's minivan or mom's elantra.
Followup- i got the number for the outbacks gas mileage from one of those report-your-mileage sites. Their official literature says 25-32. Some additional information on the outback, as I have always understood them to be good vehicles.
I recently did some work in my yard and added two large square garden layouts. In total I went through three pallets of cinder blocks. Each pallet weighs ~2600lb. My F150 is rated to 3300 in the bed and my trailer is rated to trailer weight + 8k. I didn't bother hooking up the trailer, I wasn't in a hurry, and was able to do it in three trips. Even with a trailer the outback would be unable to move a pallet of cinder blocks, it would take the outback 6+ trips to move the same amount with a trailer. The outback is rated at 1245 total capacity. This is 1245-gas-driver-helper=amount of cinder blocks. In a similar way I help my mom and a family friend get hay for the horses a couple of times a year. Yeah its possible with my moms minivan, and they have done it that way, but its much nicer to spend the fuel making two trips every six months than two+ trips every month.
My personal ideal vehicle situation would be a household with an F150 and a Camry or Outback. I have the truck for getting hard work done and I have the other for when I don't want to expend extra gas. But for me the truck is not replaceable. Turn radius has never effected me in a way that was a problem and neither has parking. I have always parked in the back of parking lots and u-turns are illegal in my state. As long as you aren't using non-stock sided tires and driving within the speed limit roll-overs aren't a real thing, they were only a real thing with the ford exploder because the tires deployed with it in the 90s were bad. I can see why these reasons would make people not prefer trucks though, and thats fine with me.
I won't defend crossovers or SUVs because they have the same gas mileage as trucks and the same ability as the outlook but lack the crash safety ratings of either.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @10:20PM (2 children)
Is there a significant difference in insurance cost between trucks and hatchbacks?
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday December 20 2018, @12:46AM (1 child)
Maybe someone else can chime in on their costs for a smaller vehicle. But for comprehensive insurance with a zero deductible I am paying 45/mo on a 2016 truck. Our '12 caravan is 50/mo for a 500 deductible. I presume this is because my truck has five stars and my wife's caravan is a deathtrap.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by istartedi on Friday December 21 2018, @12:42AM
Some variables are missing: Your state, your age, miles/year (in California and maybe other states they ask you this and presumably it could be fraud if you're caught lying), your driving record, and coverage other than deductible such as CSL (Combined Single Limit) and other aspects of the quality of the insurance. I might still be forgetting some things, but the bottom line is that you have to hold all those other variables constant before you can compare vehicles.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 1) by istartedi on Wednesday December 19 2018, @11:35PM
OK, it's a Civic and technically not a hatchback but with the fold-down seats it's able to handle long stuff, just not wide stuff. I tend to think of it as a hatchback. It's a coupe. Real highway mileage 34 mpg. My old car was an '85 Mustang which was a true hatchback and I could put a twin mattress and box spring in there and only have a little bit hanging out. That car only got 20 mpg though.
My need to move anything heavy or tow is "blue moon", so I think the economics still favor the car... that and "it's paid for". If I thought I could maintain a truck for just a few $100/yr. more I might consider it as my only vehicle also. My car's not set up to be particularly sporty, although I do currently have somewhat "performance" struts and tires. I always feel like I'm working when I drive a truck. I enjoy being at parity in the ongoing height war, but I hate the road feel.
My ideal setup would be to have a truck as a 2nd vehicle that sat in the driveway most of the time, but was ready to startup and go when I needed it... but I can't justify the purchase, and probably can't even justify the maintenance costs for what I do.
I have a hard time defending crossover and SUV too. I rented a cross-over one time and hated it so much--it handled like a truck, but I wasn't winning the height war at all. So glad to ditch that rental after a week. I know somebody who uses one to move clean boxes though, so it's good for that; but I'd rather have a truck that I can throw a bag of dirt into.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday December 19 2018, @06:33AM (1 child)
What about the licence statistics?
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Thursday December 20 2018, @07:00PM
Speaking of which: How much of the drop in issuance of teen driver's licenses has to do with these?
1. States have instituted mandatory hours of supervised driving before the holder of a learner's permit becomes eligible for a license. At least the State of Indiana requires 50 hours, and some Australian states require 120 hours, with the only possible reduction being a 20-hour bonus for completing an accredited 10-hour driver's ed course.
2. States have increased the minimum driving age from 16 to 16 1/2 or 17.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 19 2018, @11:44PM (1 child)
Those particular platforms are truck based ones. Those are usually *very* reliable. They last 10-15 years usually. A car usually eats itself by 10 unless you take care of it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 20 2018, @08:04AM