Results 1 to 60 of 60

Thread: Legality of Lifted Trucks

  1. #1
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default Legality of Lifted Trucks

    What's the legality on all the lifted trucks you see in Alberta? As far as I'm concerned, the majority of them are not street legal, but law enforcement doesn't seem to care. It's pretty obvious to see why they are illegal. Take a look when you drive up to one at a light. Visualize where the bumper (likely an aftermarket steel one) is relative to your side impact beams in your doors. The bumper is usually above the door and at glass height. Then imagine what would happen if you were t-boned by this at an intersection. Hint, that would be a closed-casket funeral.

    I wasn't sure on the legality, but after doing some research, it's clear as day:

    " A person shall not install or alter a bumper on a passenger car
    unless the design of the bumper is equivalent to, and the bumper is
    mounted in substantially the same manner as, the bumper installed
    by the manufacturer of the passenger car. "
    And
    " A person shall not alter a passenger car in such a way that the
    main structural component of a bumper is more than 500
    millimetres or less than 400 millimetres above ground level
    when
    the passenger car is not loaded. "

    Anyone know what the fine is? Anyone ever heard of someone being pulled over or fined for this?

  2. #2
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Pulled from here
    http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/regs/2009_122.pdf
    Province of Alberta
    TRAFFIC SAFETY ACT
    VEHICLE EQUIPMENT REGULATION

  3. #3

    Default

    Ive heard of people getting tickets for not having a bumper. never for a lifted truck tho. (some of the mud bogger type vehicles out there have a bumper hidden under the vehicle. i had a lifted Firebird growing up that was on a blazer frame. the bumper was "under" where the cars bumper was. )

  4. #4

    Default

    Wow, good post and question. So many of these vehicles out there. Lawless Alberta as it were.

    I'd be interested as well in how many of these get into accidents and what the results of those are.

    Its very interesting that something so evident is so common on todays roads and highways.

    It would appear as well that for some reason the seriousness of these illegal vehicles is not properly recognized or at least I assume that due to the non enforcement of it.
    Last edited by Replacement; 15-08-2014 at 01:26 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  5. #5
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Something's wrong when you can't import a stock, late model car from the US because it doens't have a 5mph bumper rating, but you can lift your truck 8", put on a steel bumper and turn it in to a battering ram.

  6. #6
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,808

    Default

    I am in a lowered small convertible vehicle, their bumpers are actually above me sometimes.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  7. #7
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    I don't care if they're lifted. As long as a proper, engineered bumper is at the right height, so it can, you know, 'bump' other vehicles.
    Every vehicle is designed with the assumption that other vehicles have a bumper within a certain height. Side impact beams are a perfect example.
    Side curtain airbags and your A, B, C pillars aren't going to do squat against those trucks.

  8. #8
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,387

    Default

    I doubt EPS and the RCMP care much unless the driver's are speeding and then they are "dangerous".

    The police must think the following are not dangerous; talking and texting on your cell phone, too high bumpers, improper merging because there is little to no enforcement.

  9. #9

    Default

    The law states "passenger car" and AFAIK it does not apply to trucks and vans.

    Years ago my friend and I got pulled over in his '77 Chevrolet El Camino and the officer was ready to write him up for an illegal bumper height until my friend pointed out the vehicle ID plate shows it is listed as a truck and the registration also said truck. The officer was miffed and gave him a ticket after walking around his car to find the front signal light was burnt out. He had to find something...

    What really scares me are the high bumpers on cement trucks and also the knife edged tilt decks on car recovery trucks (or whatever you call them). Some have swing down bumpers, most do not.

    Trucks are exempt because many need to have high bumpers but I think there should only be exceptions for special purposes.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  10. #10
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The law states "passenger car" and AFAIK it does not apply to trucks and vans.

    Trucks are exempt because many need to have high bumpers but I think there should only be exceptions for special purposes.
    Most buses and semis will have bumpers front and back in the correct range. I would feel safer getting tboned by a bus than a lifted truck.

    The fact that it only applies to passenger cars is silly. It should apply to all vehicles.

  11. #11
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,387

    Default

    Trucks aren't exempt that is why they have the rear impact guard (or in other areas underride guard)...
    http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/r...22.pdf#page=50

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sundance View Post
    Trucks aren't exempt that is why they have the rear impact guard (or in other areas underride guard)...
    http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/r...22.pdf#page=50
    Actually sundance...as I read the link provided it refers specifically to over 4356kg and most of the references are to semi trailers and similar.

