- cross-posted to:
- fuckcars@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- fuckcars@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
My previous car is a Yaris.
When I got the Yaris I heard people make snide comments like “Anyone see that big guy get out of that tiny car?” then gas prices went up and they became “Hey, what kind of MPG does that thing get?”
I like hatchbacks. Bigger is fine but nothing huge.
I have a 2017 Hybrid Yaris in blue like this one:
That I affectionately call “Blue thunder” 🤣
Got the same model in red but with the 1.5L engine from 2019. Love it. Already got 75k km and it’s still running like a charm.
Mine has half that 37k. It had 31k when I bought it in 2020, and I don’t use it often. I hoper it lasts a few more years.
Yaris gang rise up!
Want to trade my 09 in for a more recent model, hatchback would be ideal
The actual model is beautiful, and it has Apple Car/Android auto and also a HUD.
As a taller woman my wife was against us getting a subcompact until I took her to test drive it thinking I wouldn’t fit. Between seeing how comfortable and efficient it was she was entirely on board
My Yaris is actually older than me. so old in fact, that it was called “vitz” and/or “echo” in some countries. i am the 4th owner. had to replace the starter, all the fluids and the clutch (cuz old people). best car ever. it has around 100.000 km on it and runs like it rolled out of the factory just yesterday. considering we euros pay up to 7€ per gallon it’s good i still get around 40mpg out of it. love that thing.
Honda Fit gangg
My current car is an '07 Yaris. It’s totally bare bones, but everyone who has been in it comments on how spacious the interior is.
I’ve always driven small cars, because they’re economical and I’ve never needed anything larger. I hate that small hatchbacks are so scarce in the US and that our roads are overrun with ludicrously huge pickups and SUVs. We transitioned from land yachts to small cars in the late 1970’s and 1980’s, we could do it again with the right incentives.
I drive an Auris station wagon Hybrid (aka, the US Corolla iM with bigger boot). I had a chance to drive multiple Yaris generations and honestly I am always surprised by how roomy it is inside. They made a perfect use of space - way better than VW did with Polo (smaller Golf), that’s for sure…
americans will embrace small cars like they embrace gun control
We embraced the shit out of them during the oil crisis in the '70’s. Then when gasoline got cheap again we snapped right back.
“But my SUV makes me feel so ‘safe’ and gives me a commanding view of the road!!!”
I am of the opinion that everyone ought to just get a motorcycle.
I think there should be a separate license to drive SUVs and Trucks over a certain size. And that maintaining that license should be a bit of a hassle - like a required in-person written and practical test every 2 years. If people want that commanding view of the road and “safe” feeling that comes from endangering everyone else on the road, then they should have to put in some extra effort - not enough extra effort that it’s unattainable for those who actually have a need for a vehicle of that size, but enough effort that it would discourage the widespread use we have currently.
Also, during your SUV probationary period you have to drive a Suzuki Samurai for two years or so.
I’d love to have a motorcycle that would replace my current vehicle, but it would need to be capable of keeping me warm while handling well in heavy snow. Afaik, there aren’t any enclosed bikes out there
When you need a fucking step ladder to get into your jacked up pickup just so you can commute or get groceries you might have lost your mind.
I am of the opinion that everyone ought to just get a motorcycle.
I’d rather not die tyvm.
The US EPA currently penalizes smaller cars thanks to a poorly thought out rule for fuel economy that scales by wheelbase size, making larger cars easier to meet requirements for. The EPA has made many embarrassingly backwards decisions, but this might be the worst.
I was taxed an extra $150 to register a 2002 Honda Insight last year. It was for a “Hybrid Tax” because hybrid owners buy less gas and therefore are paying less tax on gasoline. Like, that’s the whole point of driving a small car!
They did for a while in the 70s-80s until giant SUVs got everyone hot and bothered
With their face?!?
Whenever I’m in the States I hate the fact that everything is a 20 minute car ride away. I understand why road rage can be a thing if you spend so much time in the car.
deleted by creator
USA didn’t start building bullshit suburbs until 1950s. before that it was dense cities.
