For the civilised counties that’s 1.75 meters.
Whaaaaat? That’s my height!!! That tank is what? 2 meters? And you tell me that’s a civil car? Like everyone can drive it? Don’t need to go to the army? 😳😳😳
Wow that girl is 3 meter tall what a beast
No it is the distance from the car lmao. Well tank.
That’s a weird looking tank
How else are the owners supposed to compensate for their 2cm dicks?
The insidious thing about the small dick energy is that it isn’t about the efficacy of the unit. They don’t care that they “can’t” provide pleasure (which, let’s just not dig into that for arguments sake, but I would contend the existence of lesbian sex sort of contradicts the whole correlation of dick mass to pleasure output, let alone the whole can of worms that is all the other miriad of genital and gender configurations). They view sex as transactional, performative, superficial, and perhaps even competative. It’s all about them. Even if they had a supreme dick, they couldn’t weild it. They’re stunted, and frightened. They don’t understand even basic communication, which I would argue that sex is at it’s core, just a type of communication. That kid in class that mocks the topic because they don’t understand it and that frightens them? So they try to tear it down and belittle the topic? Those are the kids that grow up to drive these trucks, and evidently run nations.
They view sex as transactional, performative, superficial, and perhaps even competative
I’m proud to be a filthy casual sex enjoyer
I might print this comment on sticker paper for reasons.
Use their fingers?
Cunnilingus?
Who ever wrote that meme text has definitively been huffing too much exhaust.
i swear it used to be 5’10”….
but, i have been feeling taller lately…I’m 190cm and was never tall but I’m a giant among my little brother’s friends (adults)
I feel you, I’m 235cm and was always the short one
Neat? Idk, I’m newish
Yeah I’m just here to fuck cars idk
Yank tanks are multiplying on this side of the Pacific now too. I’m 6’3” and feel like a little toddler next to one. Just as easy to run over, no doubt.
I got ran over by a car while on my bike at a roundabout bike & pedestrian crossing: I’m so glad it was a normal sized Opel instead of a tank. Only got a bruise on my butt and even my bike just needed the front wheel realigned. If it was a F-whatever monstrosity I would’ve been hurt much, much worse.
Personal vehicles in cities should be limited anyways and public transportation/pedestrian & biking paths encouraged. I hate the dust rising from stud tires grinding asphalt.
@gurnu @FrostyCaveman
I think the majority of streets don’t need to be thoroughfares for cars. We could block and barricade most streets so that bicycles and pedestrians can pass through but cars can only get in and out by a single route. Anyone who isn’t visiting a home or business in that neighborhood just wouldn’t turn off of the main road. Rat running, the use of parallel side streets to avoid traffic and police speed enforcement also causes a lot of problems. #FuckCars #UrbanismYou don’t have to mention people when replying to them, they’ll get a notification automatically.
It happens when people come from mastodon.
How annoying.
@jenesaisquoi
I didn’t mention anyone, I just hit reply.The thing you’re using might be doing it automatically then. Perhaps you could configure it not to do it?
It’d probably be easier for you to just ignore the additional @format, especially now that you know why it happens (even though it annoys you). Mastodon to Lemmy communication isn’t seamless, but it’s cool that it can happen at all
And nobody’s gonna dig through settings to find a (probably non-existent) configuration that removes the blue links, when it’s something they don’t even see. Did you check your own config to see if it could remove the @'s from Mastadon replies?
Wayyyy easier to ignore your peeve and enjoy the upside of it all, imo
Or block? Idk, that would be a personal choice and feels counterproductive to me
Complete side note: I wonder if when a Mastodon user replies to a Lemmy comment that’s nested (like 10+ replies deep), does it @everyone in the comment thread? Is there a limit? I need answers, but am too ambivalent to try
You sound like a person that does not know how to restrict themselves and in turn restricts other people from annoying them, contemplate inner peace, and then take them more active management role in controlling what affects your mood via the block button
@jenesaisquoi
I will look into it.Thank you! Very kind.
There’s diagrams that show the visual impairments such trucks have. They are worse than semi trucks and even an Abrams tank.
Above a certain height, trucks should be mandated to have the engine behind, like eurotrucks.
I don’t get how these people even feel comfortable driving something where you can’t see the road that’s in front of you for 10+ meters out. I just wouldn’t feel safe, there could be any kind of obstruction you can’t see on the road from 10m away but will still fuck up your day and/or life.
