‘Seismic shift’: driving unaffordable for many in US amid push toward SUVs
‘Seismic shift’: driving unaffordable for many in US amid push toward SUVs
Luxury vehicles, production cuts and soaring insurance prices have sent the cost of US car ownership out of control
You're viewing a single thread.
Maybe it's my interest in economics, but American life is so expensive in part because Americans are willing to spend a shit ton of money because they think they're supposed to. It's like we're all enamored with the idea that bigger and more is better just because someone said so. And then we complain about things being unaffordable like corporations aren't trying to fleece us for all we're worth.
I’ve heard it said that Americans purchase based on the maximal use case as opposed to the typical use case. As an American, that description makes so much sense. As an example, I live in an area where there are a lot of hills and it snows rarely, but just about everyone who can afford a 4WD SUV has one. Heaven forbid they can’t drive around on those 1-2 days a year that it snows! Meanwhile, they get shitty gas mileage driving to work the other 300-odd days of the year.
The maximal use case! That's a good way of thinking about it!
I'm struggling with my SO to buy a reasonable house in a high cost of living area. They want a massive 2000 Sq ft monstrosity because we plan to have a kid soon, and I'm thinking 1500 is more than enough. They're reasoning it's we need space for each other and entertaining. My reasoning is I want to eat out at the nearby fantastic restaurants nearby more often and buy cheese and wine and stuff.
The more walkable the location of the house, the less space you need because that space is outside your house.
US cities are rapidly running out of 3rd places. There's almost no neighborhood commercial centers with a cafe and a pub/bar that you can visit for extended periods of time.
The net result is that the home and the workplace are the primary locations we can spend time in.
Running out of 3rd spaces? LOL you only see those in museums now. See the smilodon exhibit next to the woolly mammoth exhibit and next to that is the American 3rd Space exhibit!
That somehow sounds like the primary space people spend time in should be a bar and not their home. That's insane. Though maybe it's some kind of an extrovert dream.
That's quite the straw man of my statement. You've read a ton into what I wrote.
Given that, I get to turn right around and say "okay, then we'll have no absolutely no places outside of work and home. All supplies delivered to a drop box on your doorstep so introverts never have to talk to a human."
My point was that communities historically have had places where people can choose to go and spend time in the shared space. Common examples of these spaces include cafes and bars/pubs. Geez you made me have to be stupid pedantic.
I enjoy going to shared public spaces and businesses that welcome sitting and relaxing. So sue me. I also make friends with every housecat, dog, hamster, and houseplant (if no pets are available) at parties I get roped into. I am, at best, a light duty introvert.
I spend way too much time in my house because going out to places in the US is extra work. The accessibility of places to sit and relax around my neighbors is next to nil. This isn't true when I get to visit international cities that aren't capitalist car-centric hellscapes. There, I walk to nearby places to sit and enjoy my city, not just my apartment. The world should have places to be outside the home, even if hiding in your four walls is both an introverts dream and a capitalism goal.
No, they're just saying it would be a part of that space. Like with a veterans club. You don't have to buy anything to be there. (Of course you do need to pay your membership, which is why we're talking about spaces that are just funded as a government item)
Meanwhile COVID loves extroverts!
I mean... it depends on what you mean, I guess? Even if I hadn't spent the pandemic lockdowns comfortably holed up in a small apartment, it's worth noting that big-ass houses typically have yards while small apartments do not.
I guess if you mean "having shops, bars and restaurants within walking distance" that can maybe work, but otherwise that doesn't seem to track.
Ah yes the private yard, another anti third space.
Public parks. The city even does your landscaping for you.
I don't really know what this conversation was meant to be about at this point, and after re-reading the thread in order a few times I think you don't either.
I had to use a unit converter, but I've lived in places housing up to seven people that weren't that big. Comfortably.
This is a conversation I had here recently as well when I pointed out to a car thread that for the money Americans pay for pickup trucks you can also buy a hatchback and a proper van, cover most use cases and not drive a tank to take kids to school. They did NOT like that.
Hatchbacks and vans are enclosed and not fun to haul stinky stuff and aren't conducive to hosing out after.
The main problem in the US is companies not making Coupe utility sized vehicles like the Subaru Brat or the El Camino. Small and light vehicles with beds. I would love a small AWD electric or hybrid truck that size that has good mileage for commuting and just enough convenience for moving cumbersome and stinky things around. The Ford Maverick is a move in the right direction, but is almost a midsized truck instead of going full on compact.
AAAAAAH, it's happening again!
