[karanddd]

I saw this video on a Twitter thread about how large new models of pick up trucks in the US are.

https://twitter.com/bontrager_keith/...Nn5y88m0g&s=19

It's scary that due to such high (& long) front ends, drivers can barely see what's ahead of them. A cyclist or pedestrian hit by these trucks would get crushed under the wheels, as opposed to rolling over the windshield of a normal sized car.

I just wanted to start this thread to hear what other people think about this. As a cyclist who's had a near miss with one such truck, I find them abominable.

At the moment I'm living in Texas, where such trucks are very common. Of the hundreds of trucks I've seen, only 1 or 2 had anything in the bed. They serve no real purpose in 95% of situations in which they're bought and endanger everyone else on the road.

Americans are too enamoured of these trucks (and manufacturers too enamoured of profits) for them to go away in the near future.

In my view the best thing about the Indian automotive scene is that such trucks do not exist and are not likely to become popular. I do however believe that something along those lines ought to be enshrined in the law.

The Bharat NCAP or equivalent testing body should take into account pedestrian collision safety as much as the safety of the people within the car. That is the only way to make our streets safer and better.

[Bibendum90949]

This must be one of those behemoth's on stilts, my guess.

[Kosfactor]

What regulations can do for a cyclist who is out there saving the world is fit an autonomous emergency braking (AEB) with pedestrian/ cyclist detection.

But a slow and fragile cyclist has no place sharing the road with cars and trucks, just a simple slip of your shoes on the pedal on a rainy day and you're
a sticker on the road - it's not someone else's fault. A dedicated cyclist lane is needed for them, I think as their numbers increase we can see such lanes in more cities.

A pickup truck's design is to be useful and serve a purpose, not to save lives - that is the job of an ambulance. Much like an 18 wheeler is designed to transport things , including that made in China / India bicycles.

The average American has a lot of stuff , they like to do things on their own, build things , live an outdoor life, haul their trailer, toys etc. There are some who may do these things only a few times in a year but it doesn't hurt to have a pickup truck when needed - and so we see newer 'softer' pickup trucks like Ford Maverick!!

[ron178]

Originally Posted by karanddd

It's scary that due to such high (& long) front ends, drivers can barely see what's ahead of them. A cyclist or pedestrian hit by these trucks would get crushed under the wheels, as opposed to rolling over the windshield of a normal sized car.

What is even more concerning is that the US - where these trucks are very common - has not applied any form of pedestrian protection regulation. Even the consumer testing programs (US NCAP and IIHS) don't test pedestrian protection though the IIHS tests AEB systems for pedestrians.

A spokesperson for the US Government (whom I won't name because it borders on politics) in 2018 called the UN GTR9 pedestrian protection headform test unfair trade practice by the Japanese to prevent the sale of American cars there. He said:

It's the bowling ball test. They take a bowling ball from 20 feet up in the air and drop it on the hood of the car. If the hood dents, the car doesn't qualify. It's horrible, the way we're treated.

This is the test (see 1:45 for real speed) (this is the Japanese NCAP):

https://youtu.be/wrAqBZR6ock?t=105

Originally Posted by karanddd

The Bharat NCAP or equivalent testing body should take into account pedestrian collision safety as much as the safety of the people within the car. That is the only way to make our streets safer and better.

Since 2017 for new cars and 2019 for existing cars, India has applied a minimum pedestrian protection standard AIS-100, modelled loosely on UN GTR9. I'm sure Bharat NCAP will do even better tests when they start (presumably even an upper legform). In fact, even before Bharat NCAP, the Global NCAP Safer Cars for India pilot project will start pedestrian testing (just GTR9, though) and passing it will be a requirement for three stars and above starting July this year.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by karanddd

I saw this video on a Twitter thread about how large new models of pick up trucks in the US are.

https://twitter.com/bontrager_keith/...Nn5y88m0g&s=19

It's scary that due to such high (& long) front ends, drivers can barely see what's ahead of them. A cyclist or pedestrian hit by these trucks would get crushed under the wheels, as opposed to rolling over the windshield of a normal sized car.

