this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2026

697 points (99.2% liked)

Mildly Interesting

27762 readers

335 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

marcar@lemmy.world

Jimbabwe@lemmy.ml

WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world

Zerlyna@lemmy.world

697

Mexico unveils the cargo version of its light truck that it will begin selling next year for about $10,000. The Mexican government has been leading project development. (www.electrive.com)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by Yasm@programming.dev to c/mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world

132 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Seldon@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Seems like you have a it's-all-about-me complex. "I drive around slowly in my truck and be calm, why can't you?1!"

[+] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world -6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well there seem to be a lot of people in this sub that fetishized Kei trucks. If you make a comment about how unsafe they are… well just look at the rabid sexist attacks, unhinged aggressive comments. I mean you reacted by flying off and writing a three paragraph essay on the subject.

So yeah you do you.

I’ll continue enjoying rolling around in my large safe comfortable truck.

[–] Seldon@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

My reaction comes from studies done on vehicle safety and the economics behind them. You reacted by saying "I feel safer" and getting all emotional because you're trying to justify your purchase. And everyone else is unhinged. Right.

Also, your reaction of "cool story" disqualifies you from any actual meaningful participation in this. Truth is, larger vehicles means more deaths and accidents. I provided comments you can easily verify with countless studies but you're not here for that.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well you sound like you have all your facts in a row instead of the dribble you spouted earlier. Can you cite a study where a modern 7000lb truck gets into an accident with a modern 2500lb car. I’d love to hear what a learned individual like yourself has researched!

Or are you just going to provide “comments” again?

Here I’ll start:

https://share.google/aimode/qeS3O27PW3ZstlGh4

When analyzing a collision between a modern sedan and a modern light truck or SUV, extensive safety data from organizations like the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals a complex dynamic defined by physical scale, structural alignment, and advanced safety technology. [1, 2]

While modern engineering has made multi-vehicle crashes more survivable than they were decades ago, significant disparities still exist when these two vehicle classes clash. [2]

1. The Physics Advantage (Mass and Kinetic Energy)

In a multi-vehicle crash, the laws of physics heavily favor the heavier vehicle. [3]

The Weight Disparity: A typical modern mid-size sedan weighs between 3,100 to 3,600 lbs, whereas a modern full-size pickup truck or large SUV routinely tips the scales at 5,000 to 6,500 lbs.
Energy Distribution: In a collision, the lighter sedan experiences a much higher change in velocity (Delta-V). The truck's massive inertia effectively "pushes" the sedan backward or sideways, transferring significantly higher G-forces to the occupants inside the sedan. [4, 5]

2. Structural Compatibility (The Override Problem)

Historically, the greatest danger in a sedan-versus-truck crash was "geometrical incompatibility"—meaning the truck’s high bumper would ride up over the sedan's hood, bypassing the sedan's crumple zones and crushing the passenger cabin directly. [2, 6]

Modern Improvements: Today, major manufacturers adhere to voluntary structural compatibility guidelines. Modern trucks are designed with lowered primary energy-absorbing structures (or secondary lower blocker bars) behind their bumpers to ensure they align directly with a sedan’s front-end crumple zones. [2]
The Remaining Threat: Despite these lower bars, if a modern truck is modified (e.g., aftermarket lift kits) or if the crash occurs at an extreme angle, the risk of the truck overriding the sedan's hood remains high, severely compromising the sedan’s safety cage. [6]

3. Collision Type Outcomes

Real-world crash studies show vastly different survival rates depending on where the sedan is struck: [7]

Collision Type	Impact on Sedan Occupants	Impact on Truck Occupants
Head-On Impact	High Risk. The sedan's crumple zone will absorb maximum energy, but the massive force of the truck can still result in a higher risk of occupant injury or death.	Low-to-Medium Risk. The truck's long front crumple zone and mass shield its occupants from severe forces.
Side-Impact (T-Bone)	Critical Risk. If a truck T-bones a sedan, the truck's tall front end strikes at the occupant's head and chest level, challenging the sedan’s side airbags and B-pillars.	Very Low Risk. The truck driver sits high above the primary point of impact.
Rollover	Extremely Rare. The sedan’s low center of gravity keeps it firmly planted.	Higher Risk. If the collision forces the truck into a sharp, sudden swerve, its high center of gravity makes it more susceptible to rolling over.

4. The Role of Modern Safety Tech

Modern safety features have altered the baseline of these crashes:

Active Crash Avoidance: Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS)—such as Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) and Forward Collision Warning—frequently mitigate the severity of these crashes by slowing the vehicles down right before the impact occurs, even if the crash isn't fully avoided.
Passive Cabin Defenses: Modern sedans utilize ultra-high-strength steel in the roof pillars and standard side-curtain airbags, which have reduced sedan driver fatalities by nearly 50% in side-impact crashes compared to older models. [2]

Are you researching this for a legal or insurance case, looking into vehicle crash-test ratings for a new purchase, or exploring mechanical engineering concepts?

[1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/

[2] https://www.youtube.com/

[3] https://safecarcompare.com/

[4] https://www.youtube.com/

[5] https://www.choosecharlie.com/

[6] https://www.nsc.org/

[7] https://curtislegalgroup.com/

[–] Seldon@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My guy, you vomited a bunch of AI slop and call that research, at the bottom of your text it says "Are you researching this for a legal or insurance case, looking into vehicle crash-test ratings for a new purchase, or exploring mechanical engineering concepts?". LMAO great research, dude.