Let me speedrun through this: I've never seen a pickup truck and I am in a rural place where people move stinky stuff all the time. Vans can be purchased with sealed off cabins, and with all doors open can be hosed down easily. It's fine. Nobody here has pickups. I haven't seen a pickup or known anybody to have one and everybody is fine. This is a strictly American thing and the US isn't the moon, there really isn't a unique need to use a truck bed for school runs.
You're doing the thing the man said: drive a tank to buy groceries in case you have to haul manure once a year.
It's about impossible to make this point with some Americans. Don't cause yourself an aneurysm.
I want a truck the size of a Subaru Brat, which had a shorter total length than a Honda Fit.
Is that unreasonable?
No they're just being a cunt and don't realize every truck isn't the size of a 737
No you are not. But perhaps you might consider a small and light trailer you could pull behind a sedan of even a mini-van. The costs are far, far, lower and the insurance and licensing are nearly non-existent.
No, for reasons already explained upthread and in various posts.
unfortunately there is no such product available in the market currently.
Most close may be a triporteur (scooter with bed) or a cargo bike, with an extended battery it is enough for daily work (60-200km)
I know there isn't in the US because I recently tried to find one to purchase, and I am complaining about that lack of availability.
Congratulations you anecdotal experience means nothing. I see pick up trucks ALL the time in rural areas (in Germany and the US) and in the US they aren't all hulking behemoth dodge rams. Those fill the suburbs. There's nothing wrong with wanting a small compact truck for hauling stuff. Trucks like the 95 toyota hilux, 98 Ford ranger, and 92 Jeep Comanche are great for hauling stuff like used furniture or concrete powder and picking up your kids from school without looking like an Abrams tank.
This is a strictly American thing and the US isn't the moon
Except the 2 best selling cars GLOBALLY in 2020 was the Toyata corolla and the Toyota hilux a fucking truck. The hilux was 2020′s best-selling VEHICLE in 14 countries, including Argentina, Australia, Panama, South Africa and Fiji.
You don't speak for the rest of the world
Wait, in 2020? Why not look up 22 or 23? I mean, it's not like anything weird would have impacted the market in 2020, huh? And hey, it doesn't even look that bad for your case, the Hilux and the F150 both break the top 10 in the most recent source I could find, if narrowly. The best seller I see is a SUV, and man, trust me, I don't share your defensiveness here, you are super allowed to mock those.
Now, I don't speak for the whole world, but I sure speak for myself. Since I was checking, in my location small vans and pickups all together account for less than 10% of the national market as per the most recent data (they don't even bother separating those segments, apparently). Large commercial vans and small commercial trucks are actually as big of a segment.
So yeah, anecdotally and statistically, it's exceedingly rare to see a pickup truck here. Turns out you also don't speak for the rest of the world. Because, you know, nobody does. That tends to happen with hundreds of countries and billions of people.
Turns out you also don't speak for the rest of the world. Because, you know, nobody does. That tends to happen with hundreds of countries and billions of people.
I never claimed to, you did. Outside of your world statistically ppl do buy trucks. They're not rare. It's not just an American thing. I'm not speaking for the world. I'm stating an objective fact.
You're just trying to walk back your condescending attitude because you realized you were PAINFULLY wrong. It's easy to shit on America (usually rightfully so) but all it showed was your own arrogance and bias.
I don't even understand how anyone could think like this if they know anything about cars. Modern trucks were designed for carrying loads (hehe) long distances through rural areas with rough to non existent roads.
You think the average guy selling mangos or hauling farm equipment still uses an ox and cart or a Citroen?
Oh, I'm condescending HARD here. The mere fact that this conversation is ongoing is extremely condescending. It's extremely boring, seeing how I've had it multiple times already, so the only thing keeping me here at all is the opportunity to condescend, frankly.
FWIW, and to engage honestly with data, because data requires honesty, we're just citing different sources. I think the one I pulled, which was dated September 2023 and had the Hilux and F150 at 6 and 9, respectively. I suspect it was a "year so far" list, given the date, but it doesn't cite a primary source, so I couldn't guarantee it.
Anyway, speaking of arrogance and condescension, I live in a rural area and have ridden on the back of Citroen vans to school more than once (don't do that, it's dangerous and illegal). So... average mango seller where? Because the anwer is yes. I've also gone around on the back of a tractor a few times.
I live in rural Germany. The only people with these trucks are the ones that never use the bed. In fact, I've recently seen one at the hardware store. The guy bought a shelf maybe 1.5 m long. Neither did it fit in the bed, nor did it fit in the cabin. Such a worthless piece of shit.
