By on June 29, 2015

Seventh-Generation Toyota Hilux

As key free trade agreements near signing, the chicken tax may soon become a bucket of Kentucky fried goodness. Just don’t hold your breath for a Hilux.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreements would dismantle the 25 percent tariff on light-duty trucks like the Toyota Hilux, Ford Ranger and Volkswagen Amarok, Automotive News reports. The latter agreement would align vehicle regulations between the United States and European Union, as well.

However, even if the tariff were to come down like the Berlin Wall, imports of the aforementioned trucks — and others like them — won’t be forthcoming in the near term for a few other reasons, starting with how many of the 39 total nations involved in their respective trade agreements have pickup truck plants ready to send their wares to the U.S. There, Thailand — which isn’t among those signing at this time — produces most of the world’s mid-size trucks. However, the nation’s government has expressed interest in joining the TPP after its enactment, leading to potential U.S.-bound production.

Another reason for the delay comes down to the dismantling of the tariff itself, which is set to take years, if not decades, with Japan taking the longest at 25 years; the Japanese rollback is part of a bilateral U.S.-Japan side deal concurrent of the TPP.

Safety figures into this, as well, as trucks made for the global market aren’t made for the U.S.’ special needs. Meanwhile, differences in how trucks are packaged — big blingmobiles for American consumers, spartan utility for everyone else — are likely to stem importation for a while.

Finally, some automakers have concerns their products wouldn’t fare well in the U.S., ranging from product overlap and right-sizing, to brand identity.

In time, however, the trucks some have wanted will board container ships bound for ports on both coasts as automakers would come to see how much profit they could reap with the chicken tax tossed in the fryer, leading to more competition in the USDM truck game down the road.

(Photo credit: Toyota)

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

151 Comments on “Chicken Tax Ready For The Fryer, Hilux Et Al Not Ready For US Market...”


  • avatar
    threeer

    I’m more concerned with not knowing where my food comes from (not a fan of the TPP).

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I share your concern.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        So more gross SE Asian seafood is coming our way?

        • 0 avatar
          runs_on_h8raide

          Would you like cat or dog meatballs with your spaghetti?

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Mmmmmm. Soon my local mega-mart will be selling five pound tubs of “ground meat product”. Imported from Mongolia and Myanmar and processed in a Chinese facility. It’s (sort of) food!

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            Same standards of calculation, but yours lack the capabilty.By the way they are 3/4 the size

        • 0 avatar
          STRATOS

          They are much better than others at cleaning and packaging fish.Maybe that is why we sell them the raw fish and they send it back us (value added)processed.Not so very long ago Canadians would try to sell cleaned cod with some blood stains and could not understand why the Europeans would not buy it.I would be just as concerned about US FDA approved foods.They approve first based on presented data and then its a wait and see for reported adverse effects.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Wild caught gulf shrimp > farm raised Vietnamese shrimp

          • 0 avatar
            Charliej

            bball, I don’t know about those wild gulf shrimp. As someone from the gulf coast of Alabama, I would be very leery of gulf shrimp right now. Our local newspaper does stories about the fish caught in the gulf just off the Alabama coast with open sores on their bodies. Dolphin deaths are running very high at this time too. The common denominator in all of this is the 2010 oil spill in the gulf. There is a layer of oil and tar on the floor of the gulf. Any storm with winds out of the south bring tar balls and oil to the beaches of Alabama. I eat shrimp caught off the pacific coast of Mexico. I won’t let my wife or son eat gulf caught seafood of any type right now. Maybe later when the fish stop having the open sores, but not now.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al From 'Murica

            So label it then and let the customer make the call.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            So I can’t eat any seafood now. Bah. The big fish from the Great Lakes are beginning to disappear, farm raised stuff is often gross, and pacific salmon from the Northwest is $$$$.

            Big Al-

            I’m fine with them labeling the food as such. Sometimes it’s difficult to know where things come from though. I try to buy all of my meat from local sources, but it isn’t always feasible. Costco is good about labeling stuff though.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @Bball
        Very different vehicles here, could not mistake tham as being the same

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        Liability laws are a little stricter than in the U.S., which is slacker in a few States. The vehicles have to built for Japanese and European standards so very strict. Payload calculations are the same as in U.S.Parts of the U.S.and Canada have 62 ton rigs. All heavy rigs have to comply to very strict safety standardsin Australia no ” Wild West” but different US States have approvals for different combinations, safety aspects? Well ask the states

    • 0 avatar
      ClutchCarGo

      All the more reason to start researching local food producers that sell direct to the consumer. Or if you have a yard or balcony/patio, grow some of your own.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        I grow my own vegetables. A vacuum sealer and a freezer is essential. Blanche the veggies, throw them in the Foodsaver, and freeze for later. I’m not big on canning, so this works better for me.

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      @Jeff S
      US manufacturers have too much to lose, if a FTA was negotiated. Ford gets 90% of its Global Profits from the sale of Pickups in NA(which impacts Canada a lot as U.S. pickups have a greater percentage of sales in Canada , than the U.S.) Any import not produced by local manufacturers takes away profits. UAW and the manufacturers are very much against dropping the tariff

  • avatar
    klossfam

    As a 4 year Ridgeline owner (obviously not subject to the tax as it is made in AL) and a current RAM 1500 owner, I’d welcome more choice…The current offerings in midsize trucks kind of suck for a day to day driver…Taco, Frontier and Gen I Ridgeline > 10 year old platforms. The current Colorado/Canyon > horrible (how do these new GM twins keep getting rave reviews? – I drove the V6 Colorado and it is ‘unacceptable’ at best for a number of reasons).

    If we had the choice – albeit down the road a few years – of Ford Rangers and VW Amaroks – I’d be estatic!

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      There won’t be more choice because there is no money in it.

      As for the Amarok, its global sales are half of Toyota’s Tacoma sales in the US alone. The last time that VW tried to sell a pickup in the US, it was a failure. Why would they bother doing it again?

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “Why would they bother doing it again?”

        Becuase it’s Volkswagen.

      • 0 avatar
        klossfam

        Unfortunately you are correct Pch101…We’ll possibly see a Ford Ranger but even FCA/RAM with the ability to do a new Dakota in North America said the cost of development would not be feasible (and of course, no one wants to risk cannabilizing their full size trucks). The crappy Colorado/Canyon – yes drove it and they suck – was a risk for GM – although it was indirectly our tax dollars funding the development.

        I think that you need close to Toyota Taco numbers before any automaker would go through the trouble…although as ajla noted, VW might be crazy/arrogant enough…

      • 0 avatar
        Exfordtech

        If by pickup, you mean that pseudo el camino they made out of the Rabbit way back when, then they never really tried in the U.S., unless there was something along the way that I missed.

    • 0 avatar
      Tinn-Can

      I always thought the Amarok was cool until I saw one with mexican plates driving around my town… I drove up behind it and wondered what the heck that giant fat and short pickup was. They are really huge. Bring back the first gen tacoma/frontier sized truck and we have a deal. Most of the trucks people lust over are too close to US full sized trucks in size and price to be a blip on the radar.

