Hacker News

points by JKCalhoun 1 day ago | 0 comments

I found out the same with pickup trucks generally.

I got one, years ago. The bed was not large enough to readily hold full sheets of plywood (the minivan I owned before could hold full sheets!). And yet, the truck was long such that parking, maneuvering in parking lots, etc, was a pain in the ass (here the minivan was about tied with the truck).

So sucked as a regular errand-car, sucked for hauling sheet goods.

(Sold it during the tail of Covid when used car prices were skyrocketing for whatever reason. Never again.)

[–] jvanderbot 1 day ago

Nailed it. I considered buying a truck for years, but the minivan has everything I want out of a vehicle. I'm so glad we got one. It's strictly better for hauling dimensional or ply, strictly better for long road trips, for gas mileage, etc. It even tows more than my jeep did, but not as much as a full size pickup. and it has a really nice reconfigurable roof rack, so adding a trip carrier on top is simple. Add to that the optional bench in back, the built in vacuum, the built in TV + entertainment, the full length moonroof, on and on.

It's a luxury vehicle that beats SUVs hands down, and most functions of urban trucks as well.

It just gets soccer mom vibes, so it's not $120,000

[–] nonethewiser 1 day ago

>It just gets soccer mom vibes, so it's not $120,000

The vehicle with soccer mom vibes may fit your use case better but that doesn't explain the cost difference. Mini vans are cheaper to manufacture. The frame, axles, brakes, engines, towing, payload hardware etc. are all lighter duty.

[–] eqvinox 1 day ago

> The frame, axles, brakes, engines, towing, payload hardware etc. are all lighter duty.

I have 2 questions about this:

* are you actually, really, sure? (Is this hard data?)

* does it matter when it's never going to go off-road and rarely strained (e.g. for towing)?

[–] matwood 1 day ago

Yes it's lighter duty parts. If you don't haul or tow, then there's no need for a truck.

[–] awakeasleep 1 day ago

Agree with you, but want to say trucks are really for towing. To haul you want a trailer.

For example the f150 is rated for 1.2 tons, the 250 1.3 to 1.8 depending on configuration. gotta go to f350 for an 8 ton configuration.

For people who don't think about this often, imagine four 200lb guys riding in the cab of the f150. It's already a third of it's payload capacity at that point. Can't fit too many bags of cement in after that.

Of course this is moot in comparison to a minivan which has a payload capacity of about 3/4 ton. You’ll be over capacity in the minivan if you have a 175lb person on each seat.

[–] eqvinox 1 day ago

> Agree with you, but want to say trucks are really for towing. To haul you want a trailer.

> For example the f150 is rated for 1.2 tons, the 250 1.3 to 1.8 depending on configuration.

Now I'm really confused. My father's Citroën CX station wagon (built 1983) was rated to tow 1.5/1.7/1.8t depending on configuration (AFAIR 2.5l Diesel engine for 1.8t), and we regularly made use of that. Admittedly 2026 is not 1983, but a BMW 3 class (not X3) can also tow 1.8t. A current VW Passat tows 1.8t to 2.2t. (Both of those are available as either limousines or station wagons.) What's the point of the F150 then? I guess if you want to do tow 1.2t every day? I would expect that the max rating also be higher if the reliability/life is better...

Ed.: nevermind, I should've just looked up the F150. It's listed as 3.4t up to 6.35t depending on configuration. Where do you get 1.2t? Is there a separate rating for "when you do this every day"?

Ed.²: wait, are you talking about hauling there? That really didn't come across for me, with the preceding sentence. (more searching) Ah, yeah. 1.4t for F150, 2.6t for F350. The 8t on F350 you're mentioning is for towing again.

(FWIW, Europeans needing anything like this generally get a Ford Transit or Mercedes Sprinter.)

[–] nullwarp 16 hours ago

Payload is almost always your limit, not pure towing capacity. You need to look at the maximum weight payload your vehicle is configured to carry (usually on a sticker in the door jamb) - this limits how much you can tow because you need 9-13% of your trailers tongue weight on the hitch which your car carries 100%

If you have 800 lbs of payload, two 175 lb adults you now have 450 lbs left of payload for a trailer you are left with ~4500 lbs of tow capacity using 10% of that on the tongue. It's not just people either - anything in your vehicle lowers your payload (the physical hitch itself, pets, coolers, accessories, ect)

Lots of people just look at pure tow capacity but ignore tongue weight/payload capacity of what they are using to two.

