The Japanese-made trucks have gained a cultlike following, attracting small-business owners seeking affordable alternatives to traditional pickup trucks.
I’m sorry, why the fuck aren’t these street legal in more than half of the states? The article says something about safety, but these are street legal all over Europe where we have stronger safety regulations.
Also there’s something I can’t put my finger on about the journalist choosing a hero image of the van losing its cargo.
Europe and Japan all have freight trucks driving around, so I don’t buy that. The fact that many states won’t allow these is American truck manufacturing protectionism, nothing more. It’s the same reason you can only get a 3/4 or 1 ton truck from Ford, Chevy, or Ram (chicken tax).
And that’s precisely because the option isn’t readily available here. We can argue merits of different countries versus the US, but at the end of the day it is what it is unless something changes at the legislative level.
When say a contractor goes to purchase a work vehicle, the option is either a van, which have pathetic motors and hauling capabilities, or a pickup from one of the big 3 that can be outfitted with a utility body. Sometimes you can score one of those Isuzu cabovers, but they’re typically outfitted with a full sized box on the chassis, and they’re far and few between, and often more expensive. Vans are also stupid expensive, especially 4x4 models, because of the van life crowd. The options really are much more limited than other parts of the world, and I truly believe it’s to keep prices high and the money vacuum humming. Plus, you can find an older utility body truck for a fraction of the cost of a used van (I just did this 6 months ago; granted I’m in California, so my experience may not be the norm).
I ended up buying a Ram 2500 when looking for a work truck. I would’ve loved a 25/35 class van, but I need 4x4 (mountains, snow), and because of the premium those models fetch due to demand from the van life people, that wasn’t an option.
And I dunno about other people, but I know what’s in front of my truck at all times. It really isn’t that hard to mind your surroundings.
Smart cars had to pass US crash test standards and have the appropriate safety equipment. The kei trucks that you can currently import and use are 25+ years old and wouldn’t have even passed US standards back then. Your legs are the crumple zone in these things.
I assume that new ones would have a chance, but it’d be expensive for a manufacturer to modify and certify for the US market. Small cars haven’t sold well here, and the profit margins are slim.
Maybe with the recent size and price increases in autos here, well see some movement. I’d love a modern Honda kei to go with my element.
This is how we got in this mess, an arms race of trying to feel safe around larger and larger hunks of metal on the road. Americans just have to endanger everyone else for their own peace of mind.
Kei trucks were designed for use in dense Japanese cities, which is why they also work in European cities. They are nimble but have a low top speed. You’re not going 70 mph around a street corner for instance.
It would work in places like NYC for the same reasons, but remember that most of the USA is suburban or rural. You need vehicles that are capable of going fast if you’re going to get on a highway.
A possible workaround is to have a separate class for these, like mopeds or scooters, which are road legal but are not highway legal.
thats honestly a problem that can be solved with a small turbocharger and a slightly higher msrp, its not like they are ever getting close to the price of one of the huge ones.
They’re not really safe. They are generally front heavy, so there is a risk of rolling forward, no crumple zone safety stuff, more often than not the front suspension is under the seat and if that breaks it would shoot up into the cabin, and on top of everything they are pretty slow. They have more in common with an off road Polaris than a traditional truck, which is to be expected because they were mostly designed to be farm trucks. I’d much rather be in an older s10 than a kei truck in the event of a crash (and s10’s aren’t very safe). I think I lot of why they are so popular these days is because there aren’t really any light trucks anymore, and these are an alternative.
Here in the states we have legal corruption lobbyists which the auto manufacturers pay to keep cheap vehicles from being used. And then the lawmakers claim safety concerns as the reason.
Traditionally they’ve been banned because they don’t do well in crash testing, as they don’t have crumple zones or airbags. Here’s some testing from 2010 by the insurance industry arguing that they shouldn’t be on highways.
Different crash standards in US and Europe. Most companies don’t even bother getting cars tested (designed?) in both because the market demands are so different.
Pretty sure that’s not the case, had a little Google and it seems like I’m right, but I’m open to being corrected if I’m wrong or misunderstanding what you mean. Here’s evidence to support my claim:
I’m sorry, why the fuck aren’t these street legal in more than half of the states? The article says something about safety, but these are street legal all over Europe where we have stronger safety regulations.
Also there’s something I can’t put my finger on about the journalist choosing a hero image of the van losing its cargo.
Probably because it’s not safe to drive them around giant pickups who can’t see over their hoods
Europe and Japan all have freight trucks driving around, so I don’t buy that. The fact that many states won’t allow these is American truck manufacturing protectionism, nothing more. It’s the same reason you can only get a 3/4 or 1 ton truck from Ford, Chevy, or Ram (chicken tax).
It’s all about the chicken tax.