    A good example is pickup trucks...unless ordered...they come with no rear bumper at all.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  13. #13
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,387

    Default

    Okay under Alberta Law "passenger car" means ...
    (n) “passenger car” means a passenger car as defined in the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada);
    www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/regs/2009_122.pdf#page=8
    Under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act ...
    “passenger car” means a vehicle having a designated seating capacity of 10 or less, but does not include an all-terrain vehicle, a competition vehicle, a low-speed vehicle, a multi-purpose passenger vehicle, an antique reproduction vehicle, a motorcycle, a truck, a trailer, a vehicle imported temporarily for special purposes or a three-wheeled vehicle; (voiture de tourisme)
    ...
    “truck” means a vehicle designed primarily for the transportation of property or special-purpose equipment, but does not include a competition vehicle, a crawler-mounted vehicle, a three-wheeled vehicle, a trailer, a work vehicle, a vehicle imported temporarily for special purposes, a vehicle designed for operation exclusively off-road or a low-speed vehicle; (camion)
    http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/r...age-1.html#h-2
    As truck has a specific meaning a pickup truck only qualifies ... IF you use for the purposes noted above otherwise it is considered a car. (Man I love legalese ... NOT!). So in the end you either need a bumper within a certain distance or a rear impact guard or it has to fit the definition of truck.
    Last edited by sundance; 15-08-2014 at 04:00 PM.

  14. #14

    Default

    AFAIK any pickup truck is legally a passenger car, and to be sold in Canada every vehicle has a min/max bumper height, so that every vehicle is designed to connect at approximately the same height in a collision. This is so engineers can design the vehicles with some amount of consistency of impact in mind.

    I'm absolutely 100% confident that all those vehicles with aftermarket lift kits higher than the front end of my SUV are completely illegal, and it's an enforcement issue.

    I don't understand why it isn't enforced. Simply set up a checkstop on QE2 and sit there with a metrestick. Bam. Infractions all around.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sundance View Post
    Okay under Alberta Law "passenger car" means ...
    (n) “passenger car” means a passenger car as defined in the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada);
    www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/regs/2009_122.pdf#page=8
    Under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act ...
    “passenger car” means a vehicle having a designated seating capacity of 10 or less, but does not include an all-terrain vehicle, a competition vehicle, a low-speed vehicle, a multi-purpose passenger vehicle, an antique reproduction vehicle, a motorcycle, a truck, a trailer, a vehicle imported temporarily for special purposes or a three-wheeled vehicle; (voiture de tourisme)
    ...
    “truck” means a vehicle designed primarily for the transportation of property or special-purpose equipment, but does not include a competition vehicle, a crawler-mounted vehicle, a three-wheeled vehicle, a trailer, a work vehicle, a vehicle imported temporarily for special purposes, a vehicle designed for operation exclusively off-road or a low-speed vehicle; (camion)
    http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/r...age-1.html#h-2
    As truck has a specific meaning a pickup truck only qualifies ... IF you use for the purposes noted above otherwise it is considered a car. (Man I love legalese ... NOT!). So in the end you either need a bumper within a certain distance or a rear impact guard or it has to fit the definition of truck.
    Not meaning to be a pain in the **** but you missed
    a multi-purpose passenger vehicle
    Which most trucks would fit...and like you I hate legalease.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  16. #16

    Default

    ( start a revot quill you haha

  17. #17

    Default

    There is also a law that the mud flap has to be at or below the center of the wheel (the axle) of the vehicle.

  18. #18

    Default

    The amusing part of this is I don't like lifted trucks...

    Much prefer small low cars...but

    There are many good ligit reasons for raised pick up trucks and SUVs other than thinking you look cool.

    And yes I have a nice little 2WD 1/2 ton for when I need a truck to haul stuff, but its an antique and I wouldn't do anything to it that would take away from it's originality.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turtle View Post
    There is also a law that the mud flap has to be at or below the center of the wheel (the axle) of the vehicle.
    Which should be enforced

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  20. #20
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    135

    Default

    I really am surprised there isn't a mandatory inspection program here. (I know there is for out of province and salvage).

  21. #21

    Default

    What really annoys me about some trucks is when they purposely roll coal just to blow smoke at others.

  22. #22
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,542

    Default

    How about the tyres that stick out beyond the fenders.
    Another issue is the sight lines when they are jacked up so high they cannot see pedestrians on the right side.
    Last edited by Glenco; 16-08-2014 at 12:26 AM. Reason: Changed left to right. Thought I was still in UK
    “Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity,”-Marshall McLuhan

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    How about the tyres that stick out beyond the fenders.
    Another issue is the sight lines when they are jacked up so high they cannot see pedestrians on the left side.
    Like they care.

    The entire attitude these drivers have is I own the road and get the hell outta the way or I'll run over you.

    Its not only that these vehicles are jacked up and hazardous they are driven in intimidating fashion. Anybody with a jacked up ride like that isn't busy being a defensive driver out there.

    But hey this is Alberta where anybody that spends significant coin on such toys is afforded free reign while enforcement isn't even thought of. The whole attitude here seems to be if you don't like being out on the road with these oversized battering rams you should buy one to even the score...
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  24. #24
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    The amusing part of this is I don't like lifted trucks...

