this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
98 points (99.0% liked)

Australia

4687 readers
20 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 6 days ago (3 children)

If the vehicle has RANGER on the back i just automatically assume they are a cunt.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago

It was a meme that the majority of incidents in DCAU were Rangers; to the point that when the Range Danger special was released, I know a few people who through it was just another episode.

DCAU is a great resource for learner drivers, to discuss and debate who is primarily at fault and who else contributed to the incident be being an arsehole.

[–] FireWire400@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

For real. The one car I've seen the most of in Oz was some kind of Ranger, with many even being Raptors.

Runner up would be the Toyota (GT)68, but I really don't mind those at all.

[–] comrade19@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Ranger Raptor RUGGED X TUFF BLACK BLOKE EDITION

[–] dumbass@piefed.social 4 points 6 days ago

Let us bully them again, these dipshits with their shit over sized vehicles used to be publicly mocked for their insecurities, bring that back and you will see a drop in sales for them, shame works wonders.

[–] DampSquid@feddit.uk 27 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Make rego 10x for these yank tank wanks

[–] SarahFromOz@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Ban Ford Rangers at least. The drivers tend to be inconsiderate psychos.

They can ride eBikes instead.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 16 points 1 week ago

Ban F-trucks, Silverados and RAMs.

I saw an F350 Super Duty parked in a suburban mains street the other day.

It is so big, it needed Interstate Heavy Vehicle plates. It was not a tradies Utes; It was not a Tow Vehicle, It wasn’t even an Oversized Load pilot. It was just compensating someone’s inadequacy.

It had a sticker on the window “Patriotism is not Racism” and it looked like a MAGA sticker but with an Australian Flag instead of the Stars and Stripes.

With all my heart, I wanted to get a paint marker and write “GAGYGF Seppo Cunt”, but I was on work uniform and did not have a paint pen. Also, I am not a complete arsehole.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Make an anger management course part of the requirements to register one.

[–] Longmactoppedup@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

Currently I think it's the other way around. Before you are allowed to own one you sign a contract saying you will at every opportunity drive millimetres from the bumper of the car in front.

[–] DampSquid@feddit.uk 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] prex@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I saw the sticker on one of them modified to say 'pinger'.

[–] Longmactoppedup@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

You would hope they have more empathy than the ones who remove the R from their sticker.

[–] hanrahan@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago

Be still my beating heart

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We should charge rego by weight and volume. We should measure safety by damage inflicted, not damage deflected.

[–] TheHolm@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We already to. IMHO rego is weight based.

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Rego is weight-based, but it's utterly fucked.

My 900kg hatchback costs $149 more to register than a ute up to 4500kg out in the country.

In the city, the rego difference is $1.10.

https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/registrations/fees-and-charges/vehicle-fees#registration-renewal-fees-for-light-motor-vehicles

What's worse, their FAQ says a lot of TAC claims for utes are paid by workcover, not the TAC. That's why it's cheaper.

...so people who purchase a roadblimp to use for school dropoffs are dodging the TAC charge, whilst being a much larger hazard than everyone else.

https://www.tac.vic.gov.au/about-the-tac/our-organisation/transport-accident-charge?drop=6

[–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago

Canberra charges based on emissions category, with EVs being cheapest to register, and big engine diesels being the most expensive

They are categorised by their CO2 emissions in g/km, so the big and least efficient pay much more

News article, as the ACT government doesn't seem to publish the details in an easy to read format

[–] TheHolm@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I did not realize that rego is state specific. IMHO NSW has most sane method.
In NSW your hatchback will cost $270 and 3 tonne SUV $949. https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/vehicle-registration/fees-concessions-and-forms/vehicle-registration-fees

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

As a Victorian I am loathe to say it, but this is definitely one thing you guys do a hell of a lot better than us.

Especially with the uptake in EVs, which while better for the environment long-term also pose a similar issue for pedestrians and cyclists, registration costs need to be reviewed and rethought from the ground up.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They need to break it down to a Road Levy and a Fuel Levy.

A 2.5T Tesla Model X should pay more for road maintenance than a 900kg Suzuki Swift.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

In the long-term, absolutely, we will need to revisit the fuel levy as we transition towards more EVs.

However I think it would be short-sighted to do anything currently that could disincentivise EV uptake.

I’d honestly much rather see a 1,000 more Model Ys on the road than 100 Rangers.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I would rather see more trains on railway tracks and buses with rational routes that service everyone than a single Tesla.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh, absolutely - we’re on the Pakenham line and took the trip through the new metro tunnel last weekend, absolutely brilliant!