      • 0 avatar
        redav

        I have a theory that the Ford Flex could be converted into a compact truck. Chop the back along the window line, remove the rear doors, keep the unibody & AWD of the Flex. If gutting the back drops enough weight, they can swap the 3.5 V6 for the 2.0 Ecoboost.

        • 0 avatar
          Exfordtech

          Without the roof structure you could call it the Flexible.

          • 0 avatar
            redav

            Yes, the moment of inertia drops considerably without the roof, but I don’t believe it insurmountable problem. First, such a vehicle doesn’t need the capabilities of a full-size truck, and second, a structural bed of larger gauge can make up for much of it. After all, if convertibles can be designed without having the dynamics of a wet noodle, then a (very) light-duty trucklet should be doable.

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      Hilux already has a strong audience. Global Pickup manufacturers sell 2.3 million already, let alone all the new models now flooding into the market. The Problem is the other way around with actual need, emissions and safety being big barriers
      I do not know what US manufacturers(of anything) can sell when the Tariffs come down,but the Asian manufacturers will ramp up their exports

  • avatar
    TW5

    This is a convenient time to repeal the chicken tax because CAFE 2025 is going to put small trucks out to pasture. Midsize might survive in hybrid form, but who knows if they’ll sell.

    Much ado about nothing.

  • avatar
    Sgt Beavis

    Even repealing the Chicken Tax cannot make me a fan of the TPP..

    But I would love to own a Ranger or Amarok.

  • avatar
    carguy

    For those who think that tariffs are good policy:

    Imagine a company that employs 10,000 workers that make 1 million widgets per year at $2,000 each. In order to protect the company from overseas competition, the government levies a 30% tariff on the widgets. The widgets now cost $2,600 each or $600 million MORE annually due to the tariff. The government collect the $600 million in revenue and the companies profit margin rises. However, that money is taken out of the pockets of the consumers who buy the widgets who are now subsidizing each worker by $60,000 a year. The company thrives (stock holders and executives mainly), the government get more revenue but the consumers pay.

    How is that possibly a good thing?

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      When there is a loophole that reduces or eliminates the tariff, then it becomes a legal fiction with no real impact.

      The chicken tax is a non-factor. It can be avoided with the use of knock-down kits and a bare-bones NAFTA assembly facility. In practical terms, it has no impact on US consumers.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I believe that the full size half tons will shrink by about a foot with the new fuel standards requiring more efficient trucks the weight will go down and the engines will be smaller. With a lighter body such as Ford’s aluminum bodies and smaller engines they could easily take a foot off the front of the trucks. If that happens the full size half tons would then be slightly bigger than the current midsize trucks. A downsized full size half ton could become the new global size thereby making the current midsize irrelevant. There is room for a true compact truck based on a front wheel drive platform as the Santa Cruz that Hyundai might make.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      US fullsizers are simply too wide for world markets. The major dimensional difference between US fullsizers and international pickups isn’t length, but width.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        The midsizers are about six to eight inches narrower than the full sizers. The Amarok is about 3.5″ more narrow than a Silverado or F150. That’s insignificant.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          That is not remotely insignificant in many parts of the world with narrower roads than the US. Keep in mind that US full-sizers are specifically designed to be as wide as the manufacturers think US roads and regulations can accommodate. Similarly, international pickups are the widest vehicles that can reasonably (or sometimes legally) be sold for personal use in those markets. Adding another 4″, let alone 6″ or 8″, isn’t going to cut it.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I understand it when the Ranger and Hilux are at 70″ wide or so. However, the Colorado and Amarok are basically a half foot wider.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            A few inches can make the difference between being able to park it and not being able to park it. In a typical European city, side streets are often so narrow that parking on sidewalks is a given; if the city is serious about keeping cars off of the sidewalk, then they install posts along the curbline in order to prevent it.

            In any case, the Amarok doesn’t move a lot of units in Europe (or, for that matter, anywhere else.) It isn’t a benchmark for success.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            I would just urge the “it doesn’t matter” crowd to look at this:

            https://goo.gl/maps/CESxq

          • 0 avatar
            Charliej

            Watching a Ford F150 or a Chevvy Siverado trying to negotiate the streets of the small Mexican village where I now reside would be funny if not for being so sad. Some of the street are so narrow, that to turn a corner, the truck must back and fill twice to get turned. Nissan Micras are very popular here. Actually, I drive a twelve year old Escape and it does all right. It has mirrors that can be folded back for tight squeezes on the road, and whenever it is parked on the street. Depending on where you are, bigger is not always better. Large vehicles here are invariably dented and scratched. Smaller ones seem to get by with less damage.

          • 0 avatar
            JimC2

            @Charliej, in regards to narrow streets, a lot of my apartment neighbors would never survive. Some of them have trouble just parking their vehicles between the white lines, never mind any semblance of being in the middle of the spot or knowing where the corners of their vehicles are…

            It would be even more sad than funny.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @Charliej – How did Mexico end up with still existing Medieval villages, like all of Europe, and the US and Canada missed out? Except Mexico is a huge buyer of fullsize pickups. Maybe they’re not tremendous sellers like in the US and Canada, but we lose several hundred thousand ‘used’ fullsize pickups to Mexico every year from legal importation and stolen. But there’s more than a few places in the US that are uncomfortable for fullsize pickups and SUVs, including beach communities.

            So how do you have any kind of trash service though? What about emergency services? Got CUV fire trucks???

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Don’t know about Mexico, but in Europe’s most crowded cities you have mini fire trucks and trash trucks, and normal if narrower ambulances, based on the sort of narrow compact truck platforms we don’t get here. There are all sorts of tiny trucks there, often powered by 1.5-2.0 liter diesel fours.

          • 0 avatar
            Charliej

            DenverMike, The towns along the North shore of Lake Chapala are all between 490 and 500 years old. The streets in the village are narrow to very narrow. Some streets are just barely wide enough for one car to be parked at the curb and another car to pass it. Literally the mirrors must be folded back to pass. We lack for nothing down here. Firetrucks are F150’s. The police trucks are mostly F150’s with a few Dodge trucks thrown in. I have never even heard of a house fire here. The houses are made of concrete. They are required to be earthquake proof. Garbage service is by the city and three days a week. We can get almost anything that we want at the lakeside. If we want more, we drive to Guadalajara, a city of four and a half million people. Guadalajara is thirty miles North of the lake side. The area where we live is a resort area. Every weekend, a hundred thousand people from Guadalajara come down and mob this area. The population literally doubles on the weekend. Every hotel is full and many people rent out a room or two to the people from Guad. The main road through town is a two lane road, made narrower by parking on both sides and bicycles, motor scooters and motorcycles buzzing around. The only traffic rule seems to be don’t hit any one else. The speed limit on the main road is 24 mph. In the back streets of the village, on the cobblestone streets, the speed limit is 12 mph. Life here is slower, but it is a great place to be retired. There are many thousand expats here. Mostly US and Canadian, but including British, Dutch, German, Australian, Croatian, and South African. These are the nationalities of people who have become friends over the last few years. There are private hospitals, a Red Cross hospital and government hopitals here. We have free health care through a government program that covers everyone over sixty for free. If you live here, you just have to register and you are covered. The climate is perfect. Average daily high, summer and winter, ranges between 70 and 85 degrees. Average lows, summer and winter, ranges between 55 and 65. We are in the rainy season now. It mostly rains between midnight and daylight. We average about 35 inches of rain per year. We live on the largest lake in Mexico, about ten by fifty miles.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @Charliej – Sounds like a great place to play and retire. I’ll be visiting it next summer. But for the most part, Mexico has plenty wide streets and parking. I sold my 4X4 F-350 crew cab, utility bed with 35″ BFGs to a friend in Yahualica. He owns a gas station/mini-mart there.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          The domestic full-sizers are too big and heavy to find much of a market outside most of the US. Cheap fuel drives consumer choices here, while expensive fuel influences them abroad.

