Should small trucks still be allowed in cars-only lanes?

(also posted on Blue Jersey) The cars-only lanes on the New Jersey Turnpike and other highways exist, in large part, because many drivers of cars find the decreased visibility of driving with trucks to be less safe and comfortable. Yet drivers of vehicles that block vision of what's in front of them almost as effectively as semis do are allowed. I'm talking about those SUV, pickups, and in rarer case minvans that are so big they get emissions and/or tax breaks for being trucks.

I need to do more research before I'd absolutely commit to this position, but I think if you're big enough to get perks for being a truck, you don't belong in cars-only spaces.

That's not a position politicians can lead on. It might get majority support, but at least at first, those opposed would likely to care a lot more. So if a change is to happen, we need to push from the outside.

The blocked vision is very real: in my low-sitting Elantra, I find I have much less awareness of the road beyond the vehicle in front of me, because of the rise of the SUVs. An added advantage of pushing this is that it will increase the self-perception of big-vehicle drivers that they're being sort of piggish, which they often (but not always) are.

So tell me what you think, but also, especially if you're from New Jersey, tell me where I can go for more research. Researchg on how this would effect safety, what the official purpose of the cars-only lanes are, who the public interest groups that might be interested are, and which legislators would be worth contacting. (Some of those answers I'll be finding for myself over the next few days, but head starts from Daily Kos would be most welcome.)

•  A thought ...

  only in the "cars only" if the vehicle is (a) subject to CAFE standards for automobiles or (b) a motorcycle/such not in the system.

  Not a fight that I'm willing to fight.

  by A Siegel on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:24:08 AM PDT

  •  Yes

    Yes, subject to car's CAFE is probably the right standard. And letting motorcycles in is probably a good idea.

    by Dvd Avins on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:27:30 AM PDT

  •  exactly!

    SUVs are the result of a loophole whereby they are considered "trucks" for fuel efficiency regulatory purposes.  

    Thus they should also be considered "trucks" for state regulatory purposes, including vehicle taxes, lane restrictions, and all the rest of it.  

    The way to deal with the "cars only lane" situation is:  vehicles below such-and-such height and weight.   If someone wants to build a micro truck with weight & dimensions of a car, and use that lane, fine, let 'em.  

    by G2geek on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 01:04:16 PM PDT

•  I am at the point where I want SUVs

  and trucks, which are much heavier than the average  midsize and compact and subcompact in their own lane, with a very large and high and heavy concrete walls between us. It's bad enough to be hit by a car the same size as your--but when a  Civic is struck by a Hummer or the like, it becomes a road pizza.

  Really, I'd like to see the damned SUVs banned unless people can justify buying one--ditto trucks. I know it's unconstitutional, but that's my fantasy.

  And I think we need really high FE standards that SUVs and large trucks can't meet....

  by irishwitch on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:29:32 AM PDT

  •  it's not unconstitutional

    Those gas guzzlers could be outlawed in a second if Washington had the will to act.  Just apply the CAFE standards across the board.

    More later, gotta scoot...

    by G2geek on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 01:06:52 PM PDT

  •  There are people who use them

    for real needs and real work, including me.

    I share your frustration with people who want them just to "look cool." Over 5 years, 'looking cool' costs around $10k just in gas. For $10k, I could be cool in a Honda Fit. Maybe other people need more help. :-)

    by elfling on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 01:15:22 PM PDT

    •  As I said--unless you have

      a real need for one.  Own here, I see mostly blondes with acrylic nails--whose idea of "off-road" is parking at the Mall that isn't right in front of the entrance.

      It's the "looking cool" morans I'd like to have to pay a price.

      by irishwitch on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 03:44:48 PM PDT

•  I share your annoyance with boxy

  vehicles that block my view of the road ahead. The problem is aggrevated by dark tinted windows. Taxing vehicles by GVW (gross vehicle weight) and/or much higher gasoline taxes may the most we can hope for. I don't see transportation authorities segregating traffic on the basis you're suggesting.