Cab over engine freight trucks with excellent visibility, not jacked up chevys where your view of the ground starts 20 feet in front of you
And that’s precisely because the option isn’t readily available here. We can argue merits of different countries versus the US, but at the end of the day it is what it is unless something changes at the legislative level.
When say a contractor goes to purchase a work vehicle, the option is either a van, which have pathetic motors and hauling capabilities, or a pickup from one of the big 3 that can be outfitted with a utility body. Sometimes you can score one of those Isuzu cabovers, but they’re typically outfitted with a full sized box on the chassis, and they’re far and few between, and often more expensive. Vans are also stupid expensive, especially 4x4 models, because of the van life crowd. The options really are much more limited than other parts of the world, and I truly believe it’s to keep prices high and the money vacuum humming. Plus, you can find an older utility body truck for a fraction of the cost of a used van (I just did this 6 months ago; granted I’m in California, so my experience may not be the norm).
I ended up buying a Ram 2500 when looking for a work truck. I would’ve loved a 25/35 class van, but I need 4x4 (mountains, snow), and because of the premium those models fetch due to demand from the van life people, that wasn’t an option.
And I dunno about other people, but I know what’s in front of my truck at all times. It really isn’t that hard to mind your surroundings.
But then it’s these giant pickups which are unfit and should not be road legal.
How’s that different from driving a car roughly the same size?
And yet Smart cars are legal.
Smart cars had to pass US crash test standards and have the appropriate safety equipment. The kei trucks that you can currently import and use are 25+ years old and wouldn’t have even passed US standards back then. Your legs are the crumple zone in these things.
I assume that new ones would have a chance, but it’d be expensive for a manufacturer to modify and certify for the US market. Small cars haven’t sold well here, and the profit margins are slim.
Maybe with the recent size and price increases in autos here, well see some movement. I’d love a modern Honda kei to go with my element.
The crumple zone thing is a bit grey as the USA sells and allows trucks like the Isuzu NPR/Chevy Cab Over.
I get all that, but the individual I replied to only related small size to safety. I was merely pointing out that size isn’t a factor.
I appreciate your post, and agree completely! A Kei truck would satisfy all my requirements for a utility vehicle.
This is how we got in this mess, an arms race of trying to feel safe around larger and larger hunks of metal on the road. Americans just have to endanger everyone else for their own peace of mind.
Protectionism.
Speed restrictions.
Kei trucks were designed for use in dense Japanese cities, which is why they also work in European cities. They are nimble but have a low top speed. You’re not going 70 mph around a street corner for instance.
It would work in places like NYC for the same reasons, but remember that most of the USA is suburban or rural. You need vehicles that are capable of going fast if you’re going to get on a highway.
A possible workaround is to have a separate class for these, like mopeds or scooters, which are road legal but are not highway legal.
thats honestly a problem that can be solved with a small turbocharger and a slightly higher msrp, its not like they are ever getting close to the price of one of the huge ones.
They’re not really safe. They are generally front heavy, so there is a risk of rolling forward, no crumple zone safety stuff, more often than not the front suspension is under the seat and if that breaks it would shoot up into the cabin, and on top of everything they are pretty slow. They have more in common with an off road Polaris than a traditional truck, which is to be expected because they were mostly designed to be farm trucks. I’d much rather be in an older s10 than a kei truck in the event of a crash (and s10’s aren’t very safe). I think I lot of why they are so popular these days is because there aren’t really any light trucks anymore, and these are an alternative.
Here in the states we have
legal corruptionlobbyists which the auto manufacturers pay to keep cheap vehicles from being used. And then the lawmakers claim safety concerns as the reason.Traditionally they’ve been banned because they don’t do well in crash testing, as they don’t have crumple zones or airbags. Here’s some testing from 2010 by the insurance industry arguing that they shouldn’t be on highways.
They don’t meet the us safety standards. It could mean a lot of things like lacking 5mph bumpers, air bags, abs, etc.
Doesn’t mean they aren’t safe.
For the hero image, that could possibly just be an attempt at a “fun” way of showing that they can carry a lot by mean of hyperbole.
“Look at that tiny truck, it’s bursting with boxes!”
Different crash standards in US and Europe. Most companies don’t even bother getting cars tested (designed?) in both because the market demands are so different.
Removed by mod
European road safety regulations are significantly weaker than those in the US and Canada.
Pretty sure that’s not the case, had a little Google and it seems like I’m right, but I’m open to being corrected if I’m wrong or misunderstanding what you mean. Here’s evidence to support my claim:
https://etrr.springeropen.com/articles/10.1007/s12544-014-0131-7
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457518300034
https://irpj.euclid.int/articles/the-dissimilar-determinants-and-outcomes-of-road-safety-in-the-united-states-and-the-european-union/