    Much prefer small low cars...but

    There are many good ligit reasons for raised pick up trucks and SUVs other than thinking you look cool.

    And yes I have a nice little 2WD 1/2 ton for when I need a truck to haul stuff, but its an antique and I wouldn't do anything to it that would take away from it's originality.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Many good reasons? Only thing I can think of is extreme off-roading, and most of the lifted trucks out there have never been anywhere near an unmaintained logging road. Even then there is a compromise between the increased clearance and making the truck less stable to rollover because of the raised center of gravity.
    Regardless, lifted vehicles should not be permitted to be driven on the highway. Either use a hydraulic lift and lower it when not off-roading, or take the truck to your favorite mud bog on a trailer.

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    The amusing part of this is I don't like lifted trucks...

    Much prefer small low cars...but

    There are many good ligit reasons for raised pick up trucks and SUVs other than thinking you look cool.

    And yes I have a nice little 2WD 1/2 ton for when I need a truck to haul stuff, but its an antique and I wouldn't do anything to it that would take away from it's originality.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Many good reasons? Only thing I can think of is extreme off-roading, and most of the lifted trucks out there have never been anywhere near an unmaintained logging road. Even then there is a compromise between the increased clearance and making the truck less stable to rollover because of the raised center of gravity.
    Regardless, lifted vehicles should not be permitted to be driven on the highway. Either use a hydraulic lift and lower it when not off-roading, or take the truck to your favorite mud bog on a trailer.
    Awfully narrow view being shown on this thread and like I said I am not a fan of lifted trucks and personally have no reason to own one..that said.

    Of the reasons I see as legitimate:
    1) Access to employment
    - I have a few neighbors that have lifted trucks strictly to be able to access work sites. They work on fields as diverse as oil field drilling rigging and servicing as well as a couple of them in the consulting engineering fields.

    I've seen their photos of the sites they have to access and conditions and there is no way a standard 4X4 would make it without damage.

    2) Ability to work...different than simple access
    - Several folks I know work as contractors in pipeline welding and like those above have to access job sites in very unimproved areas with their equipment, typically welding systems and related but I have also seen guys I used to race with that are now in monitoring and testing businesses where they use lifted trucks to haul in their testing equipment to be able to do their job.

    In both of the above cases these are folks that live/have family in Edmonton but work in the Northern remote areas on in/out shifts.

    3) Agricultural including ranching
    - Still have family to the North East in both regular ag businesses and ranching and good luck accessing much of their land without a lifted truck.
    Sure you can use a motorcycle or a horse but lets see you haul tools and equipment to repair combines/tractors and other in anything but a truck. With ranching you get similar but now its dealing with animals that may or may not need removed from the same areas.

    4) Hunting/Fishing/other recreation
    - I don't but tens of thousands of Albertans do and access to remote areas requires lifted trucks.

    So I could go on but I'm not going to bother...the point is that many tens of thousands of Albertans, for many reasons, have to access areas that require lifted trucks and other dirty nasty equipment in order to do what they need/want to do and frankly the vast majority in the Province do it without being a problem.

    But like others here I have little time or patience for those that have customized equipment just cause it's cool and make a pain in the *** of themselves.

    But I do not paint everyone with the same brush.

    As to the legality of lifting....
    It is not legal to hang your tires beyond the fender wells.

    You are required to have mud flaps

    The vehicles have to be done in a safe manner and the "kits" and factory lifts are done to the right specs.

    But some of the vehicles that get the complaints are in fact "from the factory" with the lifts/tires/etc and meet federal regulation.

    So while it seems that I share my detest for those with lifts etc that are idiots I also realize there is need for the equipment as well.

    Not everyone works/plays or lives in urban areas.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  26. #26
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    ^ i think we are talking more of the massive lifts you see on the road and not the couple of inches a super duty gets to get that clearance for off-roading.

    it really boils down to ignorance really, cant blame them though if you can get away with it why not.
    be offended! figure out why later...

  27. #27

    Default

    ^ Yeah many of the lifts you see are so high it wouldn't be about clearance and it wouldn't make the vehicle more suitable for difficult offroad terrain. It would it make it more susceptible to tipping over on anything other than on road use.

    Not sure how most of these could be argued as practical designed use.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richardW View Post
    ^ i think we are talking more of the massive lifts you see on the road and not the couple of inches a super duty gets to get that clearance for off-roading.
    (by replacement) ^ Yeah many of the lifts you see are so high it wouldn't be about clearance and it wouldn't make the vehicle more suitable for difficult offroad terrain.
    Actually most of the lifts I am talking about are in the 6-10" range suspension/tires with another 4-6" body lift.

    Two issues that those needing the capability are:
    1) Ground clearance

    2) Ability to get enough ramp angle...ie:
    Raising the body and running greater diameter tires allows the vehicle to past through drops and climb out the other side without the front or rear ends of the bodywork hitting and causing the vehicle to get stuck.

