And the reason for this is that the “light truck” classification has weaker emissions standards, so they can cheap out on efficiency of the engine which means higher profit margins (and more harmful pollution for us to enjoy inhaling).
iirc, that is bc your Forester is an SUV that uses a truck chassis underneath, whereas the otherwise extremely similar Crosstrek uses the Impreza chassis so is more of a high “car”. But that could change over the years and I’m not really a car person so don’t quote me or anything!:-P
The Forester up until 2008 was quite literally an Impreza/Legacy chassis that shares identical drivetrain components except for the body. It is unibody, Macpherson strut, symmetrical AWD and as far from a truck as you can get.
Thanks for the correction. I see now, it’s a larger car chassis - so as @[email protected] said, that’s not a “truck”, light or otherwise, at all!?
I did a search and found this article suggesting that it is a historical (hehe, some might say… “legacy”, eh?:-P) naming scheme, based on fuel economy:
The U.S. government uses light-duty trucking as a vehicle class for the regulation of fuel economy by enforcing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The light-duty truck class includes pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), vans, and minivans.
Since light-duty trucks are typically used for utility purposes rather than personal use, they have lower standards for fuel economy than cars do.
Yeah I was wrong about that. I mentioned this in another reply:
The U.S. government uses light-duty trucking as a vehicle class for the regulation of fuel economy by enforcing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The light-duty truck class includes pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), vans, and minivans.
Since light-duty trucks are typically used for utility purposes rather than personal use, they have lower standards for fuel economy than cars do.
I drive a 91 Cherokee and I defend myself because I like Jeeps and cherokees are easy to work on. I would kill for an old 70s military Jeep truck though, hell id commit genocide for one of those old boxed Willy Jeeps they find in the gods forsaken deep storage of places like the Sierra Army Depot.
Rebuild one, the few that are still in the boxes are given to museums not psychotic Rednecks. On more realistic levels though I think it’d be neat to get an old willy Jeep body and convert it to electric, theyre light enough that a squad of men can pick them up so I figure they may actually lose weight without an engine depending on the battery type.
Per the legal US definition, almost every SUV is a “light truck”, including my 1999 Subaru Forester…
And the reason for this is that the “light truck” classification has weaker emissions standards, so they can cheap out on efficiency of the engine which means higher profit margins (and more harmful pollution for us to enjoy inhaling).
iirc, that is bc your Forester is an SUV that uses a truck chassis underneath, whereas the otherwise extremely similar Crosstrek uses the Impreza chassis so is more of a high “car”. But that could change over the years and I’m not really a car person so don’t quote me or anything!:-P
The Forester up until 2008 was quite literally an Impreza/Legacy chassis that shares identical drivetrain components except for the body. It is unibody, Macpherson strut, symmetrical AWD and as far from a truck as you can get.
His Forrester is built on a Legacy chassis; it’s a four door sedan with a little lift and a bigger body shell on top.
Thanks for the correction. I see now, it’s a larger car chassis - so as @[email protected] said, that’s not a “truck”, light or otherwise, at all!?
I did a search and found this article suggesting that it is a historical (hehe, some might say… “legacy”, eh?:-P) naming scheme, based on fuel economy:
nope, not a truck in any sense of the word. granted I use it like one, lol, but it is very much a light passenger car chassis.
There are plenty of SUVs with unibodies. Hell every Jeep Cherokee from 1984 on is a unibody.
Yeah I was wrong about that. I mentioned this in another reply:
From this article.
And this is why it is a scam. All of these vehicles are all used as soccer mom mobiles.
Nuh uh! Only 90% are that way… the rest are men who buy into how “sporty” they are.:-)
I did love watching a video of a tiny Subaru Crosstrek able to do as well as a tow truck - it’s not just about power, but tire traction grip.
Also people who don’t buy into the whole “truck=manly” schtick.
But definitely 90% soccer moms too ofc.:-P
I drive a 91 Cherokee and I defend myself because I like Jeeps and cherokees are easy to work on. I would kill for an old 70s military Jeep truck though, hell id commit genocide for one of those old boxed Willy Jeeps they find in the gods forsaken deep storage of places like the Sierra Army Depot.
I mean, you could probably build one… no need for the genocide at all;-P.
Rebuild one, the few that are still in the boxes are given to museums not psychotic Rednecks. On more realistic levels though I think it’d be neat to get an old willy Jeep body and convert it to electric, theyre light enough that a squad of men can pick them up so I figure they may actually lose weight without an engine depending on the battery type.
starts singing the best part of Killing In The Name
Uno Reverse!
That’s the one I should have gone with in the first place btw lol, much less unnecessarily harsh 😆
Fwiw, I did not downvote you, and enjoyed the trip down memory lane!:-P