No it wasn’t. Like 80% of the population lived in rural areas before the 50s. Apparently this sub really doesn’t like facts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_in_the_United_States?wprov=sfla1
Europe is much more population dense than the US, a quick fact check easily confirms this.
The government was literally giving away land under the homestead act 100 years before that. You could just go stick some stakes in the ground and that was your 100+ acres, so long as you produced something with the land.
deleted by creator
Unfortunately it’s zoning that caused most of this issue. Not size. Dense residential was disallowed for not entirely un-racist reasons, so it spread out enormously instead. On top of car companies lobbying in various ways to make cars essential.
People also spread out because they could - most people would prefer to have a house with land rather than live in a tiny apt
Suburbs are subsidized by urban areas. Zoning in North America means medium and high density can only be built in limited locations, meaning demand often outstrips supply, increasing the price. The decision of “house with land” vs “tiny apt” isn’t a direct comparison and price influences people’s decisions. If these perverse incentives weren’t in place, more people would consider living in higher density areas with more amenities vs having lots of land and being far away from everything.
deleted by creator
I stay home because I can, and it’s awesome. All my cool stuff and my family is here, but if I wanted to get out and do stuff it’s a short car trip to numerous options for cool stuff to do.
If anything this means Europe’s cities just can’t accommodate cars, because they weren’t built for them. The weird thing is that American cities were built for cars and yet still can’t accommodate cars. Traffic, lack of parking, road rage… it’s a huge mess, and it seems like the more you commit to cars, the worse it all gets. That’s the trouble with cars. They just don’t work.
I don’t really understand this comment though. It doesn’t take thousands of years to achieve urban density. And what does America’s sprawl have to do with loving large cars? You don’t need a huge car to drive medium distances.
You don’t even need a huge car to travel huge distances.
You need density to support a train system. You need a large number of riders to make it economical and you need them living within a reasonable distance of the stations. The US is very spread out. You can blame cars for that but that is the world we live in. The US is also very big with large rural areas, the western US didn’t even really develop until trains came out in the 1869. Europe was built around compact cities based on horses and walking long before cars.
I agree that we are too car focused and it has become a sort of arms race, build more roads, more cars, more roads, etc.
The focus on cars is emotionally driven. The car symbolizes freedom and independence. Besides this it’s a huge status symbol. And the industry is working hard to keep it this way. The lack of decent public transportation is by design.
Adding to this, I think cars are also often a person’s only private space. Look at the YT videos that are people ranting from their car. It’s all they have. They’re very attached to it.
Further, a lot of Americans are in terrible physical shape. Obese and weak, injured, etc or all of these. But behind the wheel of a beefy car they can feel the joy of movement and power. It’s literally an extension of their body.
Freedom, independence, privacy, strength and power… yeah Americans have a lot invested in their cars. I was brought up into this culture and subscribed to it myself for a long time. Fortunately I just have other ways to feel good about myself now and caring about cars seems stupid and pathetic.
You’re absolutely correct, but a bicycle tideuor bus trip or train journey is also a feeling of freedom, too. Reframing ‘freedom’ so people don’t feel they have to get a $70,000 crew cab pickup to drive to the bar or store is the thing.
A bus felt liberating before I got my driver’s license. And driving felt liberating before I got ahold of aircraft controls for the first time. One day I’ll get this jetpack to work and then forget about planes.
There is a continuum and its hard to go in the other direction without feeling the additional restrictions.
Quite literally, same here. There’s nothing wrong with bikes, but used cars became unreasonably expensive and younger people never tasted the freedom. Planes are like that with even smaller percentages of pilots and even more unreasonable prices (last affordable in the 1960s, while cars were affordable until the early 2000s or so). People hate what they don’t have or understand. Personal vehicles are incredibly liberating for those of us who get it. We’re being shamed for appreciating an independence everyone should experience, but can’t because there are too many people, too much demand, and all the ecological problems that come with it. Yes, human impact could be reduced if everyone lived in abject poverty, but guess what, poor people in developing countries want Western amenities too. Everyone should.