    In practical use the most often reason for a body lift and larger diameter tires.

    When driven accordingly there are no issues in on road use.

    Try driving them like a sports car and you will have problems.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  29. #29
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,737

    Default

    Meh. 90% of these doucheweasels don't drive their "big, bad boy truck" for it's intended use. It's a total "look at me thing" and I'm gonna tailgate your arse because my big bad boy truck is bigger than your vehicle.

    And besides, if these things are so important in rural Alberta, how did we possibly ever get by for decades without them?

    Not buying it.

  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitlope View Post
    Meh. 90% of these doucheweasels don't drive their "big, bad boy truck" for it's intended use. It's a total "look at me thing" and I'm gonna tailgate your arse because my big bad boy truck is bigger than your vehicle.
    Well I'd agree if you're keeping it to the urban cowboys, which are the minority.

    And besides, if these things are so important in rural Alberta, how did we possibly ever get by for decades without them?

    Not buying it.
    Well first off lifted trucks have been around since the 50s, you just didn't see them in town. I was using one in the 70s as part of my work on power lines before I entered the military (59 or 60 Dodge 4X4 company truck as I recall, lifted about 18").

    Second
    Well we weren't going to the same areas or anywhere near, the oil and pipeline booms have seen to it we are going places today we weren't even considering 10 years ago.

    You want a booming economy? Well the constant expansion in oil/gas and ag is pushing where we are going to drive it and that increases the reliance on the kind of equipment being used.

    Third
    The issue its self is a tempest in a teapot...want enforcement, lets try texting while driving. It would be a heck of a lot more productive and decrease accidents a heck of a lot more.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 16-08-2014 at 04:03 PM. Reason: corrected testing to texting

  31. #31
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,456

    Default

    Monster trucks aren't the only solution for extreme off-roading. Vehicles like the classic Jeep were designed for extreme terrain while retaining civil proportions for on-road use. The breakover angle is improved by using shorter overhangs rather than jacking it up half a meter.

    The Jeep or similar SUV may not work for all off-road users, but I still think the standard bumper and headlight height rules should apply to all vehicles driven on public highways, no exceptions.

  32. #32

    Default

    A jeep is terrible for logging and lease roads. Short wheelbase and narrow means it's very tippy. While it may be good for "offroad". It's not good lease roads. It's a glorified toy that's it. Many consultants however are having luck with the Toyota fjs due to their factory hight.

  33. #33

    Default

    Monster trucks aren't the only solution for extreme off-roading.
    All depends "what" you need to carry or do.

    If it's recreational and not hauling a load or equipment one of the best was the first generation Tracker/Sidekicks.

    With the short overhangs of the design plus a minimal lift and good tires they were excellent in virtually all conditions.

    But if you needed to carry more than a box lunch (never mind a Lincoln gas welder or testing equipment) you were outta luck.

    Cars and Trucks are just tools...need to use the right tool for the right job.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  34. #34
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kitlope View Post
    Meh. 90% of these doucheweasels don't drive their "big, bad boy truck" for it's intended use. It's a total "look at me thing" and I'm gonna tailgate your arse because my big bad boy truck is bigger than your vehicle.
    Well I'd agree if you're keeping it to the urban cowboys, which are the minority.

    And besides, if these things are so important in rural Alberta, how did we possibly ever get by for decades without them?

    Not buying it.
    Well first off lifted trucks have been around since the 50s, you just didn't see them in town. I was using one in the 70s as part of my work on power lines before I entered the military (59 or 60 Dodge 4X4 company truck as I recall, lifted about 18").

    Second
    Well we weren't going to the same areas or anywhere near, the oil and pipeline booms have seen to it we are going places today we weren't even considering 10 years ago.

    You want a booming economy? Well the constant expansion in oil/gas and ag is pushing where we are going to drive it and that increases the reliance on the kind of equipment being used.

    Third
    The issue its self is a tempest in a teapot...want enforcement, lets try texting while driving. It would be a heck of a lot more productive and decrease accidents a heck of a lot more.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    I don't think they're in the minority. I'd say it's 50/50 at best, if not majority of the d-bag kind. If there's a need for work purposes, then it can have commercial plates with commercial insurance to go with it.
    Either way, lifted or not, I'm concerned about the bumpers. Lift the truck all you want, but the impact locations (bumpers) better be at the right height.

    I bet a video of a jacked truck doign a side impact with a standard car (civic or camry or something similar) done by a professional impact institute would be enough for the government to stop this. It would probably take a Kickstarter campaign to pay for it. The impact would likely show death for front and rear occupants, whereas the non lifted truck impact would show trauma but no death.

