Comment on Local news did an entire segment featuring a guy who's mad about having to drive more carefully.

• CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  I think its actually a RAM 1500 but your point still stands.

  source

  • atrielienz@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Yeah. Like. I get it. People are pissed because passenger vehicles in the US keep getting bigger and more unweildy and people don’t want them on the road because of the danger to pedestrians.

    But at the same time, the people who service your roads, power lines and water systems and respond to emergency situations still have to drive on them.

    Just because he’s being overdramatic about his own vehicle doesn’t mean he’s not right.

    source
• psx_crab@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  No road should be designed for all vehicle, else the every road is stroad. It should be big enough for municipal vehicle like garbage truck to pass through, but for turning, as long as it’s wide enough for smaller private vehicle to turn, even if vehicle like pickup and truck have to went into opposite lane to do it, it should be suffice. A wider corner turn makes people drive recklessly because they can make the turn without slowing down, while narrower like this one make sure people actually stop and take time to turn. This is also very important here because there’s a bicycle lane there, if a huge vehicle with so much blind spot just turn without stopping, that blindspot will very likely blocking the oncoming cyclist. Tom Scott did a similar video on that, and if you drive you probably experience it in some form.

  Narrow turn like this might be unfair to bigger vehicle, but it’s basically forcing bigger car driver to be extra careful, which they should be consider the size of the vehicle they’re driving and the danger their vehicle pose to others. They can drive a smaller vehicle if they feel unfair.

  source
• scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  They designed that vehicle without regard for safety. Then it was rated poor for pedestrian safety and people still bought it. They made the street safe for the people Ford and the buyer ignored.

  source

  • atrielienz@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    It sounds to me like you haven’t been in a Ford truck for some time and you’re basing your opinion on safety rating information for certain events where the occupants aren’t wearing seatbelts and don’t take the proper precautions to prevent things from flying around the vehicle in a crash.

    No offense but vehicles are better built for safety now than they were the previous 5 years, 10 years, 20 years etc. But this isn’t about safety in the event of a crash. If you mean ability to see pedestrians in front, this is true but it also has nothing to do with their ability to safely turn a corner without going into incoming traffic to do so.

    Newer vehicles generally have better turning radii than older ones. I know for a fact that there are some passenger vehicles on the road including municipal working vehicles and ambulances that can’t make that turn safety without jumping the curb. Without rose rods extended upward vertically the front or rear bumper of a larger vehicle with a worse turning radius can clear that without breaking the law and swinging into oncoming traffic.

    There is a reason that the law states that you must drive as if there are other people on the road.

    As far as the argument about not all roads being required to support all vehicles, every road should generally be able to facilitate an ambulance being driven on it (not even in an emergency situation, but in general).

    So while I admit that his personal truck can safely make that turn with no problem, that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a point.

    I would love to hear from a civil engineer or city planning engineer about this.

    I’m from an old American city with some of the narrowest roads and residential streets and I wouldn’t discount his argument just because it doesn’t effect him.

    source

    • scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      I literally do mean pedestrians, and it literally does mean being able to take a sharp corner. The hood design is deadly to pedestrians, and you’re so high up that you have massive blindspots. It is a machine that can and regularly does cause controversy, meaning running pedestrians and children over. I absolutely hate how the most unsafe hood design is considered normal, and have and will continually lobby for them to be removed from the roads.

      I do not care how safe someone feels inside. To everyone outside the car they are massive liabilities.

      [Learn up on them] (youtu.be/jN7mSXMruEo)

      source

      • atrielienz@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        I am not denying the danger. Take a moment to understand that just because the vehicle is dangerous doesn’t mean anything as far as this particular complaint is concerned. My point had exactly zero percent of anything to do with what you’re arguing.

        Even if this truck were lower to the ground (like the F150-F350 trucks of the 1990’s and early 2000’s) that still wouldn’t necessarily equate to a turning radius that would allow such a vehicle (looking at you fucking ambulances built on an F350 chassis) to turn the corner without edging into oncoming traffic which is against the law and is unsafe.

        You can stop yelling at me. I’m not a yee yee truck driver. I’m not saying that this is meant to be a normal commuter vehicle.

        I even agree with you that they’re dangerous. I never advocated for them to be used by everyday people. But they don’t require a CDL. Nor do they require any special license. And municipality’s use them all over for various tasks. So if the municipality uses a vehicle like that in normal operations the road should be able to safely accommodate it.

        source