This is so true. Bikes are a wonderful feeling.
I actually spent 8 years going to Burning Man and while I was there I volunteered to fix people’s bikes. A bike is really the best way to get around there but many people borrow one that’s in dubious condition, get out there, and realize it doesn’t ride well, or has no air in the tires, whatever. We helped so many people get those shitty bikes into a rideable state. Lots of flat fixes. Many lube jobs. A lot of people just needed the seat adjusted but didn’t have a wrench. A lot of bad derailleurs we would just remove, turning the bike into a single speed.
My goal was to help people have a week of joy on a bike and remember how awesome they can be. Most Americans ride a bike when they are kids and then abandon them. It gave me a lot of satisfaction to bring all those adults a taste of that joy and freedom again. I hope some of them returned home with a renewed interest in bikes.
the western US didn’t even really develop until trains came out in the 1869
The western US didn’t really develop until the government started giving land that had already been ceded to indigenous peoples and couldn’t actually support dense settlement to white settlers, at the behest of railroad companies who needed an artificial reason to build railroads in the first place.
I totally get that fact. I also think that it would not be bad to copy some things from other countries to make the cities in the States more liveable without car dependency. There’s enough space to do that.
At the very least we could link cities with rail systems. Don’t put a million stops on them either though. Try taking Amtrack from DC to Boston and you’ll see what I mean.
just have more than one set of tracks and you can have a regional and express service train!
Passenger trains exist in the U.S. They used to be popular. Then planes and affordable automobiles put them out of business. If you don’t live in a dense urban area, you almost certainly have a car, meaning you aren’t beholden to train schedules and destinations. If you are in an area where you get by without a car, an Uber to the airport gets you to your destination much faster.
Normal sized cars* you mean.
Normal cars aren’t small. They’re just small if you compare them to the giant ridiculous trucks they have over that.
some reasons for the raise of vehicle size on the last decades are personal taste, but others are policy driven, we could look into that, as utility vehicles are treated differently in terms of emission requirements
I have heard also that a big car is better because a big car crashing with other bigger cars will increase the probability of surviving, but then it’s a war of having the biggest car. It’s basically the same as weapons.
Yup - in the US, pick-ups and SUVs are categorized as “light trucks,” which have different fuel efficiency and emission standards and are therefore more profitable to produce.
Add to that some clever marketing to the effect of “big car = more manly/safe” and boom, now you see these big, stupid, fuel-ineffecient, dangerous vehicles everywhere.
Good job 👍
deleted by creator
Give me a new El Camino EV with a 400 mile range and I’m in.
All my road trips are around 150 miles and there may or may not be a charger at the destination.
The article says range isn’t important…if you’ve ever looked at a map of the US, you’ll see why that’s a misguided statement.
Something like the Maverick hybrid might be best for you.
But then you have to deal with driving a ford.
95% of trips are 30 miles or less. Of course everyone is the exception, we’re all above average drivers here.
That’s a terrible statistic…of course most of my travel happens around where I live.
If anything…that actually reveals long trips are more common than you think…For every 19 times you go to work or the store the 20th trip is significant…
In other words, if your number I right…Once to Twice a month the average person would likely require an extended range EV.
Or an adequate mass transportation system.
Or walkable zoning, lack of which is the fundamental cause of the car dependency.
The lack of continuous sidewalks drives me nuts. A developer might put in a sidewalk but the one next to them doesn’t. Sometimes you are walking alongside a ditch or have to cross a busy road to continue on.
As much as I’m inclined to agree with @MaggiWuerze@feddit.de, the real reason is typically that all new developments are required to include sidewalks, but existing ones aren’t required to retrofit. So you get a patchwork of sidewalks installed over time as things get torn down and rebuilt.
The “annoying and pedestrian hostile” part is municipalities’ unwillingness to infill sidewalks in front of old developments at taxpayer expense.