I just wanted to start this thread to hear what other people think about this. As a cyclist who's had a near miss with one such truck, I find them abominable.

At the moment I'm living in Texas, where such trucks are very common. Of the hundreds of trucks I've seen, only 1 or 2 had anything in the bed. They serve no real purpose in 95% of situations in which they're bought and endanger everyone else on the road.

Americans are too enamoured of these trucks (and manufacturers too enamoured of profits) for them to go away in the near future.

In my view the best thing about the Indian automotive scene is that such trucks do not exist and are not likely to become popular. I do however believe that something along those lines ought to be enshrined in the law.

The Bharat NCAP or equivalent testing body should take into account pedestrian collision safety as much as the safety of the people within the car. That is the only way to make our streets safer and better.

1. The "broken" amurican culture of individual (money and pride) over the everything else in society.
Crushing cyclist or pedestrian under wheel is a distant second, these trucks are actually battering rams roaming on the streets. What they will do on an impact is first hammer the bones and consequently the internal organs on impact.

2. Oh boy, you are mistaken - just wait and watch. I can vouch that in this thread itself you will find many support for such vehicles to remain on the road. Wait for the IT incomes to rise further and such beasts will soon become popular. (You can already experience the trend of SUVs and crossover SUVs already overtaking the sedan sales)

3. You are right that India should not blindly ape Amurica, and definitely requires strong regulations with respect to pedestrian safety.
However, another question that needs answering is there are larger and wider spread issues (like obtainment of driving license through dubious means, over speeding, drunk driving) which have higher impact and have tight rules but still not enforced properly in India.

[DicKy]

Was expecting some practical concerns like how the beds of pickup trucks are too high for someone to climb without support, or that it would be hard to load/unload stuff or that they have grown too much in size affecting usability and mileage.

Instead we have pedestrian safety concerns. Well, same could be said for vans, buses and trucks, or most commercial vehicles even. You would be stickered on the flat nose, instead of rolling onto the windshield.

Don't get me wrong. IMO, can't fathom why F150s are the top selling vehicles in USA or when pickup trucks never see anything on their loadbed. But we can say the same for MPVs with 2-3 passengers, SUVs that don't see dirt, premium Germans that may never see 140+km/h or sportscars that live their life within urban limits.

Agree with @Kosfactor.

[karanddd]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

A pickup truck's design is to be useful and serve a purpose, not to save lives - that is the job of an ambulance. Much like an 18 wheeler is designed to transport things , including that made in China / India bicycles.

The average American has a lot of stuff , they like to do things on their own, build things , live an outdoor life, haul their trailer, toys etc. There are some who may do these things only a few times in a year but it doesn't hurt to have a pickup truck when needed - and so we see newer 'softer' pickup trucks like Ford Maverick!!

I think the comparison to commercial vehicles is disingenuous. 18 wheelers do not ply in residential areas where kids may be running about or people walking etc. They also require drivers to hold a commercial license, which requires specific training and tests. On the other hand, pick up trucks with blindspots 10 feet in front of them are driven by people with a normal driver's licenses in residential neighbourhoods.

Not just Americans, but people across the world haul stuff, build objects, do things outdoors etc. And people have been doing these things for the past 50 years, with the help of much smaller vehicles. These trucks are so large not because that serves any practical purpose, they are large so that they can intimidate and scare other road users:

https://jalopnik.com/we-need-to-talk...its-1830860270

Originally Posted by DicKy

Instead we have pedestrian safety concerns. Well, same could be said for vans, buses and trucks, or most commercial vehicles even. You would be stickered on the flat nose, instead of rolling onto the windshield.

Don't get me wrong. IMO, can't fathom why F150s are the top selling vehicles in USA or when pickup trucks never see anything on their loadbed. But we can say the same for MPVs with 2-3 passengers, SUVs that don't see dirt, premium Germans that may never see 140+km/h or sportscars that live their life within urban limits.