Yes, I do have my facts in order, I studied this in university for urban planning. I find it laughable, and honestly expectable, that you're only concerned with motorists deaths. How carbrained. Even more so, that the pillar of your argument is based on physics, which you are ironically supporting my argument. Yes, vehicles are generally safer today than they were in the past (Tyndall) but the mass and shape of vehicles plays a critical role in whether pedestrians or cyclists are killed. "SUVs and light trucks are taller, heavier, and more rigid than cars, they pose an increased danger to occupants of cars and to pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists" (Hu et al.). Trucks and SUVs disenfranchise other drivers' safety, because they "...are much stiffer. They therefore absorb less of the force of the crash and transfer more to cars" (Hu et al.). To continue this argument, "occupants of vehicles colliding with any type of [SUVs and light trucks] were at higher risk of death compared with occupants colliding with cars" (Ossiander et al.).

More mass does not mean better, despite how safe you feel in your cage of steel, because "For each 1 million light trucks that replace cars, between 34 and 93 additional car occupants, pedestrians, bicyclists, or motorcyclists are killed per year... for each fatal crash that occupants of large vehicles avoid, at least 4.3 additional fatal crashes involving others occur" (White). Larger vehicles yield higher fatalities: "Between 2000 and 2019, I estimate that replacing the growth in Sport Utility Vehicles with cars would have averted 1,100 pedestrian deaths. I find no evidence that the shift towards larger vehicles improved aggregate motorist safety... If all light trucks were replaced with cars, over 8,000 pedestrian deaths would have been averted between 2000 and 2019. Vehicle body types appear to be an important determinant of pedestrian deaths in the aggregate" (Tyndall). If you think it's okay to normalize and accept the enormity of SUVs and trucks at the expense of human beings taking other forms of transportation around you, then you have a problem far deeper than I can provide with sources. That's between you and your maker.

How about next comment, skip the AI slop and do some actual research besides showing me some hurled out elementary physics I already know about.

Sources

Hu, Wen, et al. “The Association Between Passenger-vehicle Front-end Profiles and Pedestrian Injury Severity in Motor Vehicle Crashes.” Journal of Safety Research, vol. 90, June 2024, pp. 115–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2024.06.007.

Ossiander, Eric M., et al. “Crash Fatality and Vehicle Incompatibility in Collisions Between Cars and Light Trucks or Vans.” Injury Prevention, vol. 20, no. 6, May 2014, pp. 373–79. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2013-041146.

Tyndall, Justin. “Pedestrian Deaths and Large Vehicles.” Economics of Transportation, vol. 26–27, June 2021, p. 100219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecotra.2021.100219.

White, Michelle J. “The ‘Arms Race’ on American Roads: The Effect of Sport Utility Vehicles And Pickup Trucks on Traffic Safety.” The Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 47, no. 2, Oct. 2004, pp. 333–55. https://doi.org/10.1086/422979.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

My reaction comes from studies done on vehicle safety and the economics behind them. You reacted by saying "I _feel_ safer" and getting all emotional because you're trying to justify your purchase. And everyone else is unhinged.

My man, remember your original premise above? That I only felt safer but didn’t have any supporting data making me emotional? I posted it above for your edification. I appreciate you spending who knows how long putting together an argument that attacks your original statement in this thread. The paragraph you wrote below… Chefs kiss I appreciate how well you document how safe I am in my large truck.

Yes, vehicles are generally safer today than they were in the past (Tyndall) but the mass and shape of vehicles plays a critical role in whether pedestrians or cyclists are killed. "SUVs and light trucks are taller, heavier, and more rigid than cars, they pose an increased danger to occupants of cars and to pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists" (Hu et al.). Trucks and SUVs disenfranchise other drivers' safety, because they "...are much stiffer. They therefore absorb less of the force of the crash and transfer more to cars" (Hu et al.).

I am safer driving around town in the safety of my large 7000 lb truck. Than a Kei truck driver would be.

Congratulations you played yourself.

[–] Seldon@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm wondering if you can read or having memory issues, or blissfully ignoring everything I wrote. In no way did I say large vehicles are less safe for the person driving them. The problem is that they kill more people than they save around them. Read that again. So while you can feel snuggly safe in your ridiculous truck, know that cumulatively more fatalities are happening because vehicles keep getting bigger. Again, it just means you're only thinking of yourself. I'm done talking to a narcissist.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

Are you dense or just don’t understand the English language? I quoted the relevant text of a comment you made:

My reaction comes from studies done on vehicle safety and the economics behind them. You reacted by saying "I _feel_ safer" and getting all emotional because you're trying to justify your purchase. And everyone else is unhinged.

Well let me spell it out below:

I am safer in a large vehicle and both you and I verified that statement.

Smaller cars like the Kei truck being a prime example of unsafe cars. Which you and I proved.

I am glad you finally agreed with my original comment. I do take great satisfaction that you have admitted I should feel “snuggly” safe in my large truck.

My purchase is justified by the statistic you love so much and everyone else is unhinged. That was the only point I was making.

So while you can feel snuggly safe in your ridiculous truck, know that cumulatively more fatalities are happening because vehicles keep getting bigger.

I highly encourage you to stand by your convictions and purchase a small truck like the Kei. You can be the change you so vehemently advocate for. May you drive it proudly maybe even recklessly in dangerous heavy traffic around large vehicles.