  35. #35
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post

    ..... may not work for all off-road users, but I still think the standard bumper and headlight height rules should apply to all vehicles driven on public highways, no exceptions.
    This is the key. The rules are there for a reason, bumper heights should be enforced with no exceptions on public roadways. If your job site can't be accessed by highway vehicles then fix your accesses or use dedicated off-highway vehicles. There's no excuse for putting others at risk to avoid the expense of a proper site access.

  36. #36

    Default

    I bet a video of a jacked truck doign a side impact with a standard car (civic or camry or something similar) done by a professional impact institute would be enough for the government to stop this. It would probably take a Kickstarter campaign to pay for it.
    Yeah cause that worked so well for texting while driving, which is a far bigger problem that continues to go unenforced.

    The impact would likely show death for front and rear occupants, whereas the non lifted truck impact would show trauma but no death.
    You're putting an awful lot of faith in a fixed thin aluminum or steel bumper that has zero shock absorbing capability. Physics is still physics and if a 4000kg vehicle moving at 60kph goes into the side of a 1500kg vehicle the results are not going to be as different as you imagine.

    Summer and I am driving a Triumph TR-7 (remember I said I like small low cars)that weighs around 8-900kg and I get a daily perspective on the size of vehicles.

    A typical new mini van or cross over is a monster truck in the TR, bumpers typically top out near the top of my door. They hit me front-side-rear I know how its gonna work out. But they don't scare me at all.

    The people with their head in their lap texting or doing their make up (I can't believe how often I see that!) or a variety of other things that keep their eyes off the road for extended periods in heavy traffic...they scare me. Cause they are the ones that are most likely to cause an accident and do me damage.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 17-08-2014 at 09:09 AM. Reason: fixed incomplete sentence

  37. #37

    Default

    Thomas, while you defend the use of these jacked up trucks on the road the rest of us are arguing why these are even street legal, or should we say allowed on the streets due to rules not being enforced.

    Fine use the truck in the backcountry. Keep it there. To drive these ahole trucks all over a metropolitan city is another thing all together and should NOT be permitted. It really is that simple.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Monster trucks aren't the only solution for extreme off-roading.
    All depends "what" you need to carry or do.

    If it's recreational and not hauling a load or equipment one of the best was the first generation Tracker/Sidekicks.

    With the short overhangs of the design plus a minimal lift and good tires they were excellent in virtually all conditions.

    But if you needed to carry more than a box lunch (never mind a Lincoln gas welder or testing equipment) you were outta luck.

    Cars and Trucks are just tools...need to use the right tool for the right job.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Driving these jacked up trucks all over town in a major city (you see them everywhere) to run errands and pick up groceries is the "right tool for the right job"?

    We're talking specifically about the inordinate use of these right in a city.

    Anybody in this thread could submit pictures of these monster trucks parked at any mall, power center, etc.

    Not to mention at Oilers games. Because you need a big jacked up rig to go haul out to a hockey game..
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  39. #39
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    I bet a video of a jacked truck doign a side impact with a standard car (civic or camry or something similar) done by a professional impact institute would be enough for the government to stop this. It would probably take a Kickstarter campaign to pay for it.
    Yeah cause that worked so well for texting while driving, which is a far bigger problem that continues to go unenforced.

    The impact would likely show death for front and rear occupants, whereas the non lifted truck impact would show trauma but no death.
    You're putting an awful lot of faith in a fixed thin aluminum or steel bumper that has zero shock absorbing capability. Physics is still physics and if a 4000kg vehicle moving at 60kph goes into the side of a 1500kg vehicle the results are not going to be as different as you imagine.
    Agreed that texting and speeding are issues. But those are driver behaviour issues that plague a wide cross section of drivers. This issue is vehicle specific. Texting and speeding are not continuous, but a jacked up truck will always be a jacked up truck and is pretty darn easy to prove in court.

    Yes a larger vehicle hitting a smaller vehicle is going to be a bad scenario. But a large vehicle's bumper hitting the side impact beam of a smaller vehicle is what the designers planned for and provides the best chance of occupants surviving. I could care less what the bumper is made of. It's where it hits that's the issue. As you know, glass has no shock absorbing capability. Neither do heads.

  40. #40
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,737

    Default

    Well first off lifted trucks have been around since the 50s, you just didn't see them in town
    I guess in the 50's, 60s, 70s, 80s and into the 90s, when few drove these jacked up trucks in town there really was once something called common sense.

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitlope View Post
    Well first off lifted trucks have been around since the 50s, you just didn't see them in town
    I guess in the 50's, 60s, 70s, 80s and into the 90s, when few drove these jacked up trucks in town there really was once something called common sense.
    They are not common here... they exist yes. but Where i grew up there are tons more of them. go west to Drayton there are even more. with 800,000 people living in this city. your bound to have people who need these vehicles for work. and yes they also drive them around the city picking up groceries. these vehicals (Imo)also get 5-10X more Kms/year then any city car. even if one out of every 1000 people have a jackud up truck. thats still 800 in this city alone.