          I once recall seeing an Escalade in Amsterdam. It looked completely ridiculous in the context of the locale, as it was so much larger than everything else that was around it. They are barely noticeable in the US, but they stand out like a sore thumb in these other places.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            They aren’t that much bigger and heavier these days.

            I understand the differences in markets, but as time goes on, the gap in size seems to narrow.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            World drivers need more than 3 or 4 inches on each side, let’s get real. It does take a bit more skill to pilot a US fullsize, even in the US. When it comes to weight, no one perceives it or can relate to say 2 tons vs 4 tons. Meaningless numbers. Except diesel 1/2 tons would and do rival the fuel economy of midsize diesel pickups.

            I’m not saying US fullsize SUVs and pickups would take Europe and other places by storm if/when offered for sale by normal dealer channels. I’d say it has to be tried. The world is a big place and the upside would be tremendous. They’re already the world’s most profitable cars.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @dal20402
        Very , Very true in Asia. Europe is not a potential market to start with

    • 0 avatar
      mdao

      Not how CAFE works. The current system is footprint based with lower mileage targets for larger footprint vehicles. Decreasing length would actually be counterproductive as there wouldn’t be a significant increase in fuel economy, but the vehicle would need to meet more stringent fuel economy standards.

      The current inflection point where you stop getting additional leeway for increased footprint is ~ 65 sq ft. Coincidentally, this is about the footprint of the smallest available F150. By 2020, the inflection point will move to ~ 75 sq ft. Also coincidentally, this is about the footprint of the largest available F150.

      If I were a betting man, I’d wager that all full sized trucks end up with footprints around 75 sq ft based on how CAFE incentivizes things.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        The longest midsize pickup already exceeds the footprint of the shortest F-150 and that F-150 should have no CAFE problems, so why should said midsize have a problem, being that it’s smaller, lighter, less engine and much less air to push out of the way? The longest F-150 is kind of a rarity with the 8′ bed and super cab.

        • 0 avatar
          mdao

          The CAFE argument was for why full sized trucks won’t get shorter. All else being equal, shortening a truck won’t save nearly enough weight and drag to offset the increase in future (2025) CAFE fuel requirements.

          F150 Wheelbase Today:
          9 ft = 26 mpg
          10 ft = 24 mpg
          11 ft = 24 mpg

          F150 Wheelbase 2025:
          9 ft = 37 mpg
          10 ft = 34 mpg
          11 ft = 30 mpg

          Small difference today, but not so small in the future.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            The EPA Window Sticker is what we’re used to relating. It’s 23 mpg by 2025 for the longest F-150 and 30 mpg for the shortest F-150.

            Well the current longest F-150 needs to improve by 5 mpg by 2025 and the shortest needs to improve by 6.5 mpg. That’s if they meet the current CAFE schedule. Why would that be difficult? And the shortest F-150 footprint lays right between the shortest and longest midsize. Easily doable by them too.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        mdao – I had read an article that said that CAFE might cause the demise of regular cab pickups. In some respects that is already coming true. The new Colorado is available in extended and crew cab only. Tacoma is no longer available in a regular cab. It may occur to full sized 1/2 ton trucks.

        In the past car companies “gamed” CAFE by upsizing pickup GVW limits and building BOF SUV’s based on a pickup chassis. We will not see shrinkage of pickup sizes because that brings a penalty with it. Ford lightened the F150 but upped the payload. We might see Ford deliberately push the F150 into Class 2b 3/4 truck ratings for CAFE gaming. The next SuperDuty is rumoured to use the F150 cab so it may be a possibility.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          @Lou_BC – Let’s not get crazy. Worst case, we lose V8 regular cabs and or 4X4 regular cab fullsize. Probably neither. No, regular cab fullsize aren’t going away.

          Nor are 1/2 tons switching to “3/4 tons” to game CAFE. No need.

        • 0 avatar
          Jeff S

          I think the days of regular cab full size pickups are coming to an end. The sales of regular cabs are lower and as Lou_BC said the CAFE standards will cause their demise. I disagree about the shrinkage because with a smaller engine will come a smaller engine compartment. Little if any shrinkage to the cab and the bed. With the use of light weight materials it is not that hard to see the V-6 replace the V-8 and you could see the use of 4 cylinders in lighter extended cabs. If the manufacturers did downsize the full size trucks then the regular cab could possibly not meet the CAFE standards for a truck. With the rear seat delete option the extended cab becomes more acceptable to fleet buyers who want regular cabs. It is anyone’s guess what will happen to full size trucks in the next 10 years but they will be noticeably different.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            If anything, we’re going to lose extended cabs and only have regular and crew cabs, with the former almost entirely being sold to fleets. Ram, Chevy, and Toyota have already made their extended cabs into pseudo-crew cabs.

        • 0 avatar
          whynot

          I don’t think CAFE has anything to do with the demise/decline of regular cab pickups and rise of the extended and crew cabs. The reason for the decline is that people stopped using pickups just as work trucks. A 2 or 3 seater isn’t the most popular thing amongst the masses. Those who buy a pickup as a status symbol want 4 doors and the ability to seat their entire family comfortably in the cab.

          Its the same reason why sedans generally outsell their coupe counterparts.

          CAFE may have led to automakers pushing pickups as alternatives to the traditional sedan, but consumer preference is dictating the cab popularity.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Fleet buyers are a huge part of the pickup truck market and specifically demand regular cabs. If something has to be sacrificed for the CAFE gods, it would be the short bed and regular cab ‘combo’ or RCSB. I don’t see that happening either, especially when the CAFE fines could be easily absorbed or passed on to buyers. But that’s if the shortest fullsize wheelbase fails to meet the 2025 CAFE schedule. Except here’s always weaker engines and gearing, worst case.