I have a Chevy 2500 to tow my RV (needed for the weight and it’s my home) and I hate not being able to see shit. I would gladly replace it with a cab over if they brought them to the states. The truck only gets used to move the RV from site to site and I have small single cylinder motorcycles to get around because fuck parking that thing anywhere.
If they thought about things and came to good conclusions afterwards, they probably wouldn’t be driving this kind of car to begin with. The people who are driving it are probably not good thinkers.
I have one of these out of necessity. I don’t understand getting one as a daily driver for someone to go to their office job and pick up groceries.
They don’t look or care. Their car is big enough that they’ll plough right through a bunch of kids before they even notice they’re on the sidewalk.
As a truck driver I get it. It’s nice to see more. The tradeoff isn’t worth it and not why they do it. I would bet my paycheck they never take it off road either. Which would be the only good reason to raise something that much. Truckers have a good reason to. They have giant engine and transmissions that need to last for the industrial work involved.
but you don’t actually see more, that’s kinda the whole point here?
maybe you see over other cars but you lose sight closer to you
You see more further down the road. Which you need when it takes 4 to 8 times longer to stop depending on conditions.
cabovers are almost exclusively used throughout europe and asia. it’s only america and australia that tends to use the big bonnet american style trucks.
there no real reason for it
I would kill for a 4x4 cab over in the states to replace my 2500. The offerings here don’t compare.
2500 Desiel - 21000lb towing // Isuzu NPR desiel - 14500lb towing
Both are the same price at around $68000
To be fair the regulations on vehicle length and older infrastructure makes the cabover popular.
American style trucks(long nose) get better mileage on longer hauls than the blunt nose design. They also provide more cabin room. As a final note American audiences are conditioned for the long nose design and it’s difficult to find the imports here.
Having driven both I think they both have merit. In Europe an American truck would be impossible to maneuver in towns.
So that’s the “real reason for it”.
Simple solution there is to replace long-haul trucks with rail freight and use cabovers, box trucks, and sprinter vans to connect train depots to retailers and “last mile” delivery hubs. We could do with broad re-zoning to allow smaller shops rather than centralize everything into giant all-in-one grocery stores and mini malls as well but that’s not an entirely connected issue.
That would be great. I don’t know if the aging American rail infrastructure that is already being utilized would be able to handle it. It would be a big ticket item that Congress would need to pass… Oh well that was a fun though experiment.
Yeah, “simple” does not mean “easy” or even “doable” in this case.
A lot of trucking is long-range. America is fucking big and not everywhere is served by ports, railroads, and tributaries.
Those roof-scoops and curvaceous hoods aren’t just for being sexy. They greatly increase aerodynamics and with it, range.
The important thing is that it requires specialized training and a license to drive something with such poor visibility. The pickups, any 16yo kid can legally drive.
There is a reason for it: Regulations that limit the overall vehicle length. The EU has a lower maximum than the U.S., so it favors the cabover design, which allows a longer trailer. The U.S. had lots of cabover trucks on its roads until it increased the allowed length, when truckers took advantage of the easier maintenance and better ergonomics of the bonnet design.
I think there is a legal reason for no cabovers in the USA. Maybe something based on crash safety (for just the occupants of course).
No the reason was already mentioned earlier. Europe mandates a relatively short overall maximum vehicle length whereas the US mandates a maximum trailer length. So European trucks are almost always cab over design to maximize trailer length.
There is a reason in Australia, the distances travelled and the enormous loads they haul require far more powerful trucks. Look up road trains. They are significantly more efficient than using multiple trucks.
Trains would be more efficient but Australia is too large and too sparsely populated to do everything with trains.
They are also safer for the driver than the Cab over style.
Power is not the issue. Cabovers can have just as much power as long-hood tractors.
I’d imagine most road trains to run between cities, or mines, ports, industry, and cities. Building railways between them would certainly make sense, but it’d have to be the state, no single actor alone would make that investment.
What I mean to say is that trains are better and you could have them if you just chose to.
you could have them if you just chose to.
No, you don’t have the first inkling of how much that would cost. Not only would it not be cost effective due to how sparsely populated most of Australia is but no Australian Government could afford it to start with.
Road trains service extremely remote and tiny communities across Australia, as well as supporting many industries. They go off road to reach some of these communities.
You really can’t fathom how remote until you’ve been into the Outback.
Also we do have trains in many places where it makes sense. Not as many as we could have but they’re hardly ignored as an option.
You misunderstand. The trains aren’t for the supply of tiny settlements. It’s fine to use road vehicles for this. I am specifically talking about industry, cities, ports, mines.
It’s simple uneducated hubris. Nothing bad could ever happen to them because they are a Good American.
That would require rational thought
Agreed, but some people drive that way. It’s their road, get out of the way. I had a 1996 Dodge dually long ago for pulling a trailer, and its visibility wasn’t very bad, except for around the damn side columns. I got into the habit of leaning forward and back as I would turn so that I had some idea of what was being blocked. At one point we had considered upgrading to the big trucks like the F-450/F550, and I got into one to see what it was like. I could see EVERYTHING. I was like, holy shit, this is luxury.
Side columns like that should be illegal. I was driving my stepdad’s '21 Silverado 1500 crew cab a few weeks ago and was totally blown away when I almost pulled out in front of someone coming from the right in a big ass truck.
This attitude is really prevalent here. As in you don’t really need to see the road, just the car in front.
People scream blue bloody murder about bikes on the road.
Looking at those dumbfucks driving their emotional support vehicle in the city, they don’t seem to be comfortable
They are driving slow and can’t stay in their lane, as they can’t judge the distances correctly
Emotional support vehicle? Don’t you mean Gender Affirmation Vehicle?
They don’t care, as long as they get to drive their behemoth and feel powerful.
If that’s supposed to be understood by Americans, they probably should have put the units in football field-school busses.
Length is measured in hotdogs, width is measured in hamburgers
deleted by creator
My redneck ranch family has run over so. Many. Of their own dogs
WTF
The Onion having to change their repetitious article title from “Nation” to “Family”…
How else are they going to advertise their tiny cocks without public indecency charges?
Yeah, if they took a picture of them the police would arrest them for CP.
Waow (basedbasedbasedbased)
Should require a CDL to drive something that big. It’s a bus sized front end.
And transit busses have a flat front end and a large wind shield.
most of the buses in the next town over from me are f-350 and e-350s, so quite literally yes
Busses that size often don’t require CDLs, definitely don’t require a CDL B. A true bus is much, much bigger than a 350 (source, I drive a bus). An E350 has a GVWR of around 4-5 tons. I drive busses with GVWRs of 16-27 tons. (Their visibility is much, much better than this because the engine is in the back like basically all full busses)
neat! also fwiw where i’m at anything that seats 9 or more requires a cdl
Ah, where I am it’s “designed to seat” more than 16 for it to require a CDL. More than 9 seems more reasonable honestly, we have lots of non-CDL school “busses” here.
deleted by creator
How much fuel does it burn in comparison to normal European car?
Yes
And then some
I agree but I think that car hoods should be higher. If you’re hit by one of these you’ll die slowly of organ pulverization. It’d be better to be hit in the head and die quickly of head pulverization. It’s just that the poor truck cannot reach that high so it needs to be BIGGER. Maybe stick some spikes on there too, and have an optional extended package for saw blades!
(/s in case it wasn’t apparent)
@hedge_lord @Track_Shovel
Electric cars are even more fucked. The reason cars have the front sitting so far forward of the driver is so a combustion engine can get cooled by a radiator. Electric cars don’t need that. The driver should be at the front where they can see everything and the rest of the car should be behind them. Combustion engines shouldn’t be in cars. They should be allowed in emergency generators and emergency vehicles only. #FuckCarsWhat on earth are you saying? Electric motors and batteries absolutely need active cooling. And their interiors.
@noxypaws Electric motors get warm, yes. They don’t have a fire inside of them. There is a big difference in how much of a cooling system they need.
So, you agree, they need cooling.
Crumple zone?
@match I think having a big battering ram in front of you probably makes you worry less about your own safety. If the driver were in a glass bubble in front, they may suddenly feel like taking fewer risks while driving. The safety of others is an externalized afterthought with the current design.
I have a new idea for a car design, the front is a glass dome that’s shaped like a human head. You accelerate by pushing your face into the dome and slow by pulling your head backwards. Steering is done by moving your neck and shoulders. If you crash, the first point of impact is your face.
I can’t reconcile the exterior with interior pictures. From the outside it looks like the inside of that truck should be the size of a large sitting room with a Chesterfield and some end tables.
Gotta cram the plastic shit and uselss tech in there somewhere.
Cupholders! Gotta have more cupholders.
Only in America
Canada says hi