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobleea View Post
    Yes a larger vehicle hitting a smaller vehicle is going to be a bad scenario. But a large vehicle's bumper hitting the side impact beam of a smaller vehicle is what the designers planned for and provides the best chance of occupants surviving. I could care less what the bumper is made of. It's where it hits that's the issue. As you know, glass has no shock absorbing capability. Neither do heads.
    I live this everyday

    A typical new mini van or cross over is a monster truck in the TR, bumpers typically top out near the top of my door.
    Well above my side impact beam at the top of the door skin, barely below the glass.

    So should we ban mini vans? A lot more mini vans than lifted trucks.

    I also gotta giggle at the whole idea there is a lack of enforcement.

    If they were illegal they would be too easy to target and enforce...
    and no I am not going to believe it is some kind of "look" the other way" conspiracy...that is a reach at best.

    Light Trucks, federally which is the over riding legislation, do not fall under the same regs as cars...they are not a passenger car in the eyes of the law.

    That's why to this day they don't have 5mph impact bumpers and many other items.

    Check it out for yourself I am sure its on line.

    The other part of the discussion is more interesting...

    Fine use the truck in the backcountry. Keep it there. To drive these ahole trucks all over a metropolitan city is another thing all together and should NOT be permitted. It really is that simple.
    My perception (excluding nobleea as I feel his concern is sincere) is regardless of if they are legal or not many on this thread just don't like the large trucks and the "kind" of people that drive them.

    Which I find even sadder

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  43. #43
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    There is nothing "sad" about disliking oversized vehicles that are a very real threat to safety both by excessive bumper heights and by the poor visibility that they create.

    There is also nothing sad about disliking the attitude that many of the owners of these vehicles are displaying; that other people's safety is less important than their ability to drive those things. It's the ultimate expression of a general trend in automotive choices: There's an arms race to protect yourself and your family at the expense of everyone else.

    That's sad.

  44. #44
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    A typical new mini van or cross over is a monster truck in the TR, bumpers typically top out near the top of my door.Well above my side impact beam at the top of the door skin, barely below the glass.

    So should we ban mini vans? A lot more mini vans than lifted trucks.
    Tom, you are driving a 30-40yr old vehicle of which maybe 10 are registered in Edmonton. That's a bit of an outlier.

    I'm talking about 90% of the passenger vehicles on the road which are at risk from these battering rams.

    It's quite possible that light trucks are exempt from many of these rules, but that doesn't mean they should be. Especially when heavy duty trucks and buses seem to be able to follow the rules.

  45. #45
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    There is also nothing sad about disliking the attitude that many of the owners of these vehicles are displaying; that other people's safety is less important than their ability to drive those things. It's the ultimate expression of a general trend in automotive choices: There's an arms race to protect yourself and your family at the expense of everyone else.

    That's sad.
    Agreed. When we purchased a family vehicle last year, that factor played heavily in to our purchase. Wanted something high enough off the ground that the safety features would at least have a chance against these things. I have several friends who have purchased yukons or full size SUV's rather than smaller more practical ones, just for this reason.

  46. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobleea View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    A typical new mini van or cross over is a monster truck in the TR, bumpers typically top out near the top of my door.Well above my side impact beam at the top of the door skin, barely below the glass.

    So should we ban mini vans? A lot more mini vans than lifted trucks.
    Tom, you are driving a 30-40yr old vehicle of which maybe 10 are registered in Edmonton. That's a bit of an outlier.

    I'm talking about 90% of the passenger vehicles on the road which are at risk from these battering rams.

    It's quite possible that light trucks are exempt from many of these rules, but that doesn't mean they should be. Especially when heavy duty trucks and buses seem to be able to follow the rules.
    Ok
    Tom, you are driving a 30-40yr old vehicle of which maybe 10 are registered in Edmonton. That's a bit of an outlier.

    I'm talking about 90% of the passenger vehicles on the road which are at risk from these battering rams.
    Lets switch it up to a new Scion FRS, same height as the TR, Fiero, Corvette and a whole slew of new and newer vehicles...heck my daughters Metro is only about 3" taller.

    Especially when heavy duty trucks and buses seem to be able to follow the rules.
    We are certainly driving in different areas...this conversation has led me to look around a little at what is driving around me.

    This morning on the drive to work as an example...
    AMA 4X4 Tow Truck, much higher bumper than any passenger car around plus a massive steel push bar.

    On the yellowhead this morning there was a chain of oil field deck trucks (tractor trailer type) that would not meet the bumper heights posted earlier in this thread.

    Several 5ton + delivery trucks as well as a selection of others, in a 20 minute drive.

    I appreciate your concern, I think you are sincere with it, but of all the issues facing traffic safety that are more dangerous and prolific I just can't get on board. Sorry.

    We can save a ton more lives and suffering by dealing with other issues that are enforceable and more pronounced.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobleea View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    There is also nothing sad about disliking the attitude that many of the owners of these vehicles are displaying; that other people's safety is less important than their ability to drive those things. It's the ultimate expression of a general trend in automotive choices: There's an arms race to protect yourself and your family at the expense of everyone else.

    That's sad.
    Agreed. When we purchased a family vehicle last year, that factor played heavily in to our purchase. Wanted something high enough off the ground that the safety features would at least have a chance against these things. I have several friends who have purchased yukons or full size SUV's rather than smaller more practical ones, just for this reason.
    Different people different hot buttons, different-needs-wants-desires.

    A friend moved here from Nova Scotia 2 years ago with his family, after one winter he bought his wife a F-150 4X4 so she could feel safe on our snow covered, rutted roads.

    BTW they come from Edmonton originally so they knew all about winter and grew up here with it.

    We all need to do what we need to to satisfy our own concerns.

    Me...I want something small light maneuverable and fast so I can keep away from the twits driving (every conceivable type of vehicle) hazardously on the streets.

    Same reason I made my kid take both a high speed driving school and an ice race school....active avoidance skills.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  48. #48
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Some people's wants and desires directly conflict with the needs of others, and when they do, they should be recognised as wrong. We have no problem here in Canada taking issue with someone who wants to carry a loaded fire-arm everywhere he goes just to feel safe, but a parent who buys a lifted Yukon to drive the kids safely to school isn't much different.

  49. #49
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Some people's wants and desires directly conflict with the needs of others, and when they do, they should be recognised as wrong. We have no problem here in Canada taking issue with someone who wants to carry a loaded fire-arm everywhere he goes just to feel safe, but a parent who buys a lifted Yukon to drive the kids safely to school isn't much different.
    Heh, I'm not talking a lifted yukon. Just a normal one. A standard model, sold as designed by the engineers.

  50. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    We have no problem here in Canada taking issue with someone who wants to carry a loaded fire-arm everywhere he goes just to feel safe, but a parent who buys a lifted Yukon to drive the kids safely to school isn't much different.
    A parent safely driving a lifted Yukon is a heck of a lot safer than a 30-50 year old business man in a compact car texting in traffic IMHBPO.

    Same could be said of a cyclist cutting in and out of heavy traffic cutting cars off or any of many other examples of poor driving.

    That's the difference plain and simple.

    The vehicle is not the issue...its the driving skills, the driving habits and poor driving.

    That is where the enforcement needs to happen.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  51. #51
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Distracted driving is big and real issue that does not detract from the vehicle size arms race, and they come together more often than not: the driver who feels safe is his armour is more likely to engage in more risky behaviour including texting and driving.

    The "Yukon" is often a symptom of a general attitude that I matter more than anyone else. The Yukon will block crosswalk sight-lines even when parked legally 5 meters away, but that doesn't matter because my child is safe in the steel cocoon. The average 6-year-old can see over your triumph and see the distracted driver coming.

    The business man texting in his triumph is more likely to kill himself than others, but the same driver in a Yukon is a greater danger to others, and no matter how distracted a cyclist is, the probability that he will cause serious injury to anyone he hits is miniscule.

  52. #52

    Default

    highlander
    The "Yukon" is often a symptom of a general attitude that I matter more than anyone else.
    I'd take out the Yukon but the "general attitude" comment is bang on and covers a range of social, economic and cultural issues often discussed on this board.

    But I will disagree with this...
    The business man texting in his triumph is more likely to kill himself than others, but the same driver in a Yukon is a greater danger to others, and no matter how distracted a cyclist is, the probability that he will cause serious injury to anyone he hits is miniscule.
    Seen far too many accidents where the "cause" rode or drove away leaving carnage in their wake....irregardless of the size or type of vehicle.

    But we are going to continue to disagree that the "vehicle" is the problem its the driver more than any other factor in my experience.

    and

    My highly biased personal opinion

  53. #53
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,248

    Default

    Of course it's the driver that's the problem. Not the vehicle

    I won't say that a jacked up truck has some sort of advantage in an off road scenario. My previous stock 1st gen. tacoma was more capable off road than most of those jacked up rigs

    They'll never stop allowing a properly modified truck on the road. I think that this conversation has more to do with righteous indignation than safety. Otherwise we'd also lump lowered cars into that equation
    Parkdale

  54. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    Of course it's the driver that's the problem. Not the vehicle
    Thanks and agreed

    I won't say that a jacked up truck has some sort of advantage in an off road scenario. My previous stock 1st gen. tacoma was more capable off road than most of those jacked up rigs
    Depending on how many people and what you had to carry possibly, just recreational use I'd agree as I commented the same about my Tracker

    They'll never stop allowing a properly modified truck on the road.
    Agreed and no licensed mechanic is going to risk his license to allow an illegal truck on the road and same can be said of any reputable shop.

