• expatriado@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          yea, that figure comes to my mind when it is said larger cars consume more gasoline, so they pay more gas taxes, therefore that compensate road damage, but the proportion is way off

          on other note, i like to think 1000 light scratches do less damage to the skin than one very energetic

          • plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            It’s not uncommon for roads to have load limits (ie 70% rated axle capacity) for certain times of the year, when the subgrade is more susceptible to damage. Like during spring frost thaw. A fully loaded vehicle would essentially sink breaking the asphalt bond and everything in the subgrade.

    • TheGoldenV@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Counter to what you’ve heard? Like it’s the light car traffic doing the damage?

      Edit: To clarify- when I say damage I mean to the roadway surface and not the surrounding infrastructure.

      • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Even the surrounding infrastructure.

        Cars are designed to take the damage of a crash and dissipate the energy, transport trucks aren’t. Then there’s the momentum issue.

        One truck crashing into a bridge is way more damage than a bunch of cars.