But there are trips and roles that can’t rely on PT, and for those I would much rather see EV adoption over more gigantic Yank-tank “trucks” with somehow less bed-space than what the Commodore and Falcon used to offer.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 2 points 3 days ago

Yeah, I find it hilarious when I see a RAM that is actually being used by a tradie, with two Rhino Boxes and a short stack of Milwaukee PACK-OUTs taking up all the space in the tray, while a Triton parked next to it has an entire workshop of tools.

[–] Tau@aussie.zone 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Depends on the state. NSW for example is one that does vary depending on weight (based on weight ranges, not a full sliding scale) - there's a ~$180 difference between my sedan and van due to the van's higher tare weight placing it in the next category up. QLD on the other hand is one that doesn't - they charge based on the cylinder count instead.

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why is rego on a little i20 so damn expensive then

[–] TheHolm@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)
[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Increasing the weight of the car by 2x increases the road damage by 16x.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 11 points 1 week ago

First, the “SUV loophole”: under US law, most SUVs are classified as light trucks, meaning they’re subject to less stringent fuel-efficiency and crash-safety standards than passenger cars.

This has always been baffling to me. Make the standards universal and I reckon people would make very different choices.

[–] Seagoon_@aussie.zone 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

just remove the tax rebate/incentive

[–] prex@aussie.zone 6 points 1 week ago

Could it be so simple?
Pretty much yes.

[–] shirro@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago

Speed limit Rangers to 40kph within city limits. They usually speed through school zones and roadworks so it won't slow them down but we might get a few disqualified from driving which will help.

[–] Insekticus@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago

Smaller cars and tax the ultra wealthy. Really not that complex.

[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Pretty early the article points out that the top selling car in 2011 was far smaller than the best selling car now, in 2025, a Ford Ranger

It then says:

Four in five new cars sold in Australia are SUVs or utes – more than double the share of 20 years ago.

And follows up by pointing out two parts of US legislation that are driving manufacturing in the US to produce larger cars and ends by pointing out the extra risks with larger cars and how the situation can be improved using local legislation.

Why does the article ignore that the 2011 top selling car was from an Asian manufacturer and that Asian and European manufacturers exist. I went looking for data on sales from regions / brands over time but failed a bit. Anyone want to fill in the gaps? Obviously Mazda is no longer selling the top selling model and Ford is, but was there a swing in sales to Ford, a consolidation of sales on one model or maybe more that people that loved Ford just started buying the bigger cars? Any chance someone knows of some sort of data that helps fill in the gaps?

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Double the price of gas. Problem will solve itself.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

We have done more than that over the thirty years. It hasn't helped.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

$1.65 AUD/L (as per brief google search) is not that expensive. Although, I also find it funny that a Ranger is considered a “large” vehicle. That’s a mini truck in NA. The cousin humper trucks here could literally drive over a Ranger.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Replace petrol taxes with a formula based on miles driven and weight of car.

[–] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

People are surprisingly unkeen on tracking in their car. So kilometers driven wouldn't work.

I'd say just go with a fee based on the weight of the vehicle, exponential of course. We need fewer heavy cars, fewer kilometers driven will be a side effect. And as a bonus effect maybe I'd be able to buy an EV without a range that's 8 times what I actually need.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 1 points 4 days ago

Odometer reading is a relatively unobtrusive metadatum.

It is recorded when the vehicle is serviced so it is already in someone’s database.

If kms travelled had to be reported annually at the time of registration, no-one will complain (except sov-shit cookers, and they don’t pay rego anyway).

[–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Have you actually driven outside the city here? I need the 400km my EV has to get between capital cities

[–] ddiluted1@mastodon.au 1 points 5 days ago

@psud @Tenderizer guess you're not driving to Perth anytime soon then?

[–] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Why would you drive between capital cities? There's public transport for that.

I need to drive from the bush into the nearby major town and back again. 50km round trip.

[–] hanrahan@piefed.social 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Rest of is could vote Green

[–] TimePencil@infosec.exchange 1 points 6 days ago

@hanrahan

"Rest of is could vote Green"

"is"? Islamic State?

Oh!... "us"... you meant "us". A typo...

So... the "United States", right?
Am I right?

(I'll shut up now...)

@vividspecter

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

Big fan of fire

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

I thought that was specifically a North American issue. Damn. Stay safe pedestrians (those drivers of too-large vehicles won't even see you when they run you over)!

[–] TheHolm@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

"Second, under US fuel economy rules, fuel-efficiency targets are adjusted based on the size of the vehicle’s “footprint” — the area between its wheels. In practice, this means larger vehicles are allowed to consume more fuel while still meeting the target."

So this is the problem (in US) remove that rule and cars will shrink again. Deformities often caused by unnatural pressure, and this is an example.