    I think that this conversation has more to do with righteous indignation than safety. Otherwise we'd also lump lowered cars into that equation
    Agreed

    In my highly biased personal opinon

  55. #55
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Drivers are absolutely a bigger problem, but Those larger vehicles do create safety risks.

    Big vehicles create risks even when they're parked, by blocking sightlines. Yes, legal and commercial big vehicles do too, but the fewer visibility blocking vehicles there are lining our streets the better.

    They typically have worse sightlines from the inside too. That's another big deal. Really big deal. A compact car could have the bottom half of it's windshield painted black and it's driver would still see more than the typical Pick-up driver, but only one of them would be pulled over and ticketed.

    As for lowered cars, they're not at all the same. There's a chance that a low car will flip another vehicle in a higher-speed collision, of course, but besides that they don't create those risks. They don't block other driver's sightlines, they usually have better visibility and if they do hit you it's not a direct impact to your vital organs.

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    As for lowered cars, they're not at all the same. There's a chance that a low car will flip another vehicle in a higher-speed collision, of course, but besides that they don't create those risks. They don't block other driver's sightlines, they usually have better visibility and if they do hit you it's not a direct impact to your vital organs.
    Not the same but issues all the same...

    You already noted the possibility of getting under and flipping, but that is pretty low

    What you're missing is
    - Getting underneath and splitting fuel tank
    - like a motorcycle in some ways being difficult to see if other drivers are not paying attention..very common
    - problem for pedestrians in being able to seem them and extent of injury with even a minor hit
    - loss of control due to road conditions ( I have never had a problem but others have)
    - Being damaged from poor roads and the result causing other accidents

    There's more but I think the point is made.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  57. #57
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,248

    Default

    ^ i've lost sight of low vehicles in my old work truck.. A 2007 GMC 2500 4x4

    Low vehicles pose their own dangers. But it's still the person behind the wheel making bad decisions
    Parkdale

  58. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The law states "passenger car" and AFAIK it does not apply to trucks and vans.

    Years ago my friend and I got pulled over in his '77 Chevrolet El Camino and the officer was ready to write him up for an illegal bumper height until my friend pointed out the vehicle ID plate shows it is listed as a truck and the registration also said truck. The officer was miffed and gave him a ticket after walking around his car to find the front signal light was burnt out. He had to find something...

    What really scares me are the high bumpers on cement trucks and also the knife edged tilt decks on car recovery trucks (or whatever you call them). Some have swing down bumpers, most do not.

    Trucks are exempt because many need to have high bumpers but I think there should only be exceptions for special purposes.
    All commercial trucks as far as I know must have the "Jayne Mansfield" bumper on the back so you cannot be decapitated by the trailer deck, thats the lowered bumper that looks like an inverted pi symbol, or the swing bumper that PRT talks about that comes down to create this. as for lifted trucks, I think I would rateht hit those huge mud tires in a collision, which would be my fault from the rear... than some $4000 over engineered 3/8" thick stell battering ram..


    The main thing that I see illegal on these truck is the tires extendeing past the wheel whells , that is for sure illegal and have heard of many people getting tickets for this, even on lowered cars that and there must be mud falps that go down to at least the center of the wheel axle to stop large objects from getting thrown into traffic at speed. Otherwise I see no difference between these rig rockets and heavy haul trucks or cement trucks like you said PRT. I give all of them a wide birth and I drive a 4x4 myself that is pretty high already.
    Excellence is a continual Journey up a staircase where there is NO top step...

  59. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    Of course it's the driver that's the problem. Not the vehicle
    Thanks and agreed

    I won't say that a jacked up truck has some sort of advantage in an off road scenario. My previous stock 1st gen. tacoma was more capable off road than most of those jacked up rigs
    Depending on how many people and what you had to carry possibly, just recreational use I'd agree as I commented the same about my Tracker

    They'll never stop allowing a properly modified truck on the road.
    Agreed and no licensed mechanic is going to risk his license to allow an illegal truck on the road and same can be said of any reputable shop.

    I think that this conversation has more to do with righteous indignation than safety. Otherwise we'd also lump lowered cars into that equation
    Agreed

    In my highly biased personal opinon
    240 couldn't have said it better myself and I second Mr. Hinderks in his responses
    Excellence is a continual Journey up a staircase where there is NO top step...

  60. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    ^ i've lost sight of low vehicles in my old work truck.. A 2007 GMC 2500 4x4

    Low vehicles pose their own dangers. But it's still the person behind the wheel making bad decisions
    Just about ran over a lowered Acura Integra last night in my Ram 1500 4x4 stock height, guy had tinted headlight covers and was driving exactly in my blind spot so that I couldn't see him in my mirror or by shoulder checking, noticed when he zoomed ahead with his Cow in heat exhaust that he didnt have his lights on just daytime running lights.. accident waiting for a place to happen, oh and painted flat black, perfection!
    Excellence is a continual Journey up a staircase where there is NO top step...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •