BTW the tank has a better forward view than the truck
Just gonna keep on posting this
i know this is anecdotal but i’ve sat up front in the bajaj re tuktuk. one can almost see the single front wheel from that position – visibility for that one vehicle is definitely closer than the 2 meters shown in this graphic.
There really should be legal requirements for sightlines like this for most vehicles on the road.
That’s a good temporary fix but the long term solution is to get rid of stroads and get back to proper separation between streets (which are narrow, one way, and walkable) and roads (which have a high speed limit, very few intersections, and no driveways). This would dramatically cut down on the number of encounters between pedestrians and cars, while also making suburbs much more walkable and livable.
Streetcar suburbs, the most desirable neighbourhoods to live in, are illegal to build in most cities!
We could do both. I don’t see how increasing visibility is a “temporary fix”, I see that as a safety improvement regardless of how well designed a street is. Even the safest designed street is even safer by increasing the visibility a driver has. It also just makes driving easier in general.
Edit: it is also an unfortunate reality that people run over their own children or pets in their own driveway and better sightlines can reduce this risk.
it bothers me a little that it’s not in order
It’s in an order: height of the front of the vehicle from the ground.
It’s grill height until the first kid shows up, then it’s the distance away from the vehicle at which the kid becomes visible.
It’s only in that order for the first half of the chart then it gets a little jumbled
Kinda, yeah. Looks like it’s mostly typical household cars, and then 3 examples of taller vehicles with actually better angles of vision.
oh hey it is. dunno how I didn’t notice that
FTR I hate this pickup and agree with the sentiment of this photo, but I feel like there’s some skewed perspective tricks going on based on this manually photoshopped drag to relocate (no resizing of anything in photo) to demonstrate.
Lol modern day tanks are insane, they probably have the same top speed
deleted by creator
I can’t understand why someone would want that large of a car
society has made us see cars more as a statement of one’s image rather than an object of utility.
this is also why luxury brands thrive in general – because there exist people with more money than sense.
It’s not even good for truck stuff. All that lift kit is extra weight and puts the bed too high to load stuff into it without a crane.
It’s also really expensive so you’re not gonna fuck it up when off-roading, though those wheels and tires aren’t off-road ready.
ETA: It’s not even artistic. A low rider isn’t good for anything but they look great. Sometimes art can be a reason. But this is just a giant, ugly, beige piece of crap with hideous wheels.
It’s an entirely useless vehicle that isn’t good for anything and I hate it.
lift kit = extra weight, bed too high
The weight added by a lift kit is a rounding error on the weight of the vehicle
Beds are too high from the factory so this doesnt actually matterOffroading
This style is not built to go offroading
Not artisitic
Not up to you. People are allowed to like things.
Get better, defendable arguments.
These trucks suck to drive, ride like shit, get poor fuel economy, pollute the planet (especially after emissions equipment is deleted), but most importantly are unsafe to be on the road: they barely fit in the lanes, the view out of them is abysmal, and are extremely heavy which makes them unsafe in a collision.
Aaaand block
It’s also really expensive
This is the reason. Conspicuous consumption is a pox on us all.
Conspicuous consumption has been a thing for a really, really long time. But at least in previous time periods the things they were consuming at least were interesting to look at. Now it’s just mass-produced bullshit that doesn’t even look good. For fuck’s sake: They’re selling stained and ripped jeans for hundreds of dollars!
Bring back codpieces and fancy frilled collars! Bring back ornate brocade and gold detailing! Bring back ornate architecture! If you’re going to exploit us for our labor at least make things that look good!
Not to mention the borderline useless low profile tires. The bead would probably slip off the rim on a bumpy cottage road, i can’t even imagine how poorly they’d perform in real offroad conditions.
It’s good for making the owner forget they have a micropenis for a short while.
Could we stop using “micropenis” and the likes as insults? There are many men with small dicks who aren’t insecure assholes.
Agreed. Moving away from body shaming, here are a couple of names for such a huge vehicle: Pavement Princess, Emotional Support Vehicle.
Just to be pedantic and nit picky, if we want to move away from insulting body features I feel that moving to insulting gender isn’t a great thing to move to. Pavement Princess as a pejorative is mostly relying on our assumptions of princesses, end by extension the female side of the species, being delicate and useless.
Just a thought, I’ve used the term myself, though I wish I could find a better one. ESV might be the one I go to in the future.
Good point, I’ll stick with ESV instead.
“Smart people listen to smart people and are open to change.”
short while
I know right?
The tank is obviously better for the commuter.
Right? If I’m going to get a vehicle that big it better have a 120mm cannon at least.
And come up to traffic ahead? What traffic? You just keep going!
Insecure little boys generally
The issue is the tank too small, and bicycles shouldn’t exist. /s
The tank also legally requires a crew commander with functioning communications with the driver to help alleviate the blind spots if it is to be driven on public roads during peace time. At least in Canada anyway.
Never seen a scaled picture like this before and it is shocking tbh, what a waste of fuel and danger to the community.
How do you even park that monster?
Dude, I wouldn’t drive that truck if it was free. 100% would sell and get something actually usable.
When an IFV is a sensible vehicle in comparison…
IFVs generally carry a full load, making them more fuel efficient per pax than the vast majority of vehicles on the road.
I don’t get it.
“Wank tank” is a derogatory term for lifted, oversized pickup trucks, implying they’re as big as a tank, but with the only purpose of serving as wank material for the owner.
In these pictures, the pickup truck has a longer wheelbase than the tank, and is of comparable size overall, confirming that the term is appropriate.
The bicycle in both pictures with the parallel lines proves that both pictures are at the exact same scale.
They have cameras in front so that’s no longer an issue.
