• Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    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.

    • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      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.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        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.

        • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          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.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            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)

            • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              It absolutely is, and facts don’t get trumped by misleading facts.

              Its not even a difficult thing to understand. You’re on the internet and have an infinite number of pictures that refute your idea.

                • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  So… Your point is the 2004 ranger is smaller, and makes the 2024 ranger look bigger because it’s so much smaller?

                  Good work agreeing with me while trying to be clever but entirely misusing the idea of forced perspective.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    6 hours ago

                    No the whole point is to show how idiotic it is to use a picture to base your opinion on the dimensions of objects.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                Stop with your fucking pictures, look at specs sheets, it’s fucking numbers we’re comparing, not feelings.

                • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Sure, the spec sheet I’ll look at is a picture of a 2004 Ford ranger and a 2024 Ford ranger, one of which is twice the size of the other while having more limited visibility from the driver’s seat and headlights set above the average height of cars from the 1990s, ensuring bright ass headlights in your mirrors no matter what.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 hours ago

                    Numbers don’t lie, I even pulled the numbers to prove you wrong.

                    The biggest increase is in length, you know why? Crumple zones. Have fun getting in an accident without them.

                    “Hur durr, a regular cab short bed truck is smaller than a crew cab truck!”