If it was suited to the Scandinavian market it wouldn’t be a truck. We don’t understand why you want your stuff outside, we’re van people.
Vans are frustratingly underrated, and overlooked mostly because it just doesn’t look as cool. But to answer the question basically some stuff is better with an open cargo area, or at least one that isn’t shared with the driver/passengers.
Dirt/gravel/mulch, hay bales, killed fish/game, chainsaws/fuel jugs, chemicals, disgustingly dirty work clothes etc.
How often the average truck owner uses it for those purposes is debatable but when needed it’s nice to just toss stuff in and hose off the bed later. Trailers can do the same stuff mostly but manuvering is way better without one of course.
As usual the AI is dyslexic and can’t get the letters right.
Now I know what that parrot was pining for.
FJOR1D
Looks cute
So a regular cab maverick?
Maybe if it was 3 times as long, wide and tall. This looks like the small trucks of lore. I wish we could attain them.
The maverick is just tall. Its foot print is pretty small.
It is wider, taller and about as long as a 3/4 ton truck from 30 years ago. We have been gaslit into thinking that it is a small truck. I think removing the standard cab as an option was the final move towards the embiggining of trucks.
That’s straight up false. The 1993 F-250 had a width of 79 inches. The length of the 250 at it’s shortest was 213.3 inches.
The Maverick is 72.4 inches wide, and 199.7 inches long. It’s tall, sure, but so is everything.
I was using a 1986 c20. Also including the massive side mirrors (on both old and new). So with the mirrors (maverick is 83.5 with mirrors and the c20 is 79 with non trailer add on mirrors) it is taller, wider and almost as long. Like I said we have been gaslit to think it is small as it is small compared to every other truck being sold now. I would love to drive the size of new truck in this AI rendition.
Oh yeah, it’s nice to drive old small trucks. But my point was the maverick is smaller than you think.