  • avatar
    derekson

    I could see VW bringing the next generation of the Amarok to the U.S. but I don’t understand why anyone thinks the Hilux would come here when we already get the Tacoma here. The Ranger seems unlikely as well, since Ford won’t want to cannibalize F150 sales. That could change if the GM midsize trucks continue selling relatively well though. Maybe Mazda would bring its version to try to grab some truck sales?

    • 0 avatar
      I've got a Jaaaaag

      I’ve often wondered about the US lust for the Hilux, I don’t get it. The small US Toyota, no matter what it is called, has always been very close, and in most cases one generation ahead of the Hilux, IIRC when they announced the 2016 Hilux they announced it would have the Tacoma suspension. I do understand that some want the Diesel option but that doesn’t mean they need to bring the entire Hilux with them.

      • 0 avatar
        derekson

        I think it’s the desire for a more primitive form of the Tacoma, without fancy electronics and with simpler mechanicals. Plus some desire for the diesel.

        I think it’s pretty pointless personally.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        People want to feel like they’re driving a technical in Afghanistan or Syria, without the annoying risk of being shot by extremists.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        Eight guys on the internet believe that the grass is greener on the other side.

        If the world had the Tacoma and the US had the Hilux, then those eight guys would want the Tacoma.

      • 0 avatar
        gtemnykh

        The biggest difference is in the payload rating, and how that difference comes to be. The Hilux has a significantly sturdier frame, and up until this new generation, a cruder but more durable torsion bar front end instead of our double wishbone. And before the current generation, the 4wd Hiluxes famously had solid front axles. Hilux has a stiffer leaf spring pack out back, which results in a much less palatable ride unladen, probably unacceptable for the average US consumer. My guess is some of the other components like wheel bearings/hubs, maybe brakes, are also downrated for our market, but that’s just a guess.

        I actually saw not one but two current gen Hiluxes cruising down the road near Nashville Indiana a month ago, rather curious. My best guess is that it might be a defense contractor around the area that preps trucks for PMCs and the like.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          There is a difference in payload rating, but I’d love to see what Toyota would put the Hilux’s payload ratings at if it was sold it in the US.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Definitely a valid point. But the higher standard of durability of the Hilux would hold sway over the Toyota offroad crowd here in the US (as narrow of a niche as that might be). Currently, all of our BOF Toyotas here short of the Land Cruiser are built to no more than the “medium duty” Prado frame standard. That’s not to say that the current vehicles are underbuilt, aside from the rusty Dana frames fiasco.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          Payload ratings are a function of liability.

          Toyota doesn’t want you to sue them because you decided to tip over your truck after you put enough stuff in it to significantly change its center of gravity. This is not much of a factor in other markets.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @I’ve got a Jaggg
        Toyota has posted a payload of 2,700lb for the Hilux and close close to 8,000lb towing , very different from the Tacoma. The Tacoma is several generations behind the Hilux, no big deal as they sell a lot of Tacomas in the US

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          The payload and tow rating for the Hilux in Australia has nothing to do with what they would be in the US.

          For example:

          Ford Focus towing capacity AUS: 1650 lbs
          Ford Focus towing capacity US: 0 lbs

          Ford Kuga 1.6T towing capacity AUS: 2500 lbs
          Ford Escape 1.6T towing capacity US: 2000 lbs

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @Bball,
            This is not an Australian rating but a Toyota Global one
            Ford Kuga and Ford Escape are quite different
            Australian ratings do penalise. Ford F-250 Diesel, 9,900lb towing

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The Kuga and Escape are the same thing.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Why wouldn’t a Mazda pickup cannibalize other, more profitable Mazdas across the same showroom, as the Ranger would do for the F-150, Connect, Flex, etc?

      Mazda had a prominent US pickup line, with the same Chicken tax in full effect, and eventually couldn’t make it work. I mean not after the Mini-Truck Craze/Trend/Circus died out.

      But if Ford doesn’t want the Ranger here, no way no how, why would they agree to Ranger rebadge sold by Mazda?

      Really the end of the Chicken tax wouldn’t change the US midsize truck market much at all. Most global pickup OEMs would want nothing to do with North America for their pickups. Some have been there – done that. Ran off screaming.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

        They (Mitsubishi, Mazda, Isuzu) ran away from the chicken tax, not because the market hated them or something like youre implying.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          Why would I imply the market hated them? The market just went somewhere else. The next Hot Trend. The party ended is all. Maybe they didn’t actually “scream” as they left the market, but they just packed it up and left as the market dwindled. Where’s the conspiracy in that?

          You do realize the Chicken tax was here long before the Mini-Truck Crazy, no? So how did it cause any OEMs to suddenly run way from the small pickup market, out of the clear blue?

          So what exactly changed near the end? Other than the party ended? Was it a government attack that killed the Surfer/Custom/Molester Van Movement?

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

            Your “ran away screaming” is what prompted my responce. You didnt clarify what you meant that made them run away, and if it wasnt the chicken tax, what was it? The only assumption I could come up with was that you were implying it was the market.

            The market changed because GM and Ford began designing and building their own competant compact trucks, building them here with no chicken tax. Mazda and Isuzu couldnt compete price wise (with the 25% tax) so they rebadged domestics, with mixed results. Toyota decided to simply build their trucks here.

            Without the tax, my contention was that there would no longer be a major reason for them (speaking mostly of Mitsubishi, since Mazda is just a rebadged Ford now) to return to importing their own trucks. I believe if the chicken tax had been repealed earlier, Isuzu might still be here.

            In other words, to reason to scream and run away.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

            And since I “dont have permission” to edit my just-posted comment, what you described IS THE MARKET, just as I said. Youre arguing that its because the mini truck craze was over, THAT WOULD BE THE MARKET CHANGING.

            Since they no longer build trucks the size of a Datsun 620, and Toyota, Nissan and GM seem to be selling a fair amount of midsize trucks, the loss of the chicken tax opens up the door for Mitsubishi and the like to bring their trucks here, almost all of which are similar in size to Colorado, Frontier, global Ranger, etc.

            So, youre contention that because the market shifted away from compacts and moved to midsizers, they wont come back because the minitruck craze is over. That would be a valid point, IF their trucks were still small and not midsized.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            When the consumers mostly abandoned the mini-truck segment, they left for other segments, like trendy compact and midsize SUVs. The bigger midsize pickups were not the next hot thing. They were the answer to the declining mini-truck segment. The wrong answer as it turns out.

            But mini-truck OEMs ran away from declining sales and a growing percentage of fleet and other cheapskates. The chicken tax was there long before the mini-truck craze, so how did it come to affect the booming mini-truck market? Why did it not prevent the mini-truck craze if it has any affect on the market what so ever?

            When demand was high, foreign OEMs found ways to build pickups partially or totally in the US. But none paid the chicken tax. Demand went away so they went away. Peugeot, Fiat, Renault and others went away too. It’s what happens. So what? Who’s gonna cry for all the global cars we lost and or can never have??

