Maybe, but it's clearly worked it's way into fashions as well. The F-150 lightning doesn't have to worry about emissions categories, but it's just as elephantine as the rest, including a child-killing vision-obstructing front hood and grille whose only purpose is to enclose a frunk.

Your comfort shouldn’t outweigh the safety of pedestrians. There is a reason those cars do not pass regulations in Europe.

But why is that? Is there any chance it's at least partly to protect yourself from everyone else in giant cars?

I have a Subaru Forester. When I drive a sedan everyone shines their headlamps into my face. I parked my Forester behind a sedan and drove back and forth. My lights were not in their cabin.

So other people drive in a way that is not compatible with my driving because I don’t want headlamps in my cabin. Occasionally there’s a lifted truck behind me and it brightens my cabin.

In those moments I fantasize about placing retroreflectors all over my rear seat headrests but then I pull over and let them past and the moment passes.

Besides, a HN truism is “Yield to gross tonnage”. I liked that. It makes sense that HN users who believe that if you’re big others should get out of the way also get large cars.

“The cemeteries are full of people with right of way” so smaller vehicles should get out of the way of larger vehicles or risk death. It’s a good lesson. Can’t say it’s false.

I guess there should be rules about the height of headlights. It seems like exactly the sort of safety and compatibility problem that standards exist to solve.

US mainstream belief is that standards can be enforced at factory but no laws should be enforced on individuals. I act in that ecosystem. Not worsening it, but not sacrificing myself to it.

It is obviously true.

What is also obviously true is that road damage scales with the fourth power of vehicle mass, and that therefore vehicle taxation should increase at a similar power, so that the drivers of the 3-tonne trucknutted Canyoneros stop freeloading on the community.

… and that’s why I bought a Marauder MPV to go get groceries.

Nothing less than a decommissioned Abrams tank will do for taking little Billy to school!

Also the arms race of collision survivablity. I have no interest in driving a big truck, but with all the other big trucks out there I’m seriously tempted just for my own safety…

The big trucks are not evaluated for safety to the same standard as other vehicles. They aren't rigged with exploding gas tanks anymore, but the feeling of safety is mostly psychological.

That’s not the safety risk. The safety risk is not being in a big truck and getting hit by one. It’s not so much to do with the vehicle’s safety features as to (1) mass; and (2) height of the cabin.

That’s part of the issue. The safety ratings of a pickup truck do not incorporate the risk of the front end causing fatalities in collisions.

The feeling of safety is part of that - drivers think they have better visibility due to seating position. They are also more likely to roll and spin out than other vehicles.

Causing fatalities to the other drivers and pedestrians. This is, unfortunately, a selfish incentive that works against the common good.

Agreed. It’s gross. Unfortunately we live in an era where common good is a quaint concept.

The only logical next step is the mini-tank

I've been looking at the GTK Boxer since it was first announced. The modularity means you can bring the kids to school then swap the rear module for one more suited to transporting raw materials, you just need a garage equipped with a 15t crane to do the swap at home in just a few minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn_WblYc4xk

Just wait until 2050 when we all have our own killdozers [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer

The killdozers will all be self driving with no passengers and we will be the target. This will surely come to pass long before 2050.

How did I never hear of this? That was an epic read, thank you.

It isn’t an arms race, as being in those bigger vehicles only feels more safe; it isn’t actually any safer.

It is much safer to be in a big truck hitting an another big truck, than in a small sedan hitting a big truck. Physics of momentum beats out safety features. Actual studies do show this: it is safer for the occupant of the truck in a two-vehicle collision.

More trucks on the road make the chance of fatalities overall higher. You often find articles saying that fatalities go up when you introduce a truck, and that is true. But that's because trucks are more likely to kill pedestrians or drivers of smaller cars, NOT because of risk to the truck driver. []

It would be better if there were fewer trucks on the road. But if everyone else is buying a truck, it becomes your selfish incentive to do so as well, for the safety of your* family. It is a tragedy of the commons situation.

[*] The exception is single-vehicle accidents, e.g. rollovers. Those are riskier and more likely for the driver of a truck, but also less of a concern in suburban driving.

I think that’s part of it, but also about 30% of men apparently have a nearly-unlimited budget for buying the biggest truck.

Maybe we’ll see that change if the recent CAFE changes stick. I think the big bill passed recently set CAFE fines to zero.