Again the comparison with commercial vehicles is silly, as they actually serve a purpose, and are driven in a far more restricted fashion (in terms of training or where they can go). The concerns is about safety. A sports car that doesn't get used much or a 4x4 that sits in the garage does not hurt anyone, so it's pointless to compare the two things.

An Indiana television station actually did an investigation about the frontal blind spot of pick up trucks, the video for which you can find here: https://www.wthr.com/article/news/in...0-3363f0954b3b

A row of twelve children sitting in front of a pick up truck were not visible from the driver's seat. People who were shown how large the blind spot in front of their vehicle was were horrified to learn of this. You can see how much worse trucks are in this regard compared to sedans or even SUVs from this infographic.

I am slightly dismayed but not shocked at the responses to this. There is a growing awareness that pick up trucks are a menace. They are twice as likely to kill a pedestrian as compared to a sedan or smaller car (due to their weight and taller front end). Yet you see people driving them as a lifestyle option, without ever using the towing capacity or flatbed.

[GutsyGibbon]

The size of the bed on an F150 is designed to hold a sheet full sheet of plywood, flat between the wheelwells. Plywood, sheet rock, siding, etc all materials used in construction is sold as 4' x 8' sheets. The bed size has remained constant. The innovation in the tailgate ha been huge.

I own a Ford Ranger and use it to haul manure, dirt, lumber all the time. The big reason to upgrade to F150 is the ability to load construction materials easily.

[DicKy]

Originally Posted by karanddd

Not just Americans, but people across the world haul stuff, build objects, do things outdoors etc. And people have been doing these things for the past 50 years, with the help of much smaller vehicles. These trucks are so large not because that serves any practical purpose, they are large so that they can intimidate and scare other road users:

Smaller? Different countries have different levels of infrastructure and the CVs used reflect those. American cars always were vulgarly large, inefficient compared to vehicles in other countries. But they still sell. Many Americans would say they just need a Hilux size vehicle for most uses as most of the full size pick-up trucks don't get used to their full potential. And here in India, in our forum, a good number of BHPians have said that the Hilux itself is a waste of public space and too big for our roads. Ofcourse, our Apes, Aces and Maximmos carry more load than an average pick-up truck would in its lifetime in USA. But would an Ape or Ace be able to sustain long freeway trips comfortably? And safely? It depends. There are people who have use for these pickup trucks

Everything is a compromise. Cars from the 1930s,40s,50s would have terrible blindspots, especially rear vision. 1960s-1990s vehicles generally had good visibility, but then we know how they would fare in a crash test. Cars got bulkier due to safety, efficiency and comfort needs but rear parking sensors, cameras, 360° cameras, blindspot monitors, AEB are just a few of the stuff that make visibility less of a problem today

. An Indiana television station actually did an investigation about the frontal blind spot of pick up trucks, the video for which you can find here: https://www.wthr.com/article/news/in...0-3363f0954b3b

A row of twelve children sitting in front of a pick up truck were not visible from the driver's seat. People who were shown how large the blind spot in front of their vehicle was were horrified to learn of this. You can see how much worse trucks are in this regard compared to sedans or even SUVs from this infographic.

I remember seeing a video on YouTube posted by some cyclist/urbanist group. Rush hour traffic, cars are not moving. As part of the video, a couple of guys would walk in front of a random car and pretend to trip over something. The concerned driver would get out to check and the video creators would say how modern cars ( 5er, Prius, some MPVs ) have terrible frontal vision, blindspot, no place in cities blah blah. Used to wonder, what else should people be driving? Vans with a flat nose?

Pickups trucks have gotten bigger. No doubt about that. Maybe even cartoonishly. But am pretty sure old pickup trucks which were smaller, still had a high bonnet line and square shape bonnets. Maybe the Landrover style 'clear bonnet' tech will trickle down and you would be practically able to see through the bonnet.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by karanddd

I think the comparison to commercial vehicles is disingenuous. 18 wheelers do not ply in residential areas where kids may be running about or people walking etc. They also require drivers to hold a commercial license, which requires specific training and tests. On the other hand, pick up trucks with blindspots 10 feet in front of them are driven by people with a normal driver's licenses in residential neighbourhoods.