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N – I do agree that the chicken tax did work on “smaller” players. Those little trucks did not offer much in the way of convenience so the only real selling point was low low price. Add a 25% tariff on a small player and they just don’t have the incentive to get around the tariff.
          VW said they would need to sell 100,000 units per year to make it worth while to set up shop in the NAFTA zone to build Amarok pickups for the USA.
          They NEVER mentioned the DenverMike knockdown kit theory. Maybe Denver needs to go work for VW.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            It’s just a weak excuse by VW. But there must be an official excuse meant for the stock holders, suppliers, VW fans, etc. I don’t see what’s so wrong with: “We just don’t wanna, leave us alone…”

            But what’s the official excuse for denying the US the Polo, Scirocco and others?

            Turns out the more cars lines you stuff into the showroom, the less you make per line. Offering VW customers more choices would backfire, like the Colorado/Canyon did to GM.

            It’s always taken big volume car sales, to make selling in the US a worthwhile venture. So what? VW can’t expect to sell 100,000 Amaroks a year in the US no matter what. Ain’t happening, Chicken tax or no. No way, no how.

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

    Damn the hilux, bring me a Mitsubishi Triton. Put silver steelies on it, check the boxes for 4wd, diesel engine, and 4 real doors. You can even keep the bed as Id prefer a drop-side “ute” box (that becomes a flatbed when all three sides are dropped).

    • 0 avatar
      gtemnykh

      Damn all the global midsizers, give me an UAZ!

      Thick sheetmetal, bare bones basic mechanicals, and it comes with a hand crank starter and emergency hand pump for the tires!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFJ-3evD2XM

      Damn shame they never made it over here, I’d love one as a weekend dirt road explorer and firewood hauler.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        I want a Kamaz 6×6, but you can’t always get what you want. :)

        • 0 avatar
          gtemnykh

          Well the most amazing (relevant thing) is that it kind of/almost happened in 1994 for UAZ, atleast according to the video, with plans for using 3800 GM engines no less! For $10k for the wooden bed pickup, I can see some farmers or woodsmen buying one. Maybe some hardcore frontier dweller in Alaska.

          The US military “LMTV” is a very neat looking rig, most similar size/function wise to the pug nosed Soviet GAZ-66. GovPlanet has a bunch listed up for auction with temptingly low starting bids, I wonder just how much winning bids end up being.

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    I just want a RAM700. They’re made in Mexico, so NAFTA makes the Chicken Tax moot.

    FCA simply does not want to sell the RAM700 in the USA. Maybe they prefer making pesos more than dollars?

    • 0 avatar
      whynot

      The Fiat Strada likely wasn’t designed with US regulations in mind, and redesigning it to meet them probably isn’t worth it. Not that I would expect FCA to sell it here even if it did meet US specs.

      • 0 avatar
        eggsalad

        Of course they wouldn’t sell it here, out of fear that it might cut in to RAM1500 sales, and those are a lot more profitable.

        As for meeting US regulations, you’re probably right, but FCA does have that Renegade/500X platform that they could make a nifty little pickup out of, if they wanted to.

  • avatar

    *Holding breath* FIESTA BASED RANCHARO!!!!

    *Turning blue*

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Well, the Chicken Tax excludes NAFTA, and the Fiesta is already built in the NAFTA zone (Mexico), so dropping the chicken tax would not affect your fantasy Fiestachero.

      Id rather see Ford make a pickup out of the Transit Connect. It would be too small to compete in-showroom with the F-150 as the global Ranger certainly would. Itd likely be pretty cheap compared to global Ranger or our F-150 as well.

      I mean if you walked into a Ford dealer to look at pickups, and checking out an F-150, a salesman walks up and says “hey, sir, would you like 9/10ths of the F-150 for the same price or more? No, it doesnt have the payload capacity, the room, the power or the towing capacity of F-150, but at least it gets about the same MPG and costs the same or more.”

      Or rather “would you like a truly compact truck alternative with 30 some-odd MPG, that is able to handle trips to the gardening center or to carry a pallet of wigits just fine, but fits in your garage as easy or easier than your wife’s Fusion?”

      I think the Transit Connect-based pickup would fill a void missing in the US and Canada, rather than something a few inches shy of an F-150 that sells for similar money as the F-150.

      Got the perfect name for it: Ford Courier. They could also sell it in other places like Africa (where they call them a bakke, not sure if I spelled that right) and in South America, etc where its called a “coupe utility”.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N – I do believe that there was a rumour of a Transit Connect based small truck. A Ford executive had said that they were considering it. They did say that the global Ranger was just too close to the F150 to bring over.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

          That would be awesome. It would certainly fit well in fleets that typically carry light loads amd value fuel mileage and manuverability over being able to tow an airplane, lol. Like parts-runner trucks. They rarely carry any significant weight, and I bet even a crate V-8 engine on a pallet wouldnt be too much for one.

          Great vehicle to buy your son (or Tom-Boy daughter) to go to school in, go fishing/hunting in, tow a small trailer with an ATV or watercraft (jet ski, aluminum fishing boat, etc) with, and get good MPG with enough power to get the job done but not get the boy/girl in trouble with.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            I was just looking at Transit Connects today including the first wagon (“unminivan”) this dealer has gotten in.

            The wagon is stupid expensive but the cargo vans are already on my short list. A pickup version would just make me all giggly.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @John Taurus,
        Australian looking at an F150: too cumbersome for inner city parking, payload a bit small, cannot go off road,does not have diesel

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

          Cant go off road? I see plenty of F-150s used in very adverse conditions. Aside from one family member who runs a logging operation via his F-150 (complete with a diesel storage tank in the bed for fueling equipment, along with two huge tool chests, saws, etc), my cousins work for a company that clear right-of-ways for powerlines. They have F-150s as well as 3/4 and 1 ton trucks from GM, Ford and Ram (they dont have GM or Ram half tons, nor Nissans or Toyotas). Their F-150s see more off road action than most Jeep Wranglers. They are quite capable off-road. Im not implying that they are as or more capable than a Wrangler, not in the least, Im just saying that their off road capabilities are not as poor as you claim. Their F-150s take a beating and go through hell with no complaints.

          F-150 also has some of the highest payload ratings among all half tons, even more now with the aluminum bodies (body weighs less but frame is as strong or stronger than before, ergo higher payload/towing numbers).

          As for diesel, if there were a demand for it, Im sure the 5 cyl TurboDiesel from the Transit would do just fine, but would likely be way down on power, torque and payload/towing abilities compared to the current crop of gas engines used in the F-150. I think the EcoBoost 3.5L has something like 420 ft/lb pf torque. Thats nothing to sneeze at.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @JohnTaurus
            What you would term Off Road is not the same thing here. A Non modified F150 is very poor Off Road, much , much better options even the Tacoma is a lot better. Payload still very poor for the F150
            I doubt a F150 would be able to carry a full size Truck Camper? As against a folding one?
            http://www.ozcape-campers.com.au/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/P1000481.jpg

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

            @rr
            I had just spent 15 minutes typing a reply but TTAC decided I needed to log in again and it was lost

            The jist of it is, YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE ***NO*** CLUE about the F-150 or any other US half-ton. You can pretend Im talking about gravel roads as “off road”, but that doesnt make it true. You can pretend that 12,200lb towing capacity means it cant pull more than a pop-up camper, but that doesnt make it true, either.

            You go ahead and keep lying to yourself about it all you want. That, your being obtuse, your arrogance and your poor fact checking abilities are evidently all you need, so Im done. I think Id have better luck explaining this to an 8 year old boy, he’d be just as likely to make things up and outright lie as you have done, but at least he’d have the excuse of being an 8 year old. What’s yours?

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @JohnTaurus,
            Why are Americans experts on something they have never seen? I am curious
            For your information,: Current F150, a 2007,F250, a rough as guts 1995
            Hilux, short trip in a RAM 3500, and a small engined 2.7 Hilux roughly 2009.
            What is your experiences in a Hilux, Navara,Ford Ranger or Isuzu? Any idea at all?
            Ever wonder why they stopped building the F250/F350 here in 1979?
            Ford F-250/F350 production in Australia
            “Australian productionEdit

            Ford Australia assembled right-hand drive sixth generation F-Series that were fitted with a lineup of locally sourced engines.

            1973-1975Edit

            Initially they were available with US sourced 240 and 300 CID Straight-6 engines. From August 1974 the 240 CID engine was replaced with locally sourced 250 CID Straight-6 and the 300 CID was replaced by the locally sourced 302 Cleveland V-8 engines. The 302 Cleveland was a destroked 351 Cleveland built using tooling exported to Australia after the closure of the Cleveland production line.

            1976-1977Edit

            The 250CID Straight-6 was upgraded with a new crossflow head and rebadged as the 4.1 litre, increasing power and lowering emissions to meet new legislation being introduced.

            1978-1979Edit

            In 1978, the 351 Cleveland V-8 replaced the 302 Cleveland in the F-250 and F-350. The 302 Cleveland continued alongside the 351 Cleveland in the F-100. The 4.1 litre continued to be sold across the range. In 1979, the F-250 and F-350 had an automatic gearbox as an option for the first time in Australia.”
            Later in from 2001-2008 they imported the F250 from Brazil

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          “… too cumbersome for inner city parking…”?

          The exact same is said in the US about the F-150.

          “…payload a bit small…”

          That’s a US rating carried straight over and not adjusted for insane OZ pickup ratings.

          “…can not go off road…”

          Says who? Small trucks can do better, but that depends on the off road scenario. Fullsize have certain distinct advantages in many other areas besides off road, but it depends on your priorities/situation.

          “…does not have a diesel.”

          It would if it was meant for your market.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            Yep pain in the rear to park. Payload ratings they are from Toyota Japan,not Australia, your problem comes with insane towing numbers for US Pickups, they are down rated here.
            Who said it might not have a diesel?

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Yes Toyota is in Japan, but rates “payload” for where trucks are sold, and what’s accepted there.

            I’ve said it on several occasions, US fullsize pickups, and really midsizers too, have way too much max towing capacity. Any time the trailer seriously outweighs the tow vehicle it’s asking for trouble.

            Now it would be real silly of me to go on to Aussie forums and mention how inferior your OZ truck’s towing capacity is, comparing the up to 30,000 lbs US pickups can handle, trailer alone. But that’s exactly what you and BAFO do here with Aussie overrated payload.

            I really don’t care what you guys do with your insane payload capacity. Knock yourselves out. Except those ratings have no relevance here. Apples to oranges.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            Yes it would be silly to mention on some Aussie boards as they would assume you are suffering from a brain aneurysm and would need urgent medical care.
            No the payload applies to all regions. Unfortunately the same applies to the pathetic Tundra payload, it is inadequate no matter where you are

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            What truck has the same capacity rating for different markets? The Navara/Frontier and Colorado are about the same trucks for their respective markets, but very different payload capacity, for each of their markets.

            The Tundra is only rated for the US/Canada. When sold in OZ, its capacity is a straight carryover. It’s not an official import and its very conservative US/NA ratings are easily accepted in OZ.

            An Aussie pickup’s radical ratings wouldn’t fly in the US.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            No, the old Navara/ Frontier are not the same unless they sell the Frontier with.a diesel and a 2,000lb payload in the U.S.
            Tundra is rated to the maximum it can safely carry, anymore and you would have structural problems.
            Toyota’ s Hiluxes has a maximum rating of 2,700lbs, by Toyota, twice that of the Tundra, but it is a genuine work vehicle the Tundra is not

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            That alone should tell you you’re comparing two different things. Half the truck with 2X the payload?? “Static” payload must be what’s being confused.

            Our “payload” ratings take more things into account, than simply what the springs will hold before bottoming out. Such things as braking distance when maxed out, plus turning ability, engine/trans cooling, bearing load, tire ratings, headlights aim, etc, etc.

            You guys are living in the Wild West of trucking. Road Trains????

            A heavier diesel engine subtracts from payload. A least that’s how it works here. And “pickup beds” are forced here. You should subtract the weight of what ever tray you mount from “gross payload”.

            So again, I don’t care what goes on in OZ. And it sounds like you don’t have quite the liability laws and lawyers we do, but as always with you, apples to oranges.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    A Transit Connect pickup would be easy enough for Ford to do. Ford could also offer a chassis for businesses to add their own box. There are a lot of different options for a Transit Connect. Not a bad idea and a cost effective way for Ford to offer a compact truck.

  • avatar
    JimC2

    Yes, but is it pronounced “Hee-lux” or is it “High-lux?”

  • avatar
    Reino

    Can someone explain to me what makes the Helix so different than the Taco, making it so desirable?

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Well, people tend to want what they cant have. The Tacoma is a slightly watered down Hilux. Hilux is more hard-core, less “commuter friendly” than the taco. It also has (or had?) A solid front axle on 4wd versions that is highly valued by off road enthusiests.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    A couple of comments in the article are far from correct. It seems the American ignorance of what is reality beyond the American shores is rampant in these pickup articles with many half truths and misleading or just purely ignorant comments due to fear of external competition.

    WRONG……….Safety figures into this, as well, as trucks made for the global market aren’t made for the U.S.’ special needs.

    As a matter of fact global pickup in modern OECD economies have had safer pickups than the US for sometime. US pickup safety improvements is more recent.

    WRONG……….. Meanwhile, differences in how trucks are packaged — big blingmobiles for American consumers, spartan utility for everyone else — are likely to stem importation for a while.

    Look at what is on offer and big sellers in modern and mature markets. I do know in Australia mid and highend pickups are the rage and not only that 4×4 is on 3/4s of all pickups sold. The same in the EU, NZ, etc.

    The chicken tax will and must go. When this occurs you will see an influx of vehicles that will not only make the private vehicle owner happier, but business will be able to buy vehicles better suited to meet their requirements.

    I do also see the US gradually becoming more integrated into the global vehicle regulatory regime. And why not? The US is still using Beta and the rest of us have VHS. This only increases vehicle costs to the US consumer.

    Just because a vehicle is larger does not make it better. A bigger Big Mac is still crap.

    Pch101, your Amarok numbers are at least 4-5 years old. Also remember the Amarok is a new segment VW is breaking into. There is talk of further Amarok production facilities.

    As usual you mix some fact with misinformation to generate an argument/comment that is spun.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      As usual you are the one that is wrong. Cars that meet euro safety standards need upgrades, sometimes quite significant upgrades to meet US safety standards. In Euro standards pedestrians are given higher priority than occupants. Euro standards do not have anywhere near as strict standards for flame travel in case of a fire, nor chemicals that can be released by fire.

      Look at all the work that was done to your beloved GM midsize pickups to make them legal to sell in the US.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        BAFO’s stance is US safety standards are meant to block less safe foreign cars. That was never the intention of the regulations. Except the European market could have easily followed US regulations, but instead set up their own, after the fact, while purposely and blatantly zigging everywhere US regs zag. Is that the fault of the US DOT, EPA, etc?

        If there’s victims here (small foreign OEMs), the European Union is to blame.

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          Meanwhile, the “really safe” US vehicles cannot be exported anywhere else and I am not taking about Pickups

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            For example? What US market vehicle is unsafe for international consumption?

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @BBall,
            Try selling a U.S.HDT truck in Europe, unless it has been tested it is automatically failed . Freight liner has said its Cabs have passed European regulations, big deal to get European seal of approval

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        BAFO is a buffoon. He could use a full-time factchecker just to keep up with his errors. But nobody will pay for those corrections, so it’s best to just scroll past him.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

          He’s causing me to lose respect for Aussies, whom Ive always held in high regard. I hope he does not represent the majority of his people. Then again, these are the people who bitch and complain about the end of the Falcon and similar cars, all while on their way to buy another Corolla POS.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Johnnie,
            If you base judgement or attempt to make an assessment using a minute cross section of information or data, your analysis will be flawed.

            So my assessment on any opinion you put forward highlights it is tainted or better still ill considered. Paradigms are good if they are based on as much information as possible.

            This is illustrated by some of the flawed and US centric comments passed by what will now term the 3 Stooges, or maybe 6 Stooges.

            Oh, you know who you are.

            The world is an amazing place, get out and open your eyes. You are definitely blind.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          pch101,
          At least I do know that the use of mayonaise with frys, frites, chips, etc is Flemish. This denotes Dutch.

          I do suspect that mayonaise was taken from France, like minced beef, ie, hamburger came from St Petersburg.

          But, again you talk worldly with no knowledge, like your automotive knowledge.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @Scoutdude, let us look at in reverse, why they do not sell the Chevrolet Colorado , Tacoma to places that the U.S.has a FTA.?

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    You don’t see that many newer regular cab pickups in the half ton full size. I don’t see that they will be viable long term. A lot of fleets have gone to crew cabs and extended cabs and non-business users are more likely to buy crew cabs as a family vehicle. Personally it doesn’t effect me one way or the other. Denver Mike has said before that the different size beds and cab configurations cost the manufacturers. I agree and that is why I think eventually the regular cabs will be discontinued in the full size pickups eventually. An extended cab is not a lot bigger than a regular cab and with a seat delete option most fleet buyers are not going to care as long as the price difference is not too much.

    As for the extended cabs becoming more like club cabs or smaller crew cabs that has been a trend the GM and Ram have gone to. It remains to be seen if Ford does the same. I doubt the midsize trucks will go to the club cab configuration but then they might. It is advantageous for the manufacturer to upgrade everyone to a crew cab but then it remains to be seen how successful that would be. Will the consumer accept just crew cab only?

    • 0 avatar
      redav

      I prefer having enough space behind the seat to fit a tool box or other items I don’t want exposed. Also, having room for seat adjustment is nice. I have no need for seats back there, though. So, I like a slightly extended cab but not a double cab. Of course, the doors need to work such that the space is accessible.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    It would be hard to have a mini-truck craze today since there are no new mini-trucks. Mini-trucks have disappeared unless you count the older mini-trucks, 20 years old or older, still roaming the roads. Full size half tons have grown in size as well approaching the size of 3/4 ton trucks. If you want to call midsize trucks mini-trucks that is your choice but size wise they are not mini. Denver Mike name me one new truck in the US that you would consider a mini-truck? I can see your point in that the Dodge Caravan, Honda Odyssey, Toyota Sienna, and Kia Sedona are called mini vans but in reality they are much bigger than the original mini-vans. In reality these vans should be referred to as midsize. The difference with the trucks is that none of the manufacturers refer to their midsize trucks as mini-trucks so at least they are more truthful. Hard to have a mini-truck craze when the product itself has not been manufactured in years. A mini-truck craze is about like having a Crosley or Edsel craze.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      The mini-truck craze was all about ‘timing’. The perfect storm. You can bring back mini-trucks, but not the trend. Fleets would love to have them back, especially regular cabs, and so would the bottom feeders and cheapskates. Great for those consumers, but not so great for the OEMs hoping for lots of retail buyers looking for fully loaded pickups.

      Mini-trucks were sold at cut-rate prices, but very profitable from tremendous volume.

      And back then, mini-trucks shared many parts with rwd cars and SUVs. For remaining midsize pickup OEMs, it’s a lose/lose all around, while cannibalizing way more profitable fwd cars/CUVs/etc.
      We’re just in a totally different era. Forget about mini-trucks, who still sells parachute Pantz????

      • 0 avatar
        redav

        I agree that I don’t think it’s wise for automakers to get into the small truck segment, despite the fact that’s what I’m looking for. I don’t think there’s enough volume for them to be profitable.

        That said, I do think the market can support one automaker building them, but definitely not everyone getting into the game.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I have forgotten about mini trucks, it is you that keep bringing them up. You use the old long gone mini truck craze like a broken record for all your arguments so it is obvious that you haven’t forgotten and that you are beating a dead horse. The real question should not be would foreign imports increase significantly, it should be why would you keep a 50 year old tariff still around that has outlived its original purpose? I can see why a UAW member would want the tariff but from a consumer standpoint any tariff this significant will keep prices higher. A free market without protectionist tariffs will always benefit the final consumer. Another one of your arguments is that few pay this 25% tariff. If that is true then why keep an antiquated tariff on the books that cost the Government funds to enforce? Can you Denver Mike come up with a rational reason to keep the Chicken Tax?

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      Dropping tariffs unilaterally is dumb. International trade is a matter of quid pro quo, and negotiators who have to deal with the stuff in the real world, beyond an internet comments section, should be horse trading to get things in return.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Why? Do you not like competition?

        Why should big business have the consumer by the balls?

        If the consumer wins, then a country wins. This leaves the consumer to invest more resources into expanding the economy and not waste resources propping unviable industry. The viable industries will rise and not increase taxation through handouts, paying more than necessary for a product.

        A motor vehicle is like a TV or fridge, a appliance.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I thought that is why we were negotiating tariffs so that the US could get easier access to China and other Asian countries. You are not correct thinking that we are lifting this tariff without getting something in return. The original purpose of the Chicken Tax was to retaliated against a 25% poultry tax accessed against cheap US poultry imports. The poultry tax against US poultry no longer exists but the tariff against trucks still remains even though other parts of the Chicken Tax have expired. The Chicken Tax has outlived its intended purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      Argh. You asked why the tariff remains.

      Answer: Because the FTA deals have not yet been negotiated.

      When the US gets an FTA, the chicken tax goes away. If other countries are bothered by the chicken tax, then they had better give us something in return. Until they do, they are still subject to it.

      (And China is not part of the TPP.)

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I thought we were in the process of negotiating the FTA. This will probably happen and we will reach an agreement. If not then this tax will remain in effect until some agreement is reached in the future. As for the Chicken Tax itself if you would bother to read the link you would understand the original purpose of the tariff and why it has outlived its purpose unless of course you are for more taxes.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      The EU has a 22% tariff on pickup trucks with engines larger than 2.5 liters and a 10% tariff on cars. The EU’s car tariff is four times higher than the US tariff. This whole thing began when France and Germany imposed tariffs on US poultry exports; the US merely retaliated.

      Why aren’t you whining about that? Why are you expecting the US to drop its tariffs while the EU doesn’t reciprocate?

      (And while you’re at it, learn to use the reply button.)

      • 0 avatar
        Jeff S

        I am not whining, just merely stating a fact. It appears that you are in favor of higher taxes. How many cars do we import from France? I know we import cars from Germany but German manufacturers have plants in the US as US based manufacturers like Ford and GM have plants in Europe. Don’t many European countries have taxes on vehicles with engine displacements of 2.5 liters and more? I don’t think they are singling out the US manufacturers as much as they are trying to discourage large displacement engines and encourage people to buy smaller more fuel efficient vehicles.

        Another question I would pose to you is how many pickups and light trucks does the US import from Germany, France, and Britain? Originally we imported a VW truck that was based on the VW bus but the Chicken Tax took care of that. We do import the Transit Connect which I believe is manufactured in a Ford plant in Turkey. The Transit Connect is imported with seats to get around the 25% Chicken Tax but then when it reaches the US Ford takes the seats out. Sounds like an efficient way to import a vehicle. It appears you are more upset about the possible elimination of the Chicken Tax. Do you have a vested interest in this tax?

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          “It appears that you are in favor of higher taxes”

          It appears that your reading skills are compromised.

          Type the following words into Google:

          -quid pro quo
          -reciprocity

          Then, do a little research and figure out that the US is also subject to other nations’ tariffs.

          Yes, I am absolutely opposed to the US ***unilaterally*** scrapping its tariffs. There is no reason that the US should drop the chicken tax on the Europeans while the EU continues to levy a 22% tariff on large pickups and a 10% tariff on every other kind of vehicle.

          If the US can get a trade deal that it wants, then fine, horse trade the chicken tax for it — it is a fairly irrelevant tariff, anyway. But don’t give it away without also getting something in return.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @Jeff S – At the time, the VW Transporter was about the only import pickup worth mentioning. But if you think it was an actual threat to US pickups, you’re completely deluded. Barely on anyone’s pickup truck ‘radar’ It was a political statement straight up.

      Today the chicken tax is totally irrelevant. If it benefits any OEMs, it’s Honda, Hyundai, Toyota, Mazda, VW, Nissan and many others, that something like Mitsu, Mahindra, Ssangyong, etc, pickups would compete directly with their smaller pickups, CUVs, minivans, wagons, etc.

      But that too assumes many or any global pickup OEMs care to enter the torturous US market.

      • 0 avatar
        Jeff S

        Denver Mike–You missed my point. Whether or not the Chicken Tax is effective or not the point is that it is an antiquated tax that still exists long after the chickens left the roost. As for the VW truck it sold in large enough volumes to be profitable for VW but it was not ever going to displace full size pickups. Not every vehicle available from a manufacturer is intended to be the Number 1 seller in its class but if a vehicle makes a profit and fits into a manufacturer’s lineup then why not make it available. Is every product that Ford makes a top seller? If you have one top seller then you are doing well and if you have 2 or more then you are doing better than most. Anytime there is a tax you discourage potential competition thereby limiting a market and in effect raising prices to the consumer. This is basic Economics 101. To deny that a tariff or any protective measure has no effect upon the consumer is to deny basic economics. Now if you are asking how much of an effect then that is something that might be harder to measure.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          The EU has a 22% tariff on large trucks. Should I keep repeating this until you get it?

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            So they have a demand for HD Pickups in Europe? Not really. Large trucks for them would be HDTs

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          @Jeff S.
          The UAW thinks the Chicken Tax is good for the U.S. economy because it puts a price burden on non UAW built imported vehicles. Manufacturers are happy too. The original Chickens died some while ago, the Tax has become a fairly draconian barrier, that really require the manufacturers
          To rebuild a completed vehicle in the U.S., but unfortunately it has had some negative affects on the Vehicles I.e Rust

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          @Jeff S – So the Chicken tax is antiquated. OK. So are the world’s tariffs. And? It can’t really be killed, as it’s a ‘bargaining chip’. If the US drops it out_of_the_blue, what’s there to leverage EU crazy 10 to 22% tariffs on import autos?

          If the Transporter was profitable for VW, why should anyone in the US care? It didn’t sell enough to impact the US pickup market, but it’s something the US could take away from VW and Europe in general.

          The Chicken tax was all about retaliation and sending a stern message. That’s all it was, regardless of what pundits and idiot trolls read into it today, about it “propping up” the US fullsize pickup market and other BS.

          The UAW should hate the Chicken tax and EU tariffs if they have any brains. We already have the best and biggest sellers the EU has to offer. The UAW would be the biggest winners involved if all tariffs went away between the two. Use some commonsense and logic.

          Remember which OEMs would lose the most if there were no more chicken tax nor EU tariffs. Honda, Hyundai, Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, Kia, VW, etc. Most of these already have a decent foothold in Europe and markets around the world and would then have to compete with Ford, GM, Chrysler, UAW cars and trucks overseas, around the world.

          And on top of that, global OEMs then entering the US market for the 1st time (or reentering) and competing directly “bread and butter” cars from Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, VW, etc.

          Think about it this time, instead of just reciting old talking points borrowed from BAFO and his sidekick.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • PandaBear: Yaris and XLE doesn’t belong in the same model, just like you wouldn’t make a Lexus with CE or...
  • highdesertcat: That’s what I had in mind when I wrote my comment. Know of one instance where Dex-Cool...
  • PandaBear: They are probably either #1 or #2 AC manufacturer in the world. Never heard of Lennox outside of the US.
  • Inside Looking Out: It is like my wife. She often scares my into hitting brakes.
  • Inside Looking Out: It is like my wife. She often scares my into hitting brakes,

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber