When our own David Tracy writes his op-ed pieces each week, the goal is never to create Jerry Springer-like turmoil amongst Autopians. Of course, it’s not like an online melee is ever going to erupt; our readers and commenters have to be some of the most polite and respectful among the entire internet. I read the all-caps insults on other sites and wonder what the hell is wrong with them; our standards are such that this kind of rude behavior will return you to pre-membership or ghost comment status.
Still, David does stir up some shit, does he not?
Last week’s post defending super-luxury trucks caused a rather intense 300 comment discourse on whether or not trucks with heated seats, power adjustable steering columns and twenty speaker “premium audio” are A Bad Thing:
Some commenters agreed with David’s let-bygones-be-bygones approach to the subject. Others were rather up in arms: this is a TRUCK, dammit! They cried out that not only are fancy pants pickups silly but they’re an affront to the symbol of hard work and productivity! In their opinion, it’s the equivalent of taking an (Anglo) American icon like a Shelby Cobra, painting it brown, and putting a 5.7 liter GM diesel in it with a three-speed automatic (actually, that sounds interesting…no, it doesn’t).
However, in dissecting these comments, it turns out that many readers might have missed David’s original point, or at least used the opportunity to belabor a different but common sticking point: trucks are too big.
Indeed, it seems like most of the ultra-luxury King Ranch/Harley Davidson Special Edition type glitzy trucks are in fact of the full-sized variety. So that’s what is pushing the buttons of people? Well, now we’re onto a totally different issue. If we could disassociate the “luxury” and “big” aspects of these things, would that help? Some people seem to think so:
So maybe a smaller or compact luxury truck could be the answer? What about a cushy something that isn’t a “King Ranch” but instead is, I don’t know, a “King Good-Sized Back Yard”? I’d say let’s take it a step further and not just add bells and whistles to a small pickup: have this smaller truck be sold under a luxury brand in the same way that a Cadillac Escalade or Lincoln Navigator SUV are. This idea seems to make a lot of sense, though as always there are detractors there as well:
Look, I get what the reader is saying about the Cimarron, the barely disguised Chevrolet Cavalier that Cadillac tried to pass off as a BMW competitor forty years ago. I can understand the sentiment, but we’ve come a long way since then. Honestly, I think that approach of today might be the answer here. Let’s at least give it a try.
Trading In Your Chevy For A Cadillac-ac-ac-ac-ac
That fact is that almost the entire model lineup of brands like Infiniti and Lexus is comprised of these “leveled up” lower-tier-brand cars and SUVs. Back in 1998, Toyota took the platform that what was to become the popular Highlander and gussied it up with Alteeza taillights and dashboard trim from the same suppliers that made the wood for Yamaha violins to create the Lexus RX300; it’s been a sales success from day one.
Why do people want these dressed-up things? Do they care about a badge and a fancier interior compared to just getting a fully loaded version of the Toyota car this Lexus is based on? Yes, they do, and honestly there’s nothing wrong with that at all. If you enjoy the extra niceties, slightly better refinement, and the posh nametag, there’s no reason to feel embarrassed that this makes you feel somehow more special than if you were driving something of a more working-class brand. Cars are just steel, plastic, and rubber, and the way they play with buyers’ emotions has little to do with the shared floorpans or the greasy bits underneath.
There’s another advantage to these up-branded things besides vestigial prestige if you’re buying a new or relatively late model example – the dealership. David recently wrote about his Lexus service experience and I certainly concur with his findings. He mentioned that people actually enjoyed going to the dealer, which is something that sadly many owners of more affordable branded cars cannot say. A friend of mine took his Toyota in for an oil change, and the dealer never checked records and replaced the timing belt on his car when they had already done that work only about seven thousand miles earlier. This is the same Toyota dealer that many years ago “lost” our Celica for nearly an hour when we went to pick it up after service; suffice it to say they didn’t make breakfast for us while we waited as they might do at a Lexus dealership. I’m not singling these guys out, since I’ve personally experienced that same thing when getting work done at a Ford dealership versus a Lincoln-Mercury store (yes, that’s what it was called then since I’m old – it’s not like I’m talking about a Packard franchise, geez). You’ll pay dearly for such a level of treatment but it’s a price many customers are willing to shell out the money.
