The ‘kei’ cars and trucks are growing in popularity in the U.S. But many states have explicitly banned them in recent years. A bill at the statehouse would allow them on Colorado roads.
Utility, in the context of the automobile market, is a class of vehicles, hence why Australians call pickups “utes”.
Kai trucks count as utility vehicles, as do american pickup trucks.
Although, realistically, most pickup trucks sold In the US would better be described as “premium” or “luxury” vehicles given that most people buying them are not using them for off roading, hauling or towing, but rather as “life style” vehicles and status symbols.
These things get used everywhere in the world. Used to have a yellow one on a farm. Tough, super cheap, and reliable hauler around the property. It got used more than the main 4×4s which were more for long distance off-roading in remote parts of the property where terrain gets nuts.
You could get a fleet of these for the price of an American “truck”. And that means US car companies start losing profit from their useless overpriced can+trays.
Yep, exactly. Plus the mechanical simplicity means much fewer things fail anyway. Common repairs take minutes (suspension, servicing, electrics, etc.), are very simple, and very cheap. It’s exactly what you want out of a workhorse vehicle. They’ve been so cleverly thought out because Japanese manufacturers had to be with KEI designs. Plus plemty come 4×4 and are very capable on soft terrain due to the lightness.
They’re just so insanely practical and affordable. Everyone loves them. Everyone loves a big V8 turbo diesel that never gets stuck and can haul anything, but they’re inferior mechanically and economically for most day-to-day run around jobs around the property.
I’m sure these will start flooding into the US agriculture industry if they’re able to.
you’re dumb if you think American companies won’t find excuses to fuck with American consumers for profit. America is a land where morons blame regulation for things while corporations have been controlling the policy for decades and laugh as people play diversion for them often for free.
They arent keeping them from doing shit, the manufacturers are trying to avoid responsibilty and using a loophole in the regulations by making the trucks bigger than they should be.
Regulations are supposed to be designed in such a way that the “loophole” to avoid responsibility is the actual effect the regulator is seeking.
The objective is to increase fuel economy. If you are designing a regulation to increase fuel economy, you would identify the best method the industry has come up with, the worst method the industry has come up with. You’d use a carrot approach on the best method, and a stick approach on the worst.
They didn’t do that. They created a perverse regulatory incentive where a small, naturally-economical car has to meet the highest, toughest standard. They are smacking the smallest car with the stick, and the smaller the manufacturer makes that car, the harder they get hit.
If the smallest subcompacts were legally allowed to get 10mpg, every manufacturer would be making subcompacts. They’d be fighting to shrink down their compacts to qualify as subcompacts, and would actually be getting 50+ mpg.
But that’s not the regulatory environment we have. The regulations say “This drivetrain you already have will meet next year’s standards if you widen the body by an inch. Yes, widening it will decrease the MPG relative to this year’s model, but you’ll still be under the limits of the next higher bracket.”
Eliminate that perverted incentive, and cars will get smaller.
What you want is a fuel/distance tax. You can from there have variations of passenger vehicles, work cans, and pickup trucks each having a maximum fuel to distance ratio.
Potentially, sure. There are a number of ways it could be done. Eliminating specific MPG restrictions on subcompacts below a certain weight is what I’d start with, and slowly lower the weight for that category.
We could impose a large hurdle for vehicles below the 15th percentile economy for their class. If they try to bump a smaller car up a class, they harm the vehicles they actually design for that class.
There are lots and lots and lots of ways a good regulation could be structured.
Maybe those car manufacturers should get with the kei truck program instead of fighting it.
Nonsense! They want to sell you an $80,000 car. Not a $10,000 car.
They get insane margins on those big payment princesses. For a lot of US automakers that’s what’s keeping them above water.
The market shifting towards small affordable utility vehicles is their worst nightmare.
Sounds like they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
Could you imagine if the US made kei truck production a utility?
Utility, in the context of the automobile market, is a class of vehicles, hence why Australians call pickups “utes”.
Kai trucks count as utility vehicles, as do american pickup trucks.
Although, realistically, most pickup trucks sold In the US would better be described as “premium” or “luxury” vehicles given that most people buying them are not using them for off roading, hauling or towing, but rather as “life style” vehicles and status symbols.
These things get used everywhere in the world. Used to have a yellow one on a farm. Tough, super cheap, and reliable hauler around the property. It got used more than the main 4×4s which were more for long distance off-roading in remote parts of the property where terrain gets nuts.
You could get a fleet of these for the price of an American “truck”. And that means US car companies start losing profit from their useless overpriced can+trays.
I would guess it’s hard to break parts on them since they’re so light?
Yep, exactly. Plus the mechanical simplicity means much fewer things fail anyway. Common repairs take minutes (suspension, servicing, electrics, etc.), are very simple, and very cheap. It’s exactly what you want out of a workhorse vehicle. They’ve been so cleverly thought out because Japanese manufacturers had to be with KEI designs. Plus plemty come 4×4 and are very capable on soft terrain due to the lightness.
They’re just so insanely practical and affordable. Everyone loves them. Everyone loves a big V8 turbo diesel that never gets stuck and can haul anything, but they’re inferior mechanically and economically for most day-to-day run around jobs around the property.
I’m sure these will start flooding into the US agriculture industry if they’re able to.
Go talk to the NHTSA. It’s their regulations that are keeping US manufacturers from making small cars.
you’re dumb if you think American companies won’t find excuses to fuck with American consumers for profit. America is a land where morons blame regulation for things while corporations have been controlling the policy for decades and laugh as people play diversion for them often for free.
They arent keeping them from doing shit, the manufacturers are trying to avoid responsibilty and using a loophole in the regulations by making the trucks bigger than they should be.
Regulations are supposed to be designed in such a way that the “loophole” to avoid responsibility is the actual effect the regulator is seeking.
The objective is to increase fuel economy. If you are designing a regulation to increase fuel economy, you would identify the best method the industry has come up with, the worst method the industry has come up with. You’d use a carrot approach on the best method, and a stick approach on the worst.
They didn’t do that. They created a perverse regulatory incentive where a small, naturally-economical car has to meet the highest, toughest standard. They are smacking the smallest car with the stick, and the smaller the manufacturer makes that car, the harder they get hit.
If the smallest subcompacts were legally allowed to get 10mpg, every manufacturer would be making subcompacts. They’d be fighting to shrink down their compacts to qualify as subcompacts, and would actually be getting 50+ mpg.
But that’s not the regulatory environment we have. The regulations say “This drivetrain you already have will meet next year’s standards if you widen the body by an inch. Yes, widening it will decrease the MPG relative to this year’s model, but you’ll still be under the limits of the next higher bracket.”
Eliminate that perverted incentive, and cars will get smaller.
What you want is a fuel/distance tax. You can from there have variations of passenger vehicles, work cans, and pickup trucks each having a maximum fuel to distance ratio.
Potentially, sure. There are a number of ways it could be done. Eliminating specific MPG restrictions on subcompacts below a certain weight is what I’d start with, and slowly lower the weight for that category.
We could impose a large hurdle for vehicles below the 15th percentile economy for their class. If they try to bump a smaller car up a class, they harm the vehicles they actually design for that class.
There are lots and lots and lots of ways a good regulation could be structured.
I do not make vehicles, so a vehicle manufacturer should probably do that.
You’re arguing for regulatory capture.
Please dont do that.