Hacker News Reader

Comment by conductr | Hacker News Reader

From my perspective, owning a truck and SUV and using them differently for various use cases, the cybertruck is neither. So even if I ignore everything else I feel about it’s aesthetic, Musk, politics, etc. It simply does not serve many real world needs that I have. It put itself in a very narrow box of, only people that really like this quirky design and also like/feel indifferent to the tangential stuff will want to buy this truck. Oh, also you have to be able to afford it too. This is such a small addressable market for a vehicle to target. Was never going to work.

However, it provided content and distraction and kept the stock high longer than it should have and I feel like that’s what Musk continues to excel at.

View on HN

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.)

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

Of less-tall there a Subarus at least.

> 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. :-)

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

> 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.

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

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

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

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

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

>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.

> 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)?

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

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.

> 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.)

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

You're absolutely right, and I would hope people have at least some awareness of this. (There's enough trailer accidents & wrecks to indicate against that, sadly.)

That said, looking at the numbers still makes some sense to get a rough understanding of the design space of these cars though. (And, well, the numbers I was replying to were confusing the heck out of me.)

(My source: German class BE driver's license = car with heavy trailers. You're limited to 0.75t trailer OR (car + trailer) ≤ 3.5t without that, in B. The E is a separate exam, both theoretical and practical. Aside from theory bits on how cars with trailers behave, you have to parallel park or T-turn a trailer to pass it.)

Tow package for the chrystler pacifica is 3600 lbs, or 1.8 tons

> 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!

It's the soccer mom treadmill.

Station Wagons -> Minivans -> SUVs

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

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

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.

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.

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.

> 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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)

The Ford F-150 Lightning also failed and it was a full truck. It similarly was way too expensive, both for consumer and Ford, and had some issues with towing (range).

I had a friend who 'preordered' to get Cybertruck and he couldn't justify the price which was $140k CAD, so he bought a new Chevy pickup truck instead for $70-80k CAD.

That’s a hard comparison point though when the ICE F-150 was the perfect substitute it was competing against. To me, that mostly proves that people didn’t want to go electric or pay the premium for it. The F150 design itself, does fit the bill as a truck doing what a truck needs to do.

I also bought a new Chevy truck recently for less than $40k USD, mid tier trim. Other trucks can be very affordable. The trim and budget options are quite wide. Tesla was never going to get to that as it requires volume.

There's also the dynamic of how many people buy pickup trucks who don't actually need full trucks. I'm not sure how much better Cybertruck would have sold if it actually performed better as one given the price (or more so if the Youtube reviewers gave it more appeal as a real truck to people who dont need one).

There's also a big market for luxury SUVs. But you could buy a nice BMW SUV for nearly half the price. So it was really just competing with higher end SUVs.

Which is why I believe it was mostly a price issue, not that there isn't a market for such a hybrid (half SUV / pretend truck) concept.

We have a lightning specifically because we need a full sized truck. Our RAM ICE's cargo capacity was barely over 1000 lbs (BMW i3: 800 lbs). The Ford EV's capacity is 2250lbs.

Also, the RAM's transmission overheated on gentle slopes.

The slate looks great (more cargo weight capacity than our full sized RAM ICE truck; half the price, much lower fuel costs, much more convenient to own).

If their second model is 250 class, we'd probably buy it. The Lightning can only tow 10,000lbs, so it's not great at hauling rock, etc -- it can do it, but only ~2.5 tons per load when you add in the weight of the trailer. This means we have to keep paying $100's to delivery services.

It'd be nice if that hypothetical 250 slate seated 5-6 people too. That'd let it be a backup kid hauler, like the lightning is. The lightning has more bells and whistles, but the aesthetics of the slate are much better, and I like the idea of just buying an aftermarket radio that does not integrate in with the power train.

Of course, if we didn't need a truck, we'd get a Rivian R1S/T. They're great for camping, etc, and what most people want when they buy a pickup truck as a family car.

The slate isn’t even comparable to a 150 class. Their whole thing was filling the small duty void in the US market, so I think it’d be a long time before they put out an 250 class.

I think a lot of the F-150s failure comes down to dealers. You can read myriad stories in the EV subreddits of dealers putting "market adjustments" on the Lightning and Mach-E of tens of thousands of dollars. It was if they didn't want them to sell, and I think we all know why (lower revenue from regular maintenance like oil changes and other fluids).

I have a buddy that has worked for corporate auto companies for 20 years. In most cities, dealerships make little to no money on the initial sale as competition has driven them down to dealer pricing. They make all their money on add ons (undercoating, paint protection), financing kick backs, warranties, and ongoing maintenance (this being the largest chunk). So there's probably a lot of truth to what you are saying.

Couple that with the fact that these were sold at a $20-$30k premium over a regular ICE truck and the fact that you not only couldn't get these at MSRP, but you had to spend an extra $10k on top and.. yeah...

I think F150 was the right vehicle but the wrong price point.

I don't know, seems like there was a lot of demand for the Lightning, still not sure why Ford canned it.

If:

Fuel economy regulations had not been suspended and the electric vehicle credits hadn't expired I'll bet there would still be a Lightning.

Unlike the CyberTrash. The question (to me) is did Ford make a semi-rational short-term financial decision at the expense of its future competitiveness?

The Lightning didn't really fail. It was the best selling EV pickup in the US by a large margin.

I think it was killed for political reasons: They repurposed the plant for AI datacenter batteries. I predict we'll have EV pickup trucks again if the 2028 election looks like the 2026 election.

Anyway, my next full sized pickup will also be a pure EV. If I can't get a Ford, then I'll get something else. (The lightning is far better at truck stuff than our late model GMC and Ram trucks were. Maybe I can get a truck from China + register in Mexico? Is that a thing?)

The new Lightning has a useless serial hybrid setup and gets 700 miles of range (who needs that?). I suspect it'll end up being like other serial hybrids, and an option to omit the gas engine will be available, and also substantially lower the price (or enable a larger battery). In the meantime, they'll tell Trump that he managed to kill EV pickup trucks.

No idea why it "failed" or was discontinued. From what i remember there was a huge waitlist to get one. I know lots of people that wanted on. It looked amazing IMO. I dont think it was a demand issue that caused it to be canceled

To be fair, if the waitlist length was to be believed, they were made when the vehicle was advertised with substantially better capabilities at substantially lower costs. A lot of people cancelled reservations when the actual specs were announced.

The initial hype is easy to get caught up in. I jump on the list with Slate on day one and ultimately decided I didn’t want it. That’s after years of wanting basically exactly what they’re building. I mostly decided the range was insufficient and it was too underpowered for towing (specs were not originally announced IIRC). I also wanted to see one in person first and never got that opportunity, I wish they did a body only roadshow leading up to the purchase decision, but ultimately was concerned it might just feel uncomfortable. I was early enough that I was able to secure the first month of delivery but declined it.

Funny thing is I don’t think it’s actually as cheap as many people expect. Because I think most people will be doing $5-10k of addons just to get some pretty base functionality and mods it comes without. Still think it’s a cool concept

Van like Fiat Ducato is superior to american pickups: more volume, more payload great fuel economy for half the price of f150.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com