What would be the best thing to use as a basis for a small luxury truck? On Slack, we discussed this and the answer seemed to be pretty obvious. With 94,000 units in sales last year, the compact Ford Maverick pickup is the best-selling hybrid pickup on the market, and sales were up 98 percent in the month of January. It’s an unqualified smash.
The Maverick is based on the Ford Escape and Bronco Sport, an SUV that Lincoln offers a luxury version of as the Corsair. Could it be as easy as making a pickup version of Lincoln’s small dressed-up ute?
Think Blackwood But Smaller And Not Stupid
Lincolnizing the Maverick is so simple that you wonder why nobody has done it yet (or there isn’t something like a Genesis Santa Cruz). Here’s the Lincoln Sceptre concept (like Interceptor, the famous Panther body police car) below the light grey Ford Maverick; at the bottom is the Lincoln Corsair on which the Sceptre is based so you can see where the wheelbase, length, and rear overhang were added.
The biggest challenge with the conversion seems to be the back of the cab. The Maverick chops the back straight like an F-150 but to follow the Lincoln brand language I don’t see that as an answer. However, we don’t want a sloping backlight to kill the bed space. The solution is to incorporate “sail” panels as on an old El Camino (or the Santa Cruz) to carry the line down but keep an upright rear window. This will give us all of the space you’d find in the lower market Maverick (I did change the grille slightly to give a different identity from the Corsair.
Since the Sceptre is a luxury truck, I don’t see nattily-clad people folding down the tailgate to put items in the bed, which would typically be enclosed by the rollaway cover on top. It’s a pain to reach into the truck bed with the folded tailgate blocking your reach. To solve this, I’d like to bring back the old Ford gadget of the two-way “magic” tailgate that can open sideways like a door or down like a traditional gate. This gives you the flexibility of doing either Real Truck Things or Luxury Car Tasks. You can roll back the cargo cover, fold the tailgate down for a football parking lot party, or add an extender “cage” to the opened tailgate to increase your cargo space and carry even more bags of mulch and topsoil. After that, you can hose out the bed, let it dry, close the cargo cover and then open the tailgate like a regular door and put in your bags from Whole Foods and the Lululemon store as if it were a car trunk.
No Survival Of The Thickest
Regardless of your thoughts, it seems like fancy pickup are here to stay. On Slack, some of the staff equated these giant gilded work machines as the modern equivalent of seventies personal luxury coupes with two painfully long doors; vehicles with a style that people have latched on to regardless of the fact that they don’t make practical sense for daily use. Like the dinosaurs, they eventually die out. Ah, but what happened in the eighties? Those Chevy Monte Carlos and Pontiac Grand Prix transmogrified into smaller, sportier coupes like the Honda Prelude, Toyota Celica, Chevy Beretta and Mitsubishi Eclipse that flourished on the market.
If the little Maverick is finding a market niche, it’s only a matter of time before that market moves to small trucks for the higher rent districts. Many of us are ready for these products that won’t blind you with their headlamps at night and take up two spaces in the Walgreens parking lot. We’ll need to find something else to hate.
A Pickup That Turns Into An SUV Via Your Phone: Our Daydreaming Designer Imagines How – The Autopian
Today’s wages/salaries and prices of things means fewer people can afford multiple vehicles. If you’re going to buy one, you want it to do everything and more. That’s a (4 door) pickup for anything you’d ever need. May as well make it a nice place to be if it’s your work vehicle, family hauler, long distance cruiser, etc.
Utility is the ultimate luxury
I think there is a disagreement on whether size translates to luxury. Or if pretty bits and useless options are equated to luxury.
Frankly luxury has been equated to size but apportionment and options need included. Now manufacturers put in useless electronics and say luxury. Sorry Tesla build quality, leather and wood everywhere is luxury a teenage boys gaming chair and piss poor build isn’t luxury.
A pickup can be luxury but only up to a point. Open air isn’t always luxury. Compare interior to a RR. High quality materials smooth ride, which on a pickup get worse with size unless carrying a load. An empty pickup gets more terrible as it grows. But a SUV with more weight a great interior and smooth ride is more luxurious. Frankly big pickup truck claiming luxury is just a pickup with cheap Pepboys glue on cheap aftermarket accessories.
“Think blackwood but not Stupid” That’s how we got the Lincoln Mark LT
I’d still hold out for a Lincoln SubContinental, but this’ll do just fine.
No notes. When can we start production?
It doesn’t suck as much, it’s still absurd, but less so. Well done Bishop
That would do some numbers
I think the Maverick sells because (among many reasons) it still looks like a truck— boxy, squared off, somewhat masculine. I see Mavericks everywhere. The Santa Fe is similar but I see far fewer of them, probably because it looks like a car. Same problem with the Ridgeline. I’d be more interested in a small Lincoln pickup styled to look like its Navigator big brother, and I suspect the people buying them would be too.
I think I see less Santa Cruz’s because the price they are asking for them, and no hybrid option which is half the point of a small truck / was a big mistake not offering that initially
I have a Ridgeline that I use for my carpentry work and for mountain biking. It “dogs well” also. I have it in the medium luxury trim with leather seats but I’d gladly trade it for the Sport trim which has cloth seats (prefer) EXCEPT that level, for some reason, does not have adjustable lumbar support. The no heated seats isn’t a deal killer but the lumbar support is however. So less luxury please… just support my aging lower back! I won’t give up the trunk or two way tailgate and I wouldn’t mind it being a bit smaller but the Santa Cruz has a “bed” that can only fit one mountain bike and does so at an angle.
I’d happily have cloth seats, slightly smaller and, oh, PHEV. Probably won’t happen though so this is the best choice for me. And the unibody makes it super comfy to drive.
No split tailgate? No velvet lined cargo bay with chrome strips on the floor? No oh so gauche state of the art LED strip bed lighting? Lastly, no faux stripes down the bed sides sadly emulating wood panel seams? 4 no’s in a row, not a worthy Blackwood, I’m out.
Before reading any of the comments, I want to say that the point is that these trucks have inherited the luxury family cruiser segment. For a bit we had the Escalade. Back in the days of my youth we had a Caddy and the other luxury brands of the various builders. So now it’s trucks. I wish we had gone through the phase that parts of Asia did: luxury minivans. Such a lost opportunity. The idea of a luxury Maverick totally makes sense.
Luxury minivans is the ultimate luxury! In a rational world they would own the upscale market
Agreed. Minivan is the ultimate platform for luxury.
Bring me my Toyota Alphard!
TOYOTA GIVE US THE HIACE!
A small standard cab electric truck is what I really want. The Alpha Motors Wolf is the only EV design I really like. https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/632ba5afb90a1b5a4c718309/45603b02-d443-459e-91f4-208a66899b4e/WOLF+Sideview.jpg?format=500w But,stay far far away and don’t give them any money. I hear they are pretty much a scam right now.
“A small standard cab electric truck is what I really want.” I hear you buddy, but I hate to say, in today’s market, that is NEVER going to happen.
We aren’t that far off. Monsters like the Hummer EV and Cyber Truck, and even the Ford lightning are going to go by the wayside. Weight is a major factor for EV’s. Smaller batteries and lighter more efficient vehicles are going to dominate the market. So I feel we are going to see a few. It’s something the OEM’s need to figure out before they all go broke.
They’re going by the wayside because manufacturers are intentionally hobbling them (except the Cybertruck but that’s a whole other issue).
Automakers do not want to make these vehicles, full stop. They will run every play to kill demand to show as proof that the American public doesn’t want them.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind people that the current generation Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon are just as big as the current generation Silverado and Sierra. There is no difference in size because they use the same frame.
And also that the current generation of “full size” trucks are even larger than their predecessors from the ’90s (anywhere from 3″ to 7″ wider, anywhere from 5″ to a full foot taller).
Seemingly people not only don’t mind the big bastards, they actively crave them. And I say those people are wrong.
Everything in this post is inaccurate.
The Colorado is 20-30″ shorter than a Silverado, crew cab to crew cab. It is also 6″ narrower.
There’s also no truck in the world that has gained a foot in height (obviously comparing 2wd to 2wd and 4wd to 4wd) or 7″ in width unless you’re comparing to special editions like Raptors and the like. Full size trucks have been approximately 80″ wide and 75″ tall for decades.
Trucks have been styled to look larger than they are since the 1994 Ram, 4wd and crew cabs are more popular than before, and tires are larger to clear larger brakes for safety. That’s basically it.
Yes, actually. The Colorado is as big as the Silverado. The main reason why the cab is narrower is simply because they cut out a huge chunk in the center (necessitating they make a taller cab), but the fenders and a bunch of other parts have about the same dimensions. The 2WD Colorado’s actually taller than the 2WD Silverado at 78″ for the Colorado versus 73″ for the Silverado and has a longer cab length!
And as for height, yes, the trucks have gotten taller. The 1991-1996 Ford F-150 in single cab extended bed XLT 4×4 configuration was 73.7″ in height. The current F-150 XLT 4×4 extended cab extended bed is 77.2″ high. Ford’s been the most reserved in this. The ’89 to ’98 C/K trucks in the same configuration were 70.4″ in height, and they’re now at their lowest 75.5″ and at their tallest 77.66″. Dodge/RAM though? Oh boy. 77″ for the base RAM 2WD 1500, 80.9″ or 81″ depending on sources for the 4×4 Laramie version. The ’92 Dodge Ram 1500? 71″ for the 2WD variant, 75.9″ for the 4×4 version. Not quite a foot taller for trucks, I will admit I got that wrong, but six to eight inches in growth is still no bueno.
1999 Ranger: 69″ wide, 64″-68″ tall, up to 203″ long.
2024 Ranger: 75.5″-79.8″ wide, 73.9″-75.9″ tall, 210″ long.
4×2 to 4×2, we’re looking at 10″ taller, 6.5″ wider, 7″ longer. Mid-size pickups are larger than they used to be.
He said full size, so I limited my comments to that.
I was going off of the mention of the Colorado. I maintain that the biggest contributor to pickup size bloat is the increased size of the smaller pickups. Even the compact Maverick is larger than the old Ranger. 73″ wide, 69″ tall, and 200″ long (not quite as long as the longest Ranger, but the height and width are notably larger).
As for the styling differences in full-size pickups, the higher hoods, beltlines, and bed heights mean lower visibility, more damage in collisions with pedestrians or smaller vehicles, and a larger pickup overall, even if the cab height and width haven’t changed that much.
The old ranger was a compact truck and newer one is a midsize truck, but like V10omous said, overall, the comparable configuration, full-size trucks, if not changed size that much. They are still within a couple inches of each other since the 70s.
But the “comparable configuration” isn’t all there is to pickups (nor is maximum height/width the whole story of overall size–if the engine bay is larger, the bedsides higher, etc, you can have a pickup that is larger in total volume without an increase in any maximum measurement). The disappearance of the compact pickup and its replacement by the midsize changed the overall size range of pickups by a lot, since people who wanted smaller pickups ended up getting mid-size. And the reintroduction of the compact (Maverick, maybe Santa Cruz), larger than the previous compacts, isn’t really bringing us back to the previous pickup landscape.
Even accepting that the full size pickup is only slightly larger, the average size of a pickup has increased a lot due to the loss of small pickups.
That’s a good way to look at it. Good call, definitely don’t have nearly all the S-10s and rangers, hardbody’s like we used to.
Huh? I’m not gonna pull out numbers, but I literally saw a Colorado next to a GMT400 extended cab Silverado today and the Colorado was visibly wider, taller, and longer (to be fair, it was a 4-door Colorado). I had to do a double take as I thought ‘there’s no way that’s a Colorado’, lo and behold it was the brand new model.
The new Colorado is a few inches taller, mostly due to larger tires, but it is not longer or wider than a GMT400.
True, but we’re getting to be on the order of a couple inches here and there. 75″ vs 77″ width, 218″ (ext cab) vs 213″ length. In terms of road presence in person a ‘midsize’ absolutely dwarves any standard cab ‘fullsize’ from the ’80s or ’90s thanks to the taller ride height you mention.
Sorry, just had to see it with a blacked out C-pillar…
https://app.gemoo.com/share/image-annotation/623416219072475136?codeId=DWarLw7kKxnjm
Take my money
Part of the reason luxury trucks sell is that they are heavy enough to qualify for the tax breaks for buying work trucks. A smaller truck won’t be heavy enough.