Most common F-150 configurations are actually limited on their tow capacity by payload over their advertised raw tow capacity. My 2012 F-150 farm truck has 1400 lb payload, minus two people and the hitch you're at ~ 900 lbs left for tongue weight so ~ 9000 lb pull load or ~4t

The other thing people neglect to consider is just where they tow and WHAT they tow. There's a big difference between a flat utility trailer and a square cargo trailer.

I guess my point is numbers aren't everything.

Source: 20 years in the professional trucking industry

[–] ex-aws-dude 1 day ago

It totally depends on your use case

One of the reasons I love a pickup is that it separates the cargo from the interior

A lot of times I have oil/gas/chemicals/something dirty in the bed which I would not want in the cabin space

Also it depends do you care about height of cargo or not?

For example a minivan can fit plywood but not a dirt bike

[–] buggyipadmettoo 1 day ago

I've known people who chose minivans specifically for carrying motorcycles.

[–] ex-aws-dude 1 day ago

I'm guessing its a sport bike though, dirt bikes are way taller

[–] dschep 1 day ago

> It just gets soccer mom vibes, so it's not $120,000

I always find such arguments comical. Have you seen soccer moms? They all drive huge SUVs. SUVs = soccer mom vibes!

[–] kalleboo 1 day ago

It's the soccer mom treadmill.

Station Wagons -> Minivans -> SUVs

What's next? I hope we loop around back to station wagons.

[–] dzhiurgis 1 day ago

Why? I know SW handle better, but who cares. Modern familys handle plenty well.

[–] kalleboo 18 hours ago

The taller the car the less safe it is for everyone around it.

And I rented an SUV once and was surprised by how small it was on the inside compared to the outside. Seemed way less practical than it could have been.

[–] bitmasher9 17 hours ago

They are tall for ground clearance. Fantastic if you deal with a lot of off road situations. Like all other things discussed in this thread, it is underutilized.

Still, I prefer driving a awd suv in winter if I am at risk of being in a snowstorm.

[–] kalleboo 17 hours ago

Yeah we're talking about soccer moms, they don't need ground clearance. Station wagons can just as easily have AWD, Subaru were famous for it.

[–] matwood 1 day ago

> The bed was not large enough to readily hold full sheets of plywood

Many trucks are sold as not much more than vehicles to haul around some plants. But, what I would consider 'real' trucks tend to have 8' beds. My old Toyota Tundra was great at towing, had an 8' bed and was generally an all around great vehicle. It was long, but it was meant to be.

[–] kyralis 1 day ago

Eh, depends on your use case. I've got an F250 that I use for towing, and we specifically chose a standard bed rather than a long bed when we got it - and that's after having an 8' bed on our previous truck. The long bed is certainly nice sometimes (and was great for camping in!), but it's also pretty annoying whenever you're not actually using the bed length, which ends up being most of the time.

I haul plywood all the time, though; the shorter bed isn't really a problem. either you slide it in at an angle or you put the tailgate down and put it in that way with a strap.

[–] wat10000 1 day ago

There are two kinds of trucks. There are trucks that people buy for their capabilities, and there are trucks that people buy because driving a truck is part of their personality. The latter is far more popular, so your average truck ends up not being very good at doing truck things because it doesn’t have to be.

[–] conductr 1 day ago

This is a lazy stereotype of people. But there’s a huge number of truck owners that only need a truck once a month, so they buy a truck. I’m one of these people and actively resisted buying a truck for years and finally caved in. I think it’s easy for folks, perhaps like you, to scoff and say that’s a minor inconvenience but it really isn’t. And sometimes it’s one of those things you can’t plan, or you go 6 months without using but then you have something come up where you use it daily for a week or two.

