That’s not what the guy is complaining about. It’s a perfectly valid point that with a longer vehicle you have to cut into the oncoming lane or your rear tires will hit the curb.
Feel free to criticize people you disagree with, but at the very least you should criticize what they’re actually saying rather than your unfair interpretation of it.
Firstly, that’s a big ass car and no one other than tradesperson or people who work closely with construction should be driving that. Secondly, that’s a big ass gap, at least 1m, dude purposefully went all the way out there to proof his point.
And if that is the smallest turning circle of that vehicle I don’t know what to say. These shit bags are just too lazy to turn the wheel and likely have no idea where the corners of their truck are.
No offense but that’s a basic F150 Ram 1500. It’s got one of the shortest beds of the lineup.
A vehicle with a longer bed or dual wheels, or even with a trailer (say a municipal vehicle for the sake of argument) might have trouble making that turn. It’s not necessarily that his personal truck can’t do it. Just because his truck can doesn’t mean all vehicles can.
It needs to be safe enough for all vehicles that might have to travel that road.
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.
No road should be designed for all vehicle, else 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.
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.
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. With those rods extended upward vertically the front or rear bumper of a larger vehicle with a worse turning radius can’t 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.
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 front-overs, 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.
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.
As I said, feel free to disagree but at least disagree with their actual point - not your interpretation of it.
It’s unclear to me what your personal opinion on pickup trucks has to do with any of this. I’m talking about fairly representing people’s views. I don’t know what it is you seem to take issue with.
I’m disagreeing their point by saying that’s actually a non-issue, they just have to drive more carefully, especially when they’re driving something that large. And it seems like they can’t navigate it, which kinda proof the point that it is not an issue. Even if they need to go out a bit to the opposite lane, that is still non-issue. A full sized truck does that all the time, you just have to be careful with it.
The amount of idiots who drive trucks and have no clue how to drive them is a huge problem. They buy them and then never use them for the intended purpose and then cause those of us who do need them for work, to pay premiums because the manufacturers no longer care about making non premium models. Why would they when you got idiots like this guy buying the most expensive trim level, just to drive around in the city.
Exactly. People who actually need these to earn a living don’t really care about the bell and whistle it come with, they just need it to run reliably. Not to mention it’s an incredibly dangerous car seeing how huge it is compared to a sedan, the size of it literally makes people feels invincible and drive more recklessly.
Yep, they call them pavement princesses and the idiots who drive them absolutely think they can bully everything else because they’re in a truck. They’re morons.
The truck they showed who was goint into oncoming traffic was 2m away from the curb. These people can’t drive or should buy a smaller car that they can drive.
I think the main thing to criticize is the fact that the news picked this one random person’s grievance to platform.
Would the news do the same if a cyclist complained that a road was unsafe for cyclists? A driver being upset, while an expert disagrees, is considered newsworthy. But I’d bet that if it was a random cyclist who was upset, even if the experts agreed with them, it wouldn’t make the news.
it’s not a valid point because you can clearly see in the video that you don’t actually need to go out into the oncoming lane, they showed a pickup making the turn unnecessarily wide
That’s not what the guy is complaining about. It’s a perfectly valid point that with a longer vehicle you have to cut into the oncoming lane or your rear tires will hit the curb.
Feel free to criticize people you disagree with, but at the very least you should criticize what they’re actually saying rather than your unfair interpretation of it.
Firstly, that’s a big ass car and no one other than tradesperson or people who work closely with construction should be driving that. Secondly, that’s a big ass gap, at least 1m, dude purposefully went all the way out there to proof his point.
And if that is the smallest turning circle of that vehicle I don’t know what to say. These shit bags are just too lazy to turn the wheel and likely have no idea where the corners of their truck are.
No offense but that’s a basic
F150Ram 1500. It’s got one of the shortest beds of the lineup.A vehicle with a longer bed or dual wheels, or even with a trailer (say a municipal vehicle for the sake of argument) might have trouble making that turn. It’s not necessarily that his personal truck can’t do it. Just because his truck can doesn’t mean all vehicles can.
It needs to be safe enough for all vehicles that might have to travel that road.
I think its actually a RAM 1500 but your point still stands.
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.
No road should be designed for all vehicle, else 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.
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.
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. With those rods extended upward vertically the front or rear bumper of a larger vehicle with a worse turning radius can’t 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.
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 front-overs, 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.
Edit: LITERALLY 2 POSTS AWAY FROM THIS ONE ON THE FEED. Happened yesterday.
Bicyclist swerved because sedan unsafely opened their door while parking, and large truck ran them over, killing them
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.
As I said, feel free to disagree but at least disagree with their actual point - not your interpretation of it.
It’s unclear to me what your personal opinion on pickup trucks has to do with any of this. I’m talking about fairly representing people’s views. I don’t know what it is you seem to take issue with.
I’m disagreeing their point by saying that’s actually a non-issue, they just have to drive more carefully, especially when they’re driving something that large. And it seems like they can’t navigate it, which kinda proof the point that it is not an issue. Even if they need to go out a bit to the opposite lane, that is still non-issue. A full sized truck does that all the time, you just have to be careful with it.
The amount of idiots who drive trucks and have no clue how to drive them is a huge problem. They buy them and then never use them for the intended purpose and then cause those of us who do need them for work, to pay premiums because the manufacturers no longer care about making non premium models. Why would they when you got idiots like this guy buying the most expensive trim level, just to drive around in the city.
Exactly. People who actually need these to earn a living don’t really care about the bell and whistle it come with, they just need it to run reliably. Not to mention it’s an incredibly dangerous car seeing how huge it is compared to a sedan, the size of it literally makes people feels invincible and drive more recklessly.
Yep, they call them pavement princesses and the idiots who drive them absolutely think they can bully everything else because they’re in a truck. They’re morons.
The truck they showed who was goint into oncoming traffic was 2m away from the curb. These people can’t drive or should buy a smaller car that they can drive.
The traffic engineer explained it was a skill issue.
I think the main thing to criticize is the fact that the news picked this one random person’s grievance to platform.
Would the news do the same if a cyclist complained that a road was unsafe for cyclists? A driver being upset, while an expert disagrees, is considered newsworthy. But I’d bet that if it was a random cyclist who was upset, even if the experts agreed with them, it wouldn’t make the news.
Great point, I didn’t see them talk to any pedestrians or cyclists!
it’s not a valid point because you can clearly see in the video that you don’t actually need to go out into the oncoming lane, they showed a pickup making the turn unnecessarily wide