Not everyone buying a fancy boss truck is a business owner, but enough are, and then other people buy them to play boss too.
That work truck loophole needs to go. At least remove the stupid weight provision.
>the goal is never to create Jerry Springer-like turmoil amongst Autopians
Our lie detector determined that was a lie.
(Yes I know that was Maury, still funny to me)
“Now let’s see the results of the DNA testing.”
The problem with these big trucks is that they keep getting bigger in terms of length/width, their bed sizes haven’t increased at all! Sure their load carrying capabilities have grown, but is it really necessary to own a vehicle so large that half of it sticks out of parking spaces? Not to mention the fact that every gen of trucks has a higher and higher hood/belt/roofline, but when you look at where the engine is, there’s a good 2-3ft between engine cover and hood. Making trucks bigger and bigger is the equivalent of stuffing a sock down your pants. It’s all there for showing off, but internally it’s the same as a truck from 30 years ago.
Oh not to mention the amount of pickup trucks that never see more than a day of work in a year. That’s not a made up claim. These are actual facts. Oh and also fewer than half of truck owners even tow, all while taking up precious space in our environments whether it’s the local shops or when they’re afraid of public transit and end up street parking their F250 in the middle of a city. While I can’t say anything that could jeopardize my job, I will say that the teams I’ve worked with to make mid-size trucks similar to a Ridgeline were delightful to be with, the toxicity only went up as trucks got bigger. I’ve heard from friends the Raptor and TRX program were great to work on, because being badass was the only goal of program. Pedestrian safety or environmental impact weren’t KPIs and the only safety was for passengers. I’m just going to stop myself here because the words would never stop.
https://www.motorbiscuit.com/63-of-ford-f-150-owners-almost-never-tow-anything/
https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume#:~:text=According%20to%20Edwards%E2%80%99%20data%2C%2075,once%20a%20year%20or%20less.
You can even see when SUVs and trucks started getting bloated base on the infrastructure we live around. Newer banks/parking garages tend to have controls that are placed high off the ground, while an ATM that’s been around for 15 years will have controls at the eye level of a sedan. Same for parking spaces as well. The newer the parking lot, the wider the space.
I think the reason large luxury trucks stir up so much animus around here is that a large percentage of us are functional optimizers of the engineer type. (Besides the personal annoyance as mentioned of blinding headlights and danger to others, especially pedestrians.)
When we look at vehicles, or at least when I do, I’m looking at the Pareto frontier. The place in your trade space where you have to make something worse to make something else better. Automobiles have a pretty big trade space, so there are a lot of options at the Pareto frontier. Large luxury trucks are still on the Pareto frontier, but they have prioritized some type of “image” optimization for users over many of the other traditional engineering considerations.
They are still quite good in those other areas, but if “image” were less emphasized, they could be better. And as “image” is not necessarily a functional characteristic, it bugs the hell out of a functional optimizer. Because let’s face it, that’s why we don’t feel the same irritation with cars that focus on even comfort to the detriment of other elements, since comfort is still functional.
This is an excellent take.
Right tool for the job…
This is why I find myself rooting.for the Telo 4 door ev truck / van to succeed. It is similar to the Mavrick but at least now (admittedly very much in prototype stage) highly functional with an incredibly short overall footprint (same as.a. modern mini cooper) and yet can seat 5 people and has I think normally a 5 ft. Bed.
When seating 2 people, it has an 8 foot bed (drop down midgate.ala Chevy avalanche)
Neat Idea, and design. I disagree with the premise though. The reason big luxury trucks are hot is because they are big trucks, that are luxury. Granted that I think the public would like them more if they were smaller. The Maverick would be an interesting case study because I don’t think people are loving them as trucks first, they love them because they are affordable family/utility vehicles so I don’t know if going premium would necessarily work.
All I need is a ute that can carry a 4×8 sheet of plywood.
Yeah, I think this is a good counter to The Bishop’s premise. Pragmatic people who are shopping for what they need are likely to buy the existing Maverick – an efficient ute that can carry a 4×8 sheet of plywood. Most people who shop for a status symbol (and a big luxury truck is a status symbol) seem unlikely to buy something small.
