Modern cars are bad
in [Car Maintenance]
|
Prev: mk5 passat help
Next: Another alarm post
From: johannes on 12 Jun 2010 08:33 Because you can't see out of them. The MPV type window arrangement feels claustrophobic; you can see straight ahead and through the side windows, but the view at an angle is obscured by heavy pillars. Why this backward step in car design? Have car buyers just got used to it because: "that is how it is...". Good outward vision will be strict criterion for my choice of next car. A shining example of good design is James Bond's DB5 which has been much in the news recently; look how the windscreen nicely wraps around, this was common for many cars in the 1960's. Good design http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Aston.db5.coupe.300pix.jpg Bad design http://www.automotorsport.se/bigpix/2008/fordKa_dator_big.jpg
From: Conor on 12 Jun 2010 11:41 On 12/06/2010 13:33, johannes wrote: > Because you can't see out of them. The MPV type window arrangement feels > claustrophobic; you can see straight ahead and through the side windows, > but the view at an angle is obscured by heavy pillars. Why this backward > step in car design? So why not buy a car instead? There's thousands of different models and makes. Buy one that's more suitable for you. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk
From: Ret. on 12 Jun 2010 12:12 johannes wrote: > Because you can't see out of them. The MPV type window arrangement > feels claustrophobic; you can see straight ahead and through the side > windows, but the view at an angle is obscured by heavy pillars. Why > this backward step in car design? Have car buyers just got used to it > because: "that is how it is...". Good outward vision will be strict > criterion for my choice of next car. A shining example of good design > is James Bond's DB5 which has been much in the news recently; look > how the windscreen nicely wraps around, this was common for many cars > in the 1960's. > > Good design > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Aston.db5.coupe.300pix.jpg > > Bad design > http://www.automotorsport.se/bigpix/2008/fordKa_dator_big.jpg It depends upon whether you want an excellent view - or good passenger safety. In the good old days of thin roof pillars - the roof would just collapse down onto the body if the car overturned. Today it wont. Having said that, there are certainly some cars with worse visibility than others. Which? magazine recently did an article on this. The Honda Civic did very badly for driver views out. http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/02/car-visibility-getting-worse-says-which-car-204045 -- Kev
From: johannes on 12 Jun 2010 13:23 "Ret." wrote: > > johannes wrote: > > Because you can't see out of them. The MPV type window arrangement > > feels claustrophobic; you can see straight ahead and through the side > > windows, but the view at an angle is obscured by heavy pillars. Why > > this backward step in car design? Have car buyers just got used to it > > because: "that is how it is...". Good outward vision will be strict > > criterion for my choice of next car. A shining example of good design > > is James Bond's DB5 which has been much in the news recently; look > > how the windscreen nicely wraps around, this was common for many cars > > in the 1960's. > > > > Good design > > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Aston.db5.coupe.300pix.jpg > > > > Bad design > > http://www.automotorsport.se/bigpix/2008/fordKa_dator_big.jpg > > It depends upon whether you want an excellent view - or good passenger > safety. In the good old days of thin roof pillars - the roof would just > collapse down onto the body if the car overturned. Today it wont. Having > said that, there are certainly some cars with worse visibility than others. > Which? magazine recently did an article on this. The Honda Civic did very > badly for driver views out. > > http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/02/car-visibility-getting-worse-says-which-car-204045 The 'classic' Saab 900 was a strong car with excellent passenger safety, but it didn't have this visibility problem at the front: http://www.netcarshow.com/saab/1984-900_turbo_16s/800x600/wallpaper_02.htm Part of the problem, I think is the now 'fashionable' flat-angled windscreens which makes the cars look good in the brochures. Obviously, a flatter angle needs stronger pillars to support the roof, and the cab-forward position of the windscreen creates huge problems for the designers. See e.g. Ford S-max. http://www.atodoautos.com/wp-content/gallery/ford-s-max/ford_smax.jpg
From: Mrcheerful on 12 Jun 2010 14:01
johannes wrote: > Because you can't see out of them. The MPV type window arrangement > feels claustrophobic; you can see straight ahead and through the side > windows, but the view at an angle is obscured by heavy pillars. Why > this backward step in car design? Have car buyers just got used to it > because: "that is how it is...". Good outward vision will be strict > criterion for my choice of next car. A shining example of good design > is James Bond's DB5 which has been much in the news recently; look > how the windscreen nicely wraps around, this was common for many cars > in the 1960's. > > Good design > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Aston.db5.coupe.300pix.jpg > > Bad design > http://www.automotorsport.se/bigpix/2008/fordKa_dator_big.jpg I seem to remember that a major criticism of the PA cresta was of its windscreen which distorted the view terribly on the bent round bit. |