There are plenty of things vans aren’t suitable for–towing fifth wheels or holding oversized power equipment, for instance. Nor are vans any better for visibility than the trucks on OP’s list. Many start as the same truck frames and then have a different body placed on top.
So you’re saying that contractors in other countries can’t do the same stuff that US contractors do, because they don’t have access to tiny-penis trucks?
I’m saying they do have those trucks. You may not see them as much because these use cases tend to have them driven to a job site and then stay there until the work is done, which may be weeks or months.
There are also some farming needs that Europe just doesn’t have. You can go for miles and still be on the same farm in the US. Sometimes, the land is rented and isn’t contiguously connected. Hauling equipment and livestock across all that is the job of a fifth wheel, and you can’t use a van for that.
I don’t own a truck. I do know people who do and have some familiarity with farm operations.
That truck is not adaquate for the number of livestock or equipment an American farmer has. It would force multiple trips over dirt roads. Again, American farms are just plain bigger, and there might be a few changes that are needed to support that.
Also, I’m not sure why you think that truck is better than any American truck. It simply swaps a bed for a box. Edit: I believe that’s a somewhat older model Man TGL, which has a GVWR of 7.5-12 tons. That puts it in the same ballpark as an F350, so again, I don’t know why you think this is an improvement.
Also, I’m not sure why you think that truck is better than any American truck. It simply swaps a bed for a box.
Look at where the window of that cab is positioned. Is there anything in front of it blocking its view? It’s the same difference between an American and European semi-truck. The engine is under or behind the cab, so the view out of the front is unobstructed.
As for farming needs, US farmers used much smaller trucks for decades. These massive trucks are actually worse for many/most hauling needs. Consider how much extra effort it takes to load cargo into the bed when it’s 5’ up, rather than when it’s only 2’ or so off the ground. It’s just plain worse, except for making someone feel tough for some reason.
Look at where the window of that cab is positioned. Is there anything in front of it blocking its view? It’s the same difference between an American and European semi-truck. The engine is under or behind the cab, so the view out of the front is unobstructed.
Cab-over designs also make maintenance harder. There’s no free lunch. But cab-over designs do exist in this same market segment in the US
US farmers used much smaller trucks for decades
US farms have also consolidated into larger operations during those same decades.
Consider how much extra effort it takes to load cargo into the bed when it’s 5’ up, rather than when it’s only 2’ or so off the ground.
I mentioned a fifth wheel, so this isn’t relevant. If you don’t know what a fifth wheel is, you probably shouldn’t have strong opinions on this.
I mentioned a fifth wheel, so this isn’t relevant. If you don’t know what a fifth wheel is, you probably shouldn’t have strong opinions on this.
It isn’t really relevant to the conversation of if these giant trucks are required. The only argument possible for it would maybe be horsepower, but they have way more than what’s required. The horsepower to maintain 60mph is 106HP for an RV. This is probably worse than most farming equipment, especially since they usually won’t need to go even 60mph. The average car since the 1980s has been able to put out these numbers. There isn’t a need. This is assuming the people buying these trucks are actually pulling these loads, but we all know the vast majority are driving around cities never hauling anything.
Nope, that’s not how that works. To take a higher weight, the transmission needs to be beefier and the frame does, too. You might need dualie wheels, as well. Then at some point, you get into air brakes (which do generally require a CDL in the US).
As far as engines go, they may use the same ones for a large range of towing capacities. Engines are generally not the limiting factor.
So again, you’re making assumptions without actually knowing how it works.
This is assuming the people buying these trucks are actually pulling these loads, but we all know the vast majority are driving around cities never hauling anything.
At this level, yes, they do actually haul things.
If we were talking about the F150 and trucks like it, that’s different. Those mostly are posers. Once you get into the F250 level or higher, though, you’re mostly looking at people who use their truck for a living. You can’t even buy an F250 from Ford without a commercial contract, but there is a secondary market. That used to be more common, because you couldn’t get an F150 with a diesel, but that’s come and gone in recent years.
The Man truck posted above competes with the F350 (roughly), which are almost all commercial use in the US. Those are not parking lot queens.
There are plenty of things vans aren’t suitable for–towing fifth wheels or holding oversized power equipment, for instance. Nor are vans any better for visibility than the trucks on OP’s list. Many start as the same truck frames and then have a different body placed on top.
So you’re saying that contractors in other countries can’t do the same stuff that US contractors do, because they don’t have access to tiny-penis trucks?
Because that’s what you’re saying
I am now genuinely curious as to the logistics at play for construction companies across the pond.
I’m saying they do have those trucks. You may not see them as much because these use cases tend to have them driven to a job site and then stay there until the work is done, which may be weeks or months.
There are also some farming needs that Europe just doesn’t have. You can go for miles and still be on the same farm in the US. Sometimes, the land is rented and isn’t contiguously connected. Hauling equipment and livestock across all that is the job of a fifth wheel, and you can’t use a van for that.
Literally every livestock farmer owns one of these
You’re just trying to justify your tiny-penis truck when there is zero justification for it whatsoever
I don’t own a truck. I do know people who do and have some familiarity with farm operations.
That truck is not adaquate for the number of livestock or equipment an American farmer has. It would force multiple trips over dirt roads. Again, American farms are just plain bigger, and there might be a few changes that are needed to support that.
Also, I’m not sure why you think that truck is better than any American truck. It simply swaps a bed for a box. Edit: I believe that’s a somewhat older model Man TGL, which has a GVWR of 7.5-12 tons. That puts it in the same ballpark as an F350, so again, I don’t know why you think this is an improvement.
Look at where the window of that cab is positioned. Is there anything in front of it blocking its view? It’s the same difference between an American and European semi-truck. The engine is under or behind the cab, so the view out of the front is unobstructed.
As for farming needs, US farmers used much smaller trucks for decades. These massive trucks are actually worse for many/most hauling needs. Consider how much extra effort it takes to load cargo into the bed when it’s 5’ up, rather than when it’s only 2’ or so off the ground. It’s just plain worse, except for making someone feel tough for some reason.
Cab-over designs also make maintenance harder. There’s no free lunch. But cab-over designs do exist in this same market segment in the US
US farms have also consolidated into larger operations during those same decades.
I mentioned a fifth wheel, so this isn’t relevant. If you don’t know what a fifth wheel is, you probably shouldn’t have strong opinions on this.
It isn’t really relevant to the conversation of if these giant trucks are required. The only argument possible for it would maybe be horsepower, but they have way more than what’s required. The horsepower to maintain 60mph is 106HP for an RV. This is probably worse than most farming equipment, especially since they usually won’t need to go even 60mph. The average car since the 1980s has been able to put out these numbers. There isn’t a need. This is assuming the people buying these trucks are actually pulling these loads, but we all know the vast majority are driving around cities never hauling anything.
Nope, that’s not how that works. To take a higher weight, the transmission needs to be beefier and the frame does, too. You might need dualie wheels, as well. Then at some point, you get into air brakes (which do generally require a CDL in the US).
As far as engines go, they may use the same ones for a large range of towing capacities. Engines are generally not the limiting factor.
So again, you’re making assumptions without actually knowing how it works.
At this level, yes, they do actually haul things.
If we were talking about the F150 and trucks like it, that’s different. Those mostly are posers. Once you get into the F250 level or higher, though, you’re mostly looking at people who use their truck for a living. You can’t even buy an F250 from Ford without a commercial contract, but there is a secondary market. That used to be more common, because you couldn’t get an F150 with a diesel, but that’s come and gone in recent years.
The Man truck posted above competes with the F350 (roughly), which are almost all commercial use in the US. Those are not parking lot queens.
The article points out that vans are closer to normal sedans.
Depends on the model. Ford Transits are probably better, but an E250 is just an F250 with a different body, and isn’t any better.