This may sum up some of our resentment towards drivers of big luxury trucks. We don’t understand buying a status symbol and we resent people who seem to waste both their own resources (money and gas money) and shared resources (road maintenance and our someday-limited oil supply) on a status symbol.
I would greatly prefer plopping plywood or Sheetrock down onto a car-height bed than up onto a giant truck bed.
Yeah, I want an El Camino with an 8 foot bed.
could I interest you with a LWB Holden VS Commodore Ute?
Roofrack?
I think an Acura branded Honda Ridgeline would sell nicely. The Ridgeline and the MDX are very common so a fancy one makes sense. The Lincoln branded Maverick may be a harder sell. First Lincoln has some brand issues and a history of poor selling pickups. Second, the Maverick is an economy platform so even starting with a Corsair base it may need more work to be premium. The styling looks good but there must be steak behind the sizzle, not ground chuck.
A Ridgeline/Taco sized truck is the only truck people need for their life. Anything bigger is just unnecessary but regulations say otherwise.
Imagine not only thinking you know what other people need, but actually being completely wrong about it too.
So what else would people do with a pickup truck if they only use it for commuting? 35 percent of truck owners use their truck for hauling—putting something in the bed, its ostensible raison d’être—once a year or less.
https://www.motorbiscuit.com/63-of-ford-f-150-owners-almost-never-tow-anything/
https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume
96% of HD owners tow, including me. I’m sure all of them could manage just fine with a Ridgeline. /s
https://corporate.ford.com/articles/products/super-duty-truck-of-the-year.html#:~:text=Approximately%2096%25%20of%20heavy%2Dduty,500%20horsepower%20and%201%2C200%20lb.
Notice how Ford didn’t have any sources to cite and how selective they were with the wording. Sure 96% of them tow, but how many times during the vehicles lifecycle? Just using it once to tow a little tikes car would qualify as “towing”.
Where is your source for “A Ridgeline/Taco sized truck is the only truck people need for their life. Anything bigger is just unnecessary”?
A Ridgeline can tow 5000 lb, a Tacoma maxes at 6500 lb. I guess in your world, no one has ever or will ever tow more than that.
I tow more than 6500 lb multiple times a year, every year.
Congrats on towing, however there still aren’t any sources that say a majority of truck owners use their truck for towing more than once a year.
Depends what they need to tow. I towed all my worldly posessions from CT to San Diego in a trailer, pulled by a 1990 Cutlass Ciera.
The 24 Ridgeline Black Edition is pretty neato, better stereo head unit, lcd gauges, finally heated/cooled front seats, heated steering wheel, etc, it’s not quite Acura level luxury but not far behind in my view…
one nit, all the 2nd gen Black Editions have heated steering wheels standard. The Canadian versions get rainsensing wipers. (have a ’19)
I have been wondering for a few years now why Ford hasn’t re-tried the Lincoln truck thing. Trucks are selling better than ever, people are plonking more money on them than ever, and if, like most people, you’re an F-Series person, you don’t have a GMC ‘equivalent’. Obviously they make expensive-ass F150s, but just being a Lincoln over your neighbors Ford would sell quite a few at a higher margin.
Also, Lincoln has been absolutely killing it lately (and I’m assuming selling a lot better than the last 20 years), so it just confuses me. I really thought they’d have done it during the current gens life cycle. And an AviRanger, too (actually that name kinda slaps in the worst way).
IMO, there’s a ‘reverse halo’ effect with pick ups. People that buy them want to appear as though they’re rugged or blue collar. Even when they drop close to six figures on a ‘Cowboy Cadillac’, they don’t want to lose that association with the $28k vinyl seat work truck. As much as truck owners might take pride in their western-themed luxury trim badge, having a true luxury marque on the grill would torpedo that image and ruin any plausible deniability the owner has at being anything other than a good ol’ working man.
GMC works because there’s a strong association with commercial vehicles. Even if a GMC is seen as being more prestigious (and worth a few grand more) than a Chevy, it’s still not a true luxury brand.
They did two Lincoln trucks (not just the Blackwood) and they both bombed.