Almost like it’s designed to be annoying and pedestrian hostile
Removed by mod
I never drove into Boston, I always took the train. I still needed a car though if I wanted to go anywhere away from the city. Boston also has an awful spoke and no rim train system. If you want to go from the end of one line to another you can’t go in a ring around the city, you’d have to go all the way in then all the way up the other spoke.
Buses aren’t horrible.
- they feel safer in terms of crime, which might not be an issue you deal with but for over half the population it matters
- they can often go around problems. One bus on the same line up ahead has an issue that has no real impact on the bus you are on
- lot easier for the disabled to go on and off compared to down into a subway
- you have a small degree of privacy
- Mechanical problems? Get off the bus. No biggy.
I do understand, I was a subway guy for the longest time, my wife would take the bus every day and she converted me.
Removed by mod
So I live in the cousin-fuckingly-deep south where 90% of what’s on the road is trying its best to be a monster truck… I drive what looks like a pregnant rollerskate by comparison cuz I don’t want to send half my paycheck into the gas tank.
It’s funny-sad how the folks in the giant trucks get offended just by seeing my tiny car. Every day there’s always at least one asshole in an F-350 or some shit that likes to ride up on my ass cuz I guess it makes them feel powerful? I just drop a mph every couple seconds until either they fuck off or get annoyed enough to pass.
Anyway, moral of the story is that stupid-big vehicles are here to stay in the US, at least in the regions occupied by Y’all Quaeda. Their trucks are one of their few sources of self esteem.
…I’m really tempted to find one of those rubber testicle things that the cowboys like to put between the rear wheels of their trucks, but like a comically tiny one, color it like the trans flag, and hang it on the back of my tiny car just to annoy the rednecks on the road. …although here, that’d probably get my car or myself shot.
I got the chevy spark right before it got discontinued and the amount of people who comment on my small car in the south is obsurd. It’s great being able to fit into a parking spot between 2 monster trucks and it only costs like 25 dollars for a tank of gas. People who see vehicles as more than just a means of transportation baffles me. I like the tiny truck nuts idea I might have to steal that.
My dream car is a Nash Metropolitan converted to an EV.
That would be fucking dope. I’d love for retrofuturist cars like this to appear
Same with a 1959 Panhard PL 17. Some of those little old cars are just beautiful.
Lovely car! Btw: how do you put a picture in a comment? What sorcery is this?
I’m on desktop, so how I do it is right-click, copy image, then just paste into the post. Not sure how to do it on mobile.
Oh! Ok. I don’t know if that possible in Mlem (iOS app). Thanks!
Got it! it just needs the
markdown formatting. Thanks a lot. Cheers!
Bro if you could get a used leaf gen one (they run around 4k), you could take that thing to a drag strip and absolutely turn some heads.
I have a friend who wants to take my gen one leaf and do a conversion. He just went to an EV mechanics course on it.
You’d chop up a nash, and put an ev motor in it? I do not have kind words for you.
CAFE is killing the smaller vehicle. Vehicles are getting super round and boring for aerodynamics. Wheel base is getting longer. Track is getting wider. There’s no such thing as a small truck. Everything is am SUV (“truck”) or crossover (hatchback / station wagon). CAFE allows for less fuel efficiency for wider track and longer wheelbase and trucks over everything else.
Remember how VW got caught cheating on the mileage tests? Remember how every other major manufacturer was caught too?
The govt has set far too high of a standard for mileage, so car companies are making giant ass cars to meet (cheat) CAFE standards. The manufacturers have done everything they can but still can’t meet the standards.
The problem with CAFE is that it does not apply to trucks and SUV’s. So bear with me for a moment:
You are a car executive, choosing what car to make. On one hand, say there’s a station wagon. On the other, say there’s an SUV. The bean counters assure you they cost about as much to produce, but the station wagon has to comply to stricter regulations, and the engineers tell you they’ll have to work harder to make the station wagon comply to the law.
Meanwhile, the SUV costs about as much to make, but has way fewer rules it has to comply with. The marketing team tells you they can sell both vehicles just as well, though you may be able to set a higher sticker price for the SUV.
Do you build the more heavily regulated station wagon, knowing your margins are thinner? Or do you take the easier option with bigger margins and build the SUV?
You’ll even see the outcome IRL. In the US, Ford tries to convince you that the car you need for your family is a pick-up truck with a crew cab. Meanwhile, in the European market, where larger cars start costing much more much sooner, the same segment gets offered a seven seater minivan.
Here we have higher taxes for cars more than 4m long, so there are lots of small cars. Also, a lot of 3.99m cars.
There was a time back when gas prices got kinda high when I thought Americans would finally shift down to slightly smaller cars, but now it’s practically a cultural thing for half the country to burn as much fuel as possible, so I suspect even if gas prices here hit Europe levels it wouldn’t cause them to budge much.
It does feel really odd, though, going somewhere like a school and just being absolutely surrounded by huge SUVs and pickup trucks that you know damn well like 90% of the drivers aren’t actually utilizing.
Double-sucks because it’s becoming more and more difficult to find a small car. Everything new, even most cars, are huge.
I thought after 2008 that we had finally gotten over our large car addiction.
They’re so addicted to SUVs now that Ford doesn’t even make a car other than the Mustang. Their entire lineup is SUVs.
Looks to me like vehicle sales have been taking dramatically, probably due to the increased cost due to “supply chain”. Also, EV sales grew 42.7% last year.
I have a Volt, and I resent how few compact hybrid options there will be when I get a replacement. When I drive around, I literally struggle to see around the giant land boats cruising around. They hold up parking lots trying to stuff themselves into spaces, and if I get hit by one I’m much more likely to be injured. Average car size is kind of a tragedy of the commons. Everyone suffers when the cars get bigger, but the individuals with the dumb land boats suffer little of the cost.
Gen1 Honda insight here to corroborate. Trucks seem to intentionally pull in front of me, even when driving reasonably above the limit, just to prove a point. It’s dumb.
Yes, and their headlights are at the perfect height for blinding me in the rear view
tragedy of the commons
TILAW (today I learned a word):
The tragedy of the commons is a metaphoric label for a concept that is widely discussed in economics, ecology and other sciences. According to the concept, should a number of people enjoy unfettered access to a finite, valuable resource such as a pasture, they will tend to over-use it, and may end up destroying its value altogether. To exercise voluntary restraint is not a rational choice for individuals – if they did, the other users would merely supplant them – yet the predictable result is a tragedy for all.
Yes, the metaphor has fallen out of fashion for a lot of reasons, including that the guy who coined the expression turned out to be a real piece of shit, but the core concept is still a valid one.
No, there are really tangential analogies about how self-interested behavior can have negative consequences, but it is and has always been based around a bunch of numerous myths. Externalities is a better description of this.
Elinor Ostrom investigated management of the commons and the original description of tragedy of the commons was a complete lie. The commons were enclosed so that in this transitional stage of feudal lords could become businessmen that could profit off of using the land rather than taxing a peasant community living off of it. The enclosed commons is an asset to generate profit, where if enough of an increase in profit could be achieved, that could be reinvested, meant that exhausting the land would be an economically rational strategy. Where, if a peasant community is using it to sustain themselves, they have to carefully manage and steward that land so it is still producing for themselves years later, their children, and their grandchildren. The complete opposite of what the “tragedy of the commons” describes.
The idea of a commons as a shared resource that must be maintained through collective action is still a useful metaphor for our global environment. Just because Hardin’s scholarship about medieval commons was bad doesn’t mean our global world is not in itself a commons as the metaphor described it, and a useful thought experiment based on all the scholarship and debate that followed. And everyday people in a comment section who aren’t environmental professionals aren’t going to know the word “externality”. So not that useful outside of a limited audience
It’s time for Americans to embrace bicycles and ebikes and, gasp, walking
Ebikes are a bigger fucking hazard than cars, I’ve seen fucking morons on those doing speeds that you should have to be licensed for and should need insurance for.
You are kidding, right? A 17 year old irresponsible kid on a heavy bike going 30kms/hour (say, 20mph) vs irresponsible 17 year old kid in two tonnes of murder metal going 160 / 100mph, what’s more dangerous?