[–] wat10000 1 day ago

Did you buy a practical truck, or did you buy an SUV with a uselessly tiny bed tacked on? If the latter, then I wonder why you'd do that if you actually need a truck on a monthly basis. If the former, then you're not in the category I'm scoffing at.

[–] TheElectronaut 1 day ago

I'm not a car guy, buy there's a car podcast I really like where the host often tells people that even though they think they want a truck or an SUV, they probably need a minivan or a station wagon.

Sports cars are for the track, trucks are for hauling, and most drivers don't need either.

[–] gavinsyancey 1 day ago

Are there any station wagons made for the North American market anymore?

[–] deathanatos 1 day ago

Would a hatchback such as a Subaru Impreza qualify? Two rows of seats, rear storage area that isn't a trunk/has windows into it.

[–] bryceacc 1 day ago

outback is typically the "wagon" subaru, but some people say with the newer redesign it's more SUV like. I have an impreza and it is the perfect size for me, wife, and dog with a roof top box. so cheap and easy to work on

in the future I am 100% getting a minivan

[–] DenisM 15 hours ago

Modern SUVs which are not truck based are essentially taller station wagons.

Of less-tall there a Subarus at least.

[–] eszed 1 day ago

> Sports cars are for the track, trucks are for hauling

I wish I could show you the photo of my Mazda Miata with six 12' 2x6s hanging out the back. :-)

[–] Freedom2 1 day ago

I think image uploads are quite common on the internet, unless something has changed?

[–] nonethewiser 1 day ago

Does he really respond with "you need" to people saying "I want?" That sounds insufferable.

If someone says "I need a truck or suv" then I understand saying "you may not need one." But someone saying they want one then someone else explaining what they need is just condescending.

[–] enaaem 1 day ago

Fast wagons like the rs6 have a cult status among car enthousiasts. I do get it.

[–] solyin 1 day ago

> Sports cars are for the track, trucks are for hauling

Someone hasn't seen not the Dakar Rally, but the support trucks class for it. The rally cars need support. Replacement tires, suspension parts, engines. How do they get them? A fleet of support vehicles doing the same course. So then they made that a race as well. The Dakar Rally Truck edition features heavy vehicles weighing over 3,500 kg (7,716 lb) T4/5 racing across 8000km/5000 miles of sand, rocks, and desert.

[–] conductr 1 day ago

Sheet goods fit in my truck, but I don’t want to load/unload them to that height. The bed is mostly good for dirty stuff I don’t want in the interior of any vehicle. Muddy boots, bags of concrete, kids sports gear, etc. for sheet goods and bigger heavy stuff I have a trailer and the truck the towing capacity for most needs. Occasionally I still need a heavy duty and just rent it.

The Tahoe I had last was a great as I keep tools and what dry in the truck. It only had 2 rows of seating and I don’t need more passenger space in my vehicle. My wife has the city vehicle SUV that we keep clean and use for passengers. Mine is the work / utility vehicle.

When I replaced it recently , the same trim level cost twice as much as a Silverado. And they all have 3 rows now, which means I lose most that space.

It’s all about trade offs. No vehicle is a perfect all rounder. I’d prefer the Tahoe but didn’t want to pay extra for it and have to yank out the 3rd row. I could own a Corolla but it would be overly inconvenient, and probably more expensive over time, to rent a larger vehicle every time I need it.

[–] tibbon 1 day ago

This is why I don't get trucks with tiny beds. I've had a few Chevy 1500's and those were great with the full length bed. I've got a 2nd generation Tacoma with its longer bed, and its just on the edge of too small for some things.

I see people with trucks with 4ft beds (like the weird Jeep thing) and they just seem useless. Gimme an 8ft bed, ideally a bit longer! I don't need a big cab, but I have a truck to be a truck!

(Really, my 2nd gen Toyota Tacoma is pretty close to perfect 95% of the time for me, especially with a cap on the back)

[–] joenot443 1 day ago

I always encourage people to consider a two door if they're planning to use the truck for utility purposes.

I picked up a 70k mile 2011 Silverado from an Ontario government auction for $3000 and it's worked great. Tows my boat, carries my dirt bikes, and has enough room in the cab for me, my partner, and my dog between us. Who needs a backseat!