this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
922 points (98.6% liked)

The Onion

4461 readers
1268 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mean_bean279@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Blame CAFE, the EPA (I like most of the EPA), and the Chicken Tax. Those three have basically made it to where the US can’t get the smaller trucks the rest of the world gets, has a fuel economy loop-hole for larger vehicles, and basically makes it incentivized for companies to make boxier, bigger vehicles in order to lower their average fuel economy standards. Most people I talk to want the ford Ranger from the 2000s brought back in size, but we literally cannot. The closest we got was the maverick (still too big comparatively) and that’s because they gave us a hybrid option and based it off the escape.

[–] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

I’d probably blame regulatory capture as a whole than individual regs and agencies, but I agree. My feeling is that if you’re going to make a fuel efficiency regulation and then allow exceptions, they should be exceptions based on use, not based on class of vehicle. There should probably be additional fees/taxes, maybe applied annually.

Otherwise, yeah, the incentives point in the wrong direction.

[–] minibyte@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 months ago

I had an Isuzu mini-truck that had nearly the same wheel base as my old mustang. That thing was sweet. I miss mini trucks.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Didn't the maverick only come in a shortbed? Or was that the lightning?

[–] mean_bean279@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

I believe both are limited to a “crew cab, standard bed” configuration. A standard bed length being like 5’7” instead of the 6’4” which is the long bed size for 1500 and under and the standard size for 2500s.