Everyone in the trade business uses vans. For heavy duty hauling they obviously use something bigger than a fucking pickup truck.
That out of the way, I see the appeal in smaller old-school trucks. They usually have larger beds than the ridiculously oversized pieces of shit that start sprouting in urban areas.
Everyone in the trade business uses vans. For heavy duty hauling they obviously use something bigger than a fucking pickup truck.
My 2015 Dodge Ram Hemi pickup truck and 24,000lbs/11,000kg tandem axle tilt bed trailer would like a word. Pretty hard to get a skidsteer or tractor in a van........And the cost to own and insure even a single axle truck and trailer is far more expensive, (I've done the math), and far less versatile. And hiring a large truck makes scheduling very difficult for weather sensitive jobs far too often. Not to mention the loading and offloading almost always needs a ramp or dock of some kind for those larger trucks - hence the tilt bed trailer.
And when not being used as a haul/work vehicle, it can get groceries or even a 6 pack of beer...........
That said, do urbane Cowboys/Cowgirls need a pickup truck? Probably not. But it's a free, but often stupid choice they are free to make.
I think people tend to pick the wrong targets in this debate. Stuff like the Ford Maverick and F150 are usually people who really don't need a truck, and most crossover/SUV drivers would be fine with a sedan. Once you get into the F250 and higher, though, you're mostly dealing with people who actually use their truck for a living. There are reasons workers in the US choose those--such as fifth wheel trailers--and there are reasons why European workers don't (except when they do).
And it's really silly. Vans for that kind of work are generally truck frames with a different back end. It doesn't make that much difference at that level. The best you can say is that the hood doesn't stick out as far and therefore visibility is better, but even that's not always true, and there are other tradeoffs with that design.
This is a strictly American thing
If by "American" you mean North American, then yeah, you are correct, because pickups are also super popular in Canada and Mexico. But I don't think that's what you mean. I think you mean to specify the US which again, is incorrect. The fact that pickups are so popular in Canada and Mexico as well tells us that contrary to what I suspect you're trying to imply, there isn't some kind of special innate idiotic pickup truck gene that's unique to Americans and that instead, it's all about marketing.
After all, if marketing and advertising didn't work, it wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar industry. What the big American car companies have done with amazing effectiveness is to make owning a pickup truck an intimate part of a lot of people's self-image. That's what you are arguing against and that's why it's nearly impossible to change anyone's mind about it.
That's all fair enough. And let me just include the first part about North America in there and not also pick the fight about Canada being mostly in that same cultural bundle because this thread is already trolly and angry enough.
I think if this thread wasn't such a hassle it'd be interesting to pick some of that apart, because I do think the marketing is culturally bound, not arbitrary (if it was arbitrary it would have worked in the places where it didn't). I do think it's obviously hard to argue about the identitarian bit you mention, though, because... well, look around this thread.
Congratulations on having a different experience! A van is too big for my tastes, you know they are basically enclosed trucks right?
I clearly said I didn't want a tank, and have no idea why you automatically equate an exposed bed with a tank. Do you know how small a Brat was?
Non-tank sized vans are available and have better aerodynamics and overall utility than a truck.
Those are called hatchbacks and are pretty awesome! Unfortunately the Civic hatchback I had for 15 years would have been better for the last 5 years I owned it if the hatch area was just a bed becauseI no longer needed a back seat but would have been 10x more convenient with an open bed in the fact same space instead of being enclosed.
They may have better coefficient of friction, but vans have a high frontal cross section. That tends to cancel out that advantage.
We rented a minivan on a recent trip and got 35+ mpg with a very full load, and it had some decent get up and go. It had a long sloped front end and I would absolutely recommend minivans to anyone who needs more space than a hatchback!
It wouldn't work for me outside that situation though, which is why I keep saying no to those suggestions.
Was that a hybrid? I'm having trouble finding a minivan that gets that kind of mpg that isn't a hybrid. Conversely, a hybrid crossover will easily break 40mpg for both city and highway. It weighs around the same while having better aerodynamics.
To be clear, aerodynamics dominates on the highway, and weight dominates in cities.
Right, but in this scenario you end up with two vehicles: a light, economical car to drive and a dedicated work vehicle. The original point is that expensive, heavy vehicles as daily drivers can be less practical and economical than mutiple cheaper, dedicated vehicles.
For some reason, this makes Americans, and especially American car people VERY angry to hear, and it's bizarre.
The original point is that expensive, heavy vehicles as daily drivers can be less practical and economical than mutiple cheaper, dedicated vehicles.