  Related to your safety concern, I think that the height of headlights should be restricted. I'm sure that you've been blinded many times when a large vehicle is following closely and its headlights (even on lo-beam) are shining directly into your mirrors.

  by RudiB on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:29:43 AM PDT

  •  I think it's an obnoxious marketing ploy

    If I drove with my brights on too close to another car, I could get a ticket for it. But it's just fine if an SUV does the same thing with its headlights? It's like the auto makers are trying to pressure everyone else to buy an SUV so they won't have the headlights in their face or worry about being hit about a bigger vehicle.

    by growingMajorityMN on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:58:39 AM PDT

    •  Yes! Moreover,

      If you pulled up behind me with your brights on, assuming that the headlights are mounted no more than 30" from the road, they wouldn't shine directly in my face. I think SUVs are worse than cars with misalgined lights, or drivers who are inattentive and leave their brights on. The SUVs are hazardous BY DESIGN.

      by RudiB on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 12:06:57 PM PDT

•  Agree with your goal.

  The stretch of N.J. Turnpike in northern New Jersey that has the 'Cars Only' lanes might be the ugliest stretch of road in North America; you shouldn't have to share your lanes with big, ugly trucks to boot.

  Pickup trucks and SUVs already have the privilege of driving on the far-left lane of freeways where 18-wheelers are prohibited; it's not a lot to ask them to avoid 'Cars Only' lanes.

  by Greasy Grant on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:34:43 AM PDT

•  FYI - nj has "car only" lanes to start with

  on the turnpike, the diarist just wants to the big ass suv's to go with the trucks, where the belong. Seems some out of states may have missed that point,

  by mad cow on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:35:42 AM PDT

  •  Thank you.

    Thanks. I think that explains some of the reaction.

    Everyone, I've got to run out for a few hours. If there are more comments I should address, I'll do that when I get back.

    by Dvd Avins on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:39:10 AM PDT

•  no, to the contrary, SUVs and pickmeups

  should be treated as trucks, banned from car lanes, taxed as trucks, and licensed as trucks.

  by agnostic on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:37:53 AM PDT

•  My tiny little Toyata truck

  gets about 30 mpg even at its advanced age, so it ought to be able to qualify as an ordinary car under CAFE standards.  And since I can't see over or around most of the vehicles on the road -- or even fit two handbags and one other lady in the front seat -- it qualifies car-wise.

  Get the monster tax-break vehicles out of the cars-only lane, by all means, and blessings on you.  Sounds a little too hard for actuality, though.

  by lgmcp on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:44:14 AM PDT

  •  I agree

    I'd go with a gross weight and/or mpg standard.  If your vehicle can't get better than 20 mpg, then it's either a land yacht or a truck.  Or it is an off road vehicle - in which case, why use roads?

    by Fabian on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 12:27:40 PM PDT

•  Half the drivers in New Jersey

  own SUVs. They're not going to get on board.

  by Ashley Taylor on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 11:47:39 AM PDT

•  Same for "No tucks in left lane" highways

  If you're going to get a tax benefit from driving your vehicle on a truck chassis, you shouldn't be able to drive in the lanes which say "no trucks"

  by Hey BB on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 12:07:33 PM PDT

•  OK, but are you willing

  to wait longer and pay more to all the small independent tradespeople (plumbers, carpenters, heating) who also are trying to get to your house and fix something, or are responding to a heating emergency in the winter? Many of us drive trucks or vans or SUV's cause we have to, not as compensation for sexual inadequacy <snark>

  by farmerchuck on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 12:35:40 PM PDT

  •  Am I willing to have the people driving trucks

    drive their trucks in the lane for trucks?

    Yes.

    by dconrad on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 04:39:40 PM PDT

•  I know some people from New Jersey, and

  "if you're from New Jersey, tell me where I can go"

  is not something you want to say to them. Believe me, they will.

  I also find SUVs to be an annoyance, an eyesore, and an obstruction to visibility on the road. I'm behind your initiative 100%.

  by dconrad on Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 04:35:49 PM PDT