Why are kids running around on the road? These are supposed to be developed countries wherein some awareness must be there that Road = vehicles, playground = Kids. There is some level of entitlement the people who walk on the road randomly, bicycles etc that they can flout all rules and expect the law abiding car owner to watch out for them and save their lives - sorry, the laws of physics does not allow a moving object to stop on a dime.

But a question nevertheless - where does this end?

Yesterday - Cyclist, Today - Toddler or kid, tomorrow it could be some cuddly pet companion that is crawling on the road and my vehicle is supposed to have someone sitting on the hood like you see in African Safari vehicles to avoid me running over something on the road.

We should petition government to once again allow Omni to be sold, I guess an Omni cannot intimidate anyone but then again where do we find grown adults who get intimidated by a truck going around minding its own business.

[karanddd]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

Why are kids running around on the road? These are supposed to be developed countries wherein some awareness must be there that Road = vehicles, playground = Kids. There is some level of entitlement the people who walk on the road randomly, bicycles etc that they can flout all rules and expect the law abiding car owner to watch out for them and save their lives - sorry, the laws of physics does not allow a moving object to stop on a dime.

If you do end up traveling outside of India, you will find, especially in Europe, that cities are designed first and foremost for pedestrians (which includes children as well as pets), and only secondarily for automobiles. Therefore, sidewalks/footpaths are wider than the road for cars, and people (& their children) walk on those sidewalks to go to most places. And of course that also entails crossing the road. In that sort of situation, children (and even adults) may very well end up in front of an automobile (irrespective of whether that's due to the child running amok or a car driver failing to give right of way). This is why the EU has mandated strict pedestrian collision safety standards for cars. Many cities in Europe are now reducing speed limits within cities to 30 kmph:

https://qz.com/2056530/european-citi...treet-traffic/

All this because their aim to reduce fatalities due to automobiles colliding with pedestrians or cyclists to zero (called "Vision Zero"). In Europe these are seen as completely avoidable (& unacceptable) deaths, i.e. that the benefit created by having automobiles does not outweigh the cost to human life due to accidents. The US of course lags behind in this, but there is still awareness of the danger to pedestrians, as New York has a 30 mph speed limit in the entire city and no free right turns. In contrast, in Indian cities you see people accelerating their cars to 60-70 whenever they see enough space ahead to do so.

It's strange you say that people who walk on the road are entitled. Anyone who has ever tried to walk in Indian cities knows that many roads do not have any kind of sidewalk or footpath, and even when they exist, they are narrow and often obstructed. Where else can people walk? Car owners form a minuscule percentage of the Indian population, and if everyone tried to get around in a car, the traffic would never move. Other countries and cultures do not share the mindset that people can only walk in restricted spaces such as playgrounds, malls or within the compounds of their residential colonies (this is now the default in India).

The automobile is very recent in the scale of human history. If we let it impede our basic freedom to walk (which humans have always had, without fear of being run over), we cause irredeemable harm to our living spaces, as that can only lead to congestion and pollution. We're already seeing the effects of that in Indian cities, where even walking to a place one or two km away is a challenge due to lack of infrastructure, which is why people are forced to use scooters for local runabouts etc.

[GutsyGibbon]

Originally Posted by karanddd

At the moment I'm living in Texas, where such trucks are very common. Of the hundreds of trucks I've seen, only 1 or 2 had anything in the bed. They serve no real purpose in 95% of situations in which they're bought and endanger everyone else on the road.

It also matters as to where you are spotting these pickup trucks. At a Home Depot/Lowes, or the loading dock of furniture stores, you can be certain the trucks will have stuff on the bed. At campsites, pickup truck campers are very common. Camper shells are inexpensive, and make great platforms for a simple bed, with slide out drawers for storage. Football games, tailgate parties, there is no tailgate party without pickup trucks and their tailgates. Throw a shelter/canopy, a table, and a ice chest/cooler one is all set. Parks/beaches - same deal easy setup, easy to throw stuff. When Ford alone sells a million F150 a year, 95% of them cant be buying it for image sake. Pickup trucks are work horses for people doing all kinds of work, contractors to regular joe's doing household work.

