Small gas-powered trucks are effectively illegal in the US.
It’s regulation made in response to automakers calling everything a “light truck” to get around fuel economy and emissions standards in the 90s and 2000s.The straw that broke the camel’s back was the PT Cruiser being classified as a truck by Chrysler.
So, starting in model year 2012, vehicle fuel economy standards started being based on vehicle footprint. The side effect was that small, powerful vehicles designed for moving cargo more efficiently or in tighter spaces than large trucks were impacted. It’s why 2011 was the last year model of the old Rangers, S10s, Dakota, etc.
That’s why the new Rangers are larger than the old F150s. They have to make them bigger to meet CAFE standards.
Same issue hit the small cargo vans in 2021/22. As the CAFE standards went up, it became impossible to meet fuel economy standards for the NV200, Ford Transit Connect, and Ram ProMaster City compact cargo vans, so they were all discontinued.
New York City was changing its whole Taxi fleet to NV200s due to their flexibility and accessibility options, and now can’t buy new ones because a Toyota Camry has less-strict fuel economy requirements.
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.
I own two mavericks, it’s a fair comparison. They only look small because of the size of today’s vehicles… in the 1980’s you’d see most of today’s lifted trucks in a monster truck rally.
Oh yes, that part is obvious. I was more curious where “twice the size” came from, especially if comparing a four-door truck to a two-door single cab which I’d argue isn’t a fair comparison. Although, they don’t make the maverick in a single cab do they?
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.
That’s why the new Rangers are larger than the old F150s.
If you’re comparing a crewcab Ranger to a 2-door F150, sure, but that’s not really a valid comparison.
Comparing equivalent configs tells a different story: every crewcab F150 is taller, longer, and wider than a new crewcab Ranger. The 10th gen and earlier (pre-2004) F150s, which are shorter than 11th gen+ F150s, are still bigger when compared to the Ranger in equivalent configurations.
People can’t seem to figure that out, to them a truck is a truck is a truck even though they’re the vehicles with the most variations in size for a same model built the same year.
Small gas-powered trucks are effectively illegal in the US.
It’s regulation made in response to automakers calling everything a “light truck” to get around fuel economy and emissions standards in the 90s and 2000s.The straw that broke the camel’s back was the PT Cruiser being classified as a truck by Chrysler.
So, starting in model year 2012, vehicle fuel economy standards started being based on vehicle footprint. The side effect was that small, powerful vehicles designed for moving cargo more efficiently or in tighter spaces than large trucks were impacted. It’s why 2011 was the last year model of the old Rangers, S10s, Dakota, etc.
That’s why the new Rangers are larger than the old F150s. They have to make them bigger to meet CAFE standards.
Same issue hit the small cargo vans in 2021/22. As the CAFE standards went up, it became impossible to meet fuel economy standards for the NV200, Ford Transit Connect, and Ram ProMaster City compact cargo vans, so they were all discontinued.
New York City was changing its whole Taxi fleet to NV200s due to their flexibility and accessibility options, and now can’t buy new ones because a Toyota Camry has less-strict fuel economy requirements.
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
I own two mavericks, it’s a fair comparison. They only look small because of the size of today’s vehicles… in the 1980’s you’d see most of today’s lifted trucks in a monster truck rally.
Oh yes, that part is obvious. I was more curious where “twice the size” came from, especially if comparing a four-door truck to a two-door single cab which I’d argue isn’t a fair comparison. Although, they don’t make the maverick in a single cab do they?
…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.
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.
If you’re comparing a crewcab Ranger to a 2-door F150, sure, but that’s not really a valid comparison.
Comparing equivalent configs tells a different story: every crewcab F150 is taller, longer, and wider than a new crewcab Ranger. The 10th gen and earlier (pre-2004) F150s, which are shorter than 11th gen+ F150s, are still bigger when compared to the Ranger in equivalent configurations.
People can’t seem to figure that out, to them a truck is a truck is a truck even though they’re the vehicles with the most variations in size for a same model built the same year.