A Maverick is a light truck in much the same way a 737 is a small plane. Sure there are bigger ones, but it’s a 4 door truck with a 4 foot bed that’s high enough to make loading and unloading harder than it needs to be. It’s twice the weight and almost twice the size of a 70s/80s Toyota Pickup, which is a light truck.
A Nissan Hardbody is one of the small trucks people keep complaining aren’t made anymore.
Dimensions of the 4 doors variant: length 5.1m, width 1.8m, height 1.7m
Maverick dimensions (biggest model just to prove the point): length 5.1m, width 1.84m, height 1.76m
It’s the same thing with all trucks, compared to the equivalent model (i.e. not comparing a 2 doors with a crew cab like the anti truck crowd loves to do) modern trucks look much bigger but it’s a design and height thing more than anything, their length and width hasn’t increased that much, especially if you compare with cars of the same model over the same period (1985 Civic sedan vs 2025 Civic sedan for example).
I’m saying the difference isn’t a big as what some people pretend when you’re comparing the same versions.
Short box regular cab vs long box crew cab, that’s what people usually use as a comparison to prove their point even though it makes no sense to do so.
It does make sense, as regular cabs cannot be bought on new trucks. All of them are crew cabs, decreasing their utility and increasing their weight and size.
As far as the general argument. Look at the headlight and start height of a Ford ranger in 2002 vs today.
The problem is you’re arguing against what people have actually experienced, and in cases where they’re in an area with persevered older vehicles on the road, can directly see.
Rangers are now the size of old f150s, f150s are now larger than older f350s. Trucks are just bigger, period. All newer vehicles are just bigger and bulkier than older (90s-00s) vehicles.
Its a massive safety issue, it’s been studied in actual scientific journals, it is a fact you can’t really deny at this point and it’s weird you’re trying to.
That’s not accurate. “Light Truck” also includes a crew cab F150 with an extended bed that requires a Sherpa to enter. The Maverick and an F150 have the same standards, but weighted based on vehicle footprint.
But the Maverick standard model is a hybrid, so it meets CAFE standards.
What are the Maverick and Santa Cruz classified as? I think they fit the small or light truck category, if they are categorized as trucks at all.
A Maverick is a light truck in much the same way a 737 is a small plane. Sure there are bigger ones, but it’s a 4 door truck with a 4 foot bed that’s high enough to make loading and unloading harder than it needs to be. It’s twice the weight and almost twice the size of a 70s/80s Toyota Pickup, which is a light truck.
Twice the size how? Like, crew cab versus single cab? Not sure that’s a fair comparison
…park a maverick next to a nineties ranger; the difference is ridiculous…
A Nissan Hardbody is one of the small trucks people keep complaining aren’t made anymore.
Dimensions of the 4 doors variant: length 5.1m, width 1.8m, height 1.7m
Maverick dimensions (biggest model just to prove the point): length 5.1m, width 1.84m, height 1.76m
It’s the same thing with all trucks, compared to the equivalent model (i.e. not comparing a 2 doors with a crew cab like the anti truck crowd loves to do) modern trucks look much bigger but it’s a design and height thing more than anything, their length and width hasn’t increased that much, especially if you compare with cars of the same model over the same period (1985 Civic sedan vs 2025 Civic sedan for example).
If you think a 2nd and 8th gen Toyota Hilux are the same dimensions it might be time to visit an optometrist.
I’m saying the difference isn’t a big as what some people pretend when you’re comparing the same versions.
Short box regular cab vs long box crew cab, that’s what people usually use as a comparison to prove their point even though it makes no sense to do so.
It does make sense, as regular cabs cannot be bought on new trucks. All of them are crew cabs, decreasing their utility and increasing their weight and size.
As far as the general argument. Look at the headlight and start height of a Ford ranger in 2002 vs today.
Nope, doesn’t make sense at that’s like saying cars got bigger because the Jetta is bigger than the Golf.
As far as headlight height is concerned, again, design difference, total height isn’t that different.
The problem is you’re arguing against what people have actually experienced, and in cases where they’re in an area with persevered older vehicles on the road, can directly see.
Rangers are now the size of old f150s, f150s are now larger than older f350s. Trucks are just bigger, period. All newer vehicles are just bigger and bulkier than older (90s-00s) vehicles.
Its a massive safety issue, it’s been studied in actual scientific journals, it is a fact you can’t really deny at this point and it’s weird you’re trying to.
Again, if you look at the actual specs and compare the same types of trucks, no, they’re not that much bigger. Feelings don’t trump facts.
Their hood might be higher, the box encompassing the vehicle isn’t that much bigger than it was back in the day.
Third gen ranger (the one everyone seems the be missing so damn much) dimensions: Length 188 to 203", width 70", height 69"
Current gen ranger: length 211" (+8 vs comparable model), width 75" (+5"), height 73 to 76" (+4" to 7")
Tenth gen F150: length 202 to 239" (+11" for model comparable to current Ranger), width 80" (+5), height 73 to 75" (about the same)
Hybrids meet CAFE.
But their towing and carrying capacity versus the old Rangers and S-10s is pitiful.
Light trucks, which means less CAFE regulation. Same classification as crossovers (why crossovers are so popular).
That’s not accurate. “Light Truck” also includes a crew cab F150 with an extended bed that requires a Sherpa to enter. The Maverick and an F150 have the same standards, but weighted based on vehicle footprint.
But the Maverick standard model is a hybrid, so it meets CAFE standards.