I am surprised as to why households with multiple cars do not consider a pickup truck. They have seating for 5, high ground clearance, and offer ability to haul stuff like no other. Delivery of anything that is bigger than a HomeDepot moving box, is really expensive, and a hassle. I cant tell you how many times my friends borrow my pickup truck. Sure, when you see my truck at work (where I do software) no truck will have anything in the bed. We dont have a Tata Ace with a driver ready to haul stuff at every single store, a pickup truck and hand truck/luggage dolly should be a mandatory first purchase for anyone with a single family home in the US. Like this one.
https://www.coscoproducts.com/collec...38868116078777

[neeravnaik]

Things are getting a bit ridiculous with the size of these trucks. We can make fun of it but this will not change. Big trucks are like guns for Americans. It is tied to their identity and expression. They will not give it up and the market will remain big.

Problem with the US model of consumerism is that it sets model for everywhere. Consuming far more than what you need is the Ultimate American dream. Ultimately it hurts the Earth but who are we to say as all of us are complicit.

[rajk15]

In my opinion, pedestrians/cyclists have no business on the main road built for vehicles; they are supposed to use the sidewalks/cycling tracks. As for kids, it's as it is not safe for them to play on the road; play in the park kiddos.
As for pedestrian safety in NCAP, for me that would have 0 relevance.
Sorry if this is coming off as rude but I am actually kind of fed up bcoz of 2 wheelers erratic driving and the fact that I have always hated the idea of kids playing on the road. I for one didn't ever play on the road; either it was the park or home.

[ads11]

I have to agree, a lot of these pickups are Too Darn Big. As a geologist I've been in some properly inhospitable areas, home ground for rugged utility vehicles. And I've used and seen a fair number of pick up trucks as well. Honestly, there's no need for them to have ballooned so much. One need only look at Hiluxes and F-150s from say 15 years ago to see the growth. I understand the utility argument but far as I can tell bed size has mostly stayed the same, and overall utility hasn't necessarily grown any more from the supersizing of regular pick ups. I have no qualms for someone who makes use of theirs but I think in the quest to make the pickups more urbane and comfortable inside, we've gone and made cabs akin to American housing! The space is lovely but is there no way to make them more svelte? Some of the centre consoles and armrests on these things are gargantuan.

I accept that the best thing is to have separate cyclist infrastructure, separate lanes. To me it feels American roads have the space for it, but their vehicles need to slim down a bit to cede some of that ample room. One wonders if this transformational infrastructure bill might bring about some of that change, even a start would be good.

I guess I come from the school of thought where every new generation needn't have to be slightly bigger than the last to also be an improvement. I always smile when I see a current gen MX-5/Miata for that very reason. It's stayed true to the dimensions that made the original a classic. Similarly I'm always pleased when OEMs keep overall dimensions the same but instead find clever ways of utilising that volume better to get more room for eg. Sadly though it seems in the case of pickups, those just form a "Compact pickup" segment to generate more revenue for the OEMs. Can't blame the manufacturers really. They're just following the money. I just wish regulators would clamp down on the very obvious blind spot problem created by the bluff front end designs of a lot of modern SUVs and pickups. It's not a new problem at all, and it's only getting worse. Designing cameras to provide 360 degree visibility feels like a cop out solution to a more structural issue.

Before design fans go up in arms about how that's impacting the asthetic of this form factor, stop. Just as the entire world has quietly accepted that long and low bonnets are no longer feasible for modern crash safety regulations and come to terms with it as talented designers made appealing bodies to get around this regulatory framework, truck and SUV designers can absolutely find it within themselves to clear new regulation and meet the consumer with good products, they just won't do it unless kicked into gear.