Ebikes can and should be limited to 25-30 (say 15-20mph) and anyone breaking that loses their bike. It’s not a big problem.
Cars are literally big problems
Edit: bikes require, just like cars, good infrastructure. Build that and it’s good
Never gonna happen. Where I live, it’s not safe for my daughter to walk the 1/2 mile to school. To make it safe, we would need to install sidewalks throughout town. That’s millions of dollars that less than 100
childrennon-taxpayers would use. And since the school is in the middle of a residential neighborhood, there’s not really any other use of the sidewalks either…And since the school is in the middle of a residential neighborhood, there’s not really any other use of the sidewalks either…
As a European, this statement sounds completely insane. I honestly can not comprehend how a nation got to the point of saying “we don’t need to be able to walk somewhere from our house so lets not bother building sidewalks”.
You and your daughter should cycle to school though. If she’s not old enough to go on her own bike, take her with a trailer bike. If she’s too young for that then a child seat, and when she’s old enough she can cycle on her own.
The idea of using a car to go 900m is just crazy to us.
It’s crazy to us too! Unfortunately, we don’t have much say in the matter. That said, plenty of kids do still walk to school, and many do have sidewalks, although they’re far from universal. The thing is that without the sidewalks you can more easily achieve:
- Speed capture traffic cameras around school zones (nobody aside from the below likes these)
- Contractor to manage the traffic camera
- Kickbacks for the politicians to install the camera
- Fines to pay the cop budget
- Accidents to justify the above
No
Redesign the roads. If you build every road like it’s a highway it’s obvious that everybody drives insame, can you blame them? Make the roads narrower, people will automatically drove slower.
I can’t fathom why they don’t make school crossings on small increases in height. Not a traffic bump, just move a piece of 20 meters / yards long up by 25cm / 10 inches with a nice slope to get on and off. If you drove normal you barely notice it. If you drive fast, you’ll go flying.
US road engineering literally is decades behind other countries, you still build roads like it’s 1960, and you build horrible stroads.
First of all, either walking near the school is unsafe or the school in the middle of a residential neighborhood. You don’t get to have it both ways!
Second, the idea that sidewalks are too expensive is obviously horseshit, considering that the alternative is widening the roads and they can somehow always find the much larger amount of money for that.
What you’re saying is completely backwards.
If you install sidewalks, people will use it. Right now nobody walks because they can’t. Install sidewalks and they will. Ensure there are places to go, so redesign your cities so that you have mixed use buildings. If you have small stores and bars and restaurants right around the corner, you’ll walk.
In a residential area there are LOADS of uses for sidewalks. It’s just that the car industry has programmed Americans to think their legs can’t be used for anything. I love European cities, especially the Netherlands because you can safely walk and cycle anywhere. People don’t want to own cars, why would they? Everything they need is around the corner, and if they need to go far away there is awesome public transportation that is better, safer, faster cheaper and more comfortable than cars.
To me you sound like somebody who doesn’t know what he’s missing out on because you’ve basically been lied to.
The last time they installed sidewalks, they were installed between a Target that you can’t get to unless you drive, and a commercial area that’s about a mile away. I’m not sure what the percentage of people who are going to walk from work to target on their lunch break is, but that’s what they did.
The other sidewalk that they tried to put in, was in front of the township building. Which is between to a horse farm and a forest. I get the “if you build it they will come” mentality, but I don’t think it applies for trees and horses.
Yeah that’s just designed to fail. If you design a shitshow and then say “well let’s not do this again because it failed” then you’re just being disingenuous. Governments should take a hint from the Netherlands on hoe to do bicycle infrastructure. You can ride anywhere in the country on bike, there are more bicycle roads than car roads
Yeah that’s just designed to fail. If you design a shitshow and then say “well let’s not do this again because it failed” then you’re just being disingenuous. Governments should take a hint from the Netherlands on hoe to do bicycle infrastructure. You can ride anywhere in the country on bike, there are more bicycle roads than car roads