Hold up here. Americans have too many cars per capita as it is. Your solution is to increase that? Especially when cars come with a big environmental footprint right out of the factory. Because I'm over here trying to consolidate how many cars we have and use an e-bike more often.
I don't think you've thought this through.
Well, see, the secret is you probably don't really need that truck bed in the first place, so if I was to guess, I'd say that's why there's a bit of resistance to that idea. The working hypothesis here is that if you bought a sensible car that makes sense as a car... and a separate van to work, then you'd never buy a van. Which is what most people do here, honestly. You don't so much buy a van as you know a guy who does own a van and will let you use it for the thirty minutes that you actually need it once or twice a year in exchange for a beer later.
Which is probably how you end up with fewer cars per capita than the US and still have work vehicles separate from whatever you use to take the kids to school or go get groceries.
Also, you send the kids to school in a bus and walk to the shop. That also helps, I bet.
I'm not sure why you think a van is a better option. If we're talking about people who actually use their big hauling thing for more than running to Starbucks, they're different options for different uses. They're not more efficient, and on fact may may be less efficient in comparable models. The bigger ones are built on exactly the same truck frames.
People who actually need one can choose whatever. I don't have a need for either, don't have either, and probably never will. But I've seen this van argument a lot, and I think it's silly and misunderstands how the two are built and their tradeoffs.
I don't want two vehicles that don't do what I want. I want one vehicle, that is the same size and gets the same gas mileage as a car that does what I want by having an open bed in the back instead of an enclosed hatchback.
Its like you can't read.
Note: The Subaru Brat, which is one of the example I said that I wished they sold trucks in today, was smaller than a Honda Fit. Do you think a Honda Fit is big?
I'm amazed they haven't accused you have having a small penis because you want a (checks again to be sure) Subaru Brat.
We had a used Brat when I was a teenager in the 80s! The seats in the bed had already been taken out and it was a rust bucket, but just fun on a bun until my older brother rolled it in a ditch.
A modern version with an electric drive train would be fantastic!
No, hey, I get it. You want a cool toy, not a boring practical solution. That's legitimate. I own many things that are not the optimal answer to a problem just because I like them.
The sheer rage at the insinuation that the option may not be optimal is fascinating, though. So uniquely American. Which is what this thread is about. "The maximal use case".
For the record, I had not heard of the "Honda Fit". I guess it's like a Japanese Fiat Punto. Also for the record, what both the Fiat Punto and the Honda Fit seem to have is a back seat. But hey, again, a cool toy, not an optimal solution. Maximal use case. It's a good observation.
What about a small car trailer?
How is an extra piece of equipment that is less convenient and takes up more space a better solution? Where the fuck am I going to keep that when I could just have that same space in the back of a vehicle instead of an enclosed trunk?
Either truck means something different in your language where you cannot conceive of one being small, or you are somehow opposed to a vehicle with an open bed existing at all.
Please keep offering less convenient solutions than having an open bed in the back of a car sized vehicle though, it is entertaining how fucking ridiculous the suggestions are instead of just agreeing that a smaller trucks would be a nice alternative.
The base answer to your problem is owning a **small and light trailer. One that is capable of hauling a few boards or an appliance or two like a clothes washer or refrigerator. And when done with the task, can be parked in a corner and forgotten until needed again. A perfectly good one can be had for around $500US - Some simple assembly required.
**Apartment dwellers might not be able to own one.
Or just go to UHaul, rent a truck or van for $20, then return it.
That can work also. As long as there is a U-Haul to rent from and they have what you need when you need it. And it WILL cost more than $20 - been there done that.
The trailer takes up space when not being used, the back half of the vehicle does not. This is true no matter what the parking situation is. Zero space is better than any space, if the back half of the vehicle doesn't need to be enclosed or have seating.
The trailer requires some extra maintenance too. Keeping things oiled, tires aired up and replaced regularly. Driving with the trailer means needing to use to parking stalls when parking. Backing up with trailers is a lot of fun too!
The trailer is a very situational benefit for situations where the main vehicle space is needed. Hell, if I need a trailer I can just rent one from UHaul. But I don't when the same thing is solved with a truck bed, and the truck bed format is far more convenient if the vehicle with the bed is the same size as a normal car!
There are light trailers that can be stored vertically to take very minimal space and can be deployed in a few minutes of effort.
The maintenance costs and effort of greasing two bearings and tire replacement is still far, far, less than the total cost of owning and insuring a pickup truck. Plus, they have the bonus of being a whole lot easier to load and unload due to the much lower bed height.
Any place you might go with your trailer to haul larger/heavier items will have proper room to park your vehicle and small trailer. After all, they are getting far larger trucks and trailers to receive and ship items in bulk. Appliance, home improvement, furniture stores and the like seldom have "street only" parking. And if that's all that's available, you didn't need either the trailer or a pickup truck to shop there.
Backing up a trailer isn't hard - learn to drive.
Learn to read and understand words.
Ok. We raised 4 kids in an 1800 sq foot house with one bathroom. I do not recommend the one bathroom, but the space was more than adequate.
Having said that, it does make a difference, we have the same size house now and only 2 kids left at home, but this house has a bigger main kitchen/dining area, smaller bedrooms, a separate living room for the kids, an enormous back porch/deck adding to the useable space and entertaining space is really helpful more than I had imagined.
1500 arranged right with small bedrooms and enough common area, and at least 2 bathrooms sure. It's not a small house, that's a medium size house. With an enormous porch? Hell yeah. We used to live in one of those with two other couples, it was fine. But I do think you are undercounting the value of common space.
We have two kids in a 3 bed/2 bath 1350 sq ft home. We do have a full basement, but the kids aren't really allowed down there (power tools, toy stash, etc). I guess I do hang out there some nights, but that's only because my gaming computer moved downstairs years ago when our oldest started to be able to reach the keyboard and pull key caps off it.
In our experience, you're probably not going to do a lot of entertaining while you have young kids. While one of your kids is under 3-4, and sometimes older, they're going to need naps. They're also going to have early bedtimes. Naps are mostly behind us, and we do have afternoon play dates, but the kids don't really care what space they're in as long as they're engaged and have things to do. Having an adult gathering is... very rare. We have a nice sized yard, so we tend to have gatherings outside.
I don't think we need extra bedrooms or bigger bedrooms/bathrooms. An office might be nice, but working from the basement works just as well. A toy room could be nice, but to me it would be wasted space as the kids get older and have fewer, but larger/more engaging, toys. At least around here, the extra room comes with extra walls that result in a space that's not often used (think a formal dining room).
There's also the financial side of things. We could afford a larger house, but would rather be putting any extra into 529s, our own 401ks, etc. Kid related expenses really add up before you start also thinking about a bigger mortgage payment.
On cars I agree wholeheartedly. It's way too expensive to maintain that capacity. We rent a minivan to travel but buy small car for daily use.
House I am not convinced, the value proposition is different. It really is nice to have a little extra space. Not some monstrous McMansion, but not cozy, and space for the kids to have their gaming computer stuff not inside their bedroom and my home office stuff not inside my bedroom. And moving is a pain in the ass and expensive, absolutely don't want to have to scale up if the family gets bigger.
Oh yeah the "office" they keep trying to delete from apartments and town houses. There's good evidence for psychological health in separating sleep, work, play, and relaxation spaces.
My hybrid SUV (Ford escape) has awd and gets low-mid 40s mpg on my 12gallon-600 mile tank. The trick is the awd isn’t permanently on, it’s only on when it needs the traction or I change the drive mode to AWD when I’m expecting ice/snow.
It's the issue of "but sometimes". People want to use a worse solution because the better solution has an issue that happens only rarely.
Also, I drove a manual compact sedan in a mountain town with hills for about 6 years. Yeah it's not as easy as throwing "off road" mode on but it's not exactly hard either.
I’m always blown away seeing these blue collar guys driving around these $50-80k trucks that probably get 8 mpg. How do they afford this?
Debt to their eyeballs
Also some of them are paid very well. Any of your unionized specialty trades can easily make $150k+ a year, especially if they're willing to travel or work a lot of OT. If you're single or married with no kids, you can pretty easily afford a big fancy truck like that.
If you're willing to travel that can be more than $50k a year in per diem pay, so in two years you can easily pay off a new trailer to live in and a nice truck to haul it with. I personally know people who have done exactly this. The catch is that you need to get into a good union and do your apprenticeship and generally have your shit together. It always surprises me that more people don't know this.
Credit?
Loan on a $50k vehicle is $1000-$1500/month depending on loan term. It’s likely $80 minimum every time you refuel too.
That's why repossessions are a booming business.
Yes, I've been trying to get the idea across to people to spend less instead of making more.
They just don't get it, and I think that's by design.
These problems won't get solved until our culture changes. It won't change until enough people feel disenfranchised.
In other words, it'll get worse before it gets better. Blame every poor person who believes the disparity in wealth should grow instead of shrink.