• jasondj@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    CAFE should just differentiate by unibody and body/frame.

    Make unibody have a high requirement.

    You want a truck? You can have a truck.

    And get rid of paying your way out of your mileage requirement. Or at least raise the rate astronomically.

    • rchive@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why do they have different standards, anyway? A vehicle is a vehicle, sort of, when it comes to emissions.

      • BlackVenom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure what parent is after exactly.

        Body in frame is an older way of making cars but it’s far easier/cheaper to make thos heavy duty and modular (e.g. an f250 can be a pickup, tow truck, ambulance, dump truck…)

        Unibody is more modern.

        Most people can live with a unibody truck (Maverick,Ridgeline,Colorado).

        I don’t thing there’s causation between unibody and body on frame as far as fuel consumption is concerned.

        We’d need a mechanism that incentives smaller vehicles without impacting the services relying on the heavy duty vehicles…

        A Maverick starting at like $24k and an f150 at $35k isn’t enough…

    • Javi_in_4k@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is basically what we already have. What we should do is require drivers to have a CDL to drive body on frame trucks.