Can't stand these new high waist designs either, always with a far too shallow windscreen that you have to limbo under, and adopt a laid back approach to driving as if in a single seater.
Was inside a new Alfa GT on Friday, quite made Anthony's Astra experience seem spacious and well lit in the rear, and forget reversing the things.
I think it was the Audi TT that started the fad, swmbo used to have to drive one occasionally, she thought it probably similar to driving a coffin.
By the way, spare a thought for us chaps that have to load them onto transporters at all angles, try and get your head out the window enough to see where the wheels are, need a longer neck..;)
|
|
Is it that Chrysler (300?) which looks as though someone had stepped on it an squashed the windows? Hideous!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure that it would be quite easy to devise some sort of standardised visibility rating for comparing cars. Putting numbers to things helps people choose vehicles by fuel consumption, and similarly EuroNCAP has helped drivers assess the safety of a vehicle. The NCAP tests are severely compromised by their failure to measure all sorts of critical aspects of safety, but are still a lot better than nothing.
|
Its not a problem, and my answer is the same as those who mention thick A pillars. To borrow Donald Rumsfeld - its the known unknowns. You can see what you can't see, so you make an effort to see it. Ie you move around more, turn your head perhaps.
Take the A post in the Altea - Thick. Its so thick that its blindingly obvious you have a visibility issue, so you overcompensate and look round it - twice - you move your head and look round it. That in my book makes it safer than thinner ones where you can be drawn into thinking you have no visibility issue - where in fact there could be.
Its the same as blocking visibility to roundabouts and junctions. You make the driver nervous, cautious because its clear that you cant see so you take extra care.
|
That in my book makes it safer than thinner ones where you can be drawn into thinking you have no visibility issue - where in fact there could be.
So why not improve your safety one step further by gluing some blackout curtain to the windscreen in front of you, and driving with your head stuck out the window?
|
because then you cant see the left hand side of the car. Are you blonde this week NW? ;)
|
because then you cant see the left hand side of the car. Are you blonde this week NW? ;)
My diary says I was due to go blonde on monday, but I can't actually remember. ;)
Anyway, if you really want to see the left side too, just poke your head out the sunroof. (I maybe blonde, but I'm not dumb ;p )
|
I've mentioned in the past that the explanation given to me was the pedestrian safety requirements involving car bonnets i.e. to compensate for the higher bonnet line the windows have become narrower in depth.
Even in the new, much larger Mondeo the effect can be claustrophobic for some people and it's also very easy to bang your head getting in and out of the car if you are not careful.
|
|
I think this is why the visibility was such a revelation in my Ro80 when I first got it - as a relatively young driver (28) I have become acustomed to modern, high waisted cars and I have to say, for example, pulling out from a motorway slip road feels MUCH safer in the Ro - albeit if somebody hit me, I wouldn't do as well as if I were driving my newer car...
|
|
|
I've mentioned in the past that the explanation given to me was the pedestrian safety requirements involving car bonnets i.e. to compensate for the higher bonnet line the windows have become narrower in depth.
A high bonnet does indeed necessitate a higher windscreen (unless other design compromises are made), but that's nothing to with the way that some designers have chosen to make the waistline of the car rise steeply upwards from the front to the back, or how windows behind the rear door doors have been all but abolished. That's just styling, for the benefit of those who thunk it looks kewl.
|
|
|
>To compensate for the higher bonnet line the windows have become narrower in depth.
= shallower? :-) Seriously, that is a desperate attempt to come up with a decent reason. One could equally well argue that with deeper windows the chances of avoiding pedestrians were better? It is all about style and keeping up with trends (which in the case of 4x4s look like being short-lived). The view out of an obsolete car like a 205 is far better than any current similar model. Also, although some people grumble that one has to stoop to get into a 306, I find I have to duck my head further to get into a Qashqai - its roof is higher, but so is the seat.
|
|
Yes, if they raise the window line they should raise the seat, as Skoda did when replacing the old Fabia with the current one, but I'm not sure that Ford made sufficient adjustment when changing to the current, smaller-windowed, Mondeo (I haven't driven one).
|
|
the rear side windows on the suzuki swift look like they have been fitted by a DIY'er with a bad hangover completly put me of the car just seeing it for 100 yards away i didnt even bother going in to take a closer look, style....uur no i dont think so
|
The Transit Connect has the worst windscreen I've ever been behind. Far too high, too much unnecessary light, and driving into the sun is a nightmare.
I haven't driven one on a hot day, but I'll bet it's even worse then. To compensate for an unwanted view of the sky, sun and treetops, Ford have fitted massive sun visor's.
What is the point ?
|
I have a connection with the automotive glass industry and in fact the glass content of cars has been increasing. Over a ten year period by 25% or more on average. Not perhaps due to side, front and backlights, the focus of much of the comment here, but to the use of complex curved glass for styling reasons. The panoramic roof is a gift to glass manufacturers as are the "J" curves of things like the Clio backlight which started a bit of a fashion for these sorts of things. basically the more you can bend glass in two or more different directions at the same time the more opportunity there is for creative styling. If you think back to the original fiesta or the old renault 4 and compare the glass content there with cars nowadays there is an obvious difference particularly if you see pictures of them side by side. The french manufacturers are among the more adventurous. It was a trend driven by the fact that at one time, not sure about now, glass was cheaper than steel and offered more design options.
MGs
|
|
Bus and coach styling is going the other way, with more and more glass, especially at the front!
|
I have a connection with the automotive glass industry and in fact the glass content of cars has been increasing. Over a ten year period by 25% or more on average.
But that's no use if 2 inches around the perimeter is covered with black dots and sealant...
Agree with the mention of the NSU Ro80, or even something like a Triumph Herald. Elegant thin pillars are much more pleasant than the current trend for muscular styling and gloomy interiors.
|
I saw a high spec Seat Leon the other day - the side windows virtually disappeared at the rear of the vehicle.
The basic front bonnet design might, hopefully, substantially extend the life of some unfortunate pedestrian, but for the rest of the time the lack of visibility for Leon (or similarly restricted vision) drivers may well cause unnecessary accidents.
|
Agree with the mention of the NSU Ro80 or even something like a Triumph Herald. Elegant thin pillars are much more pleasant than the current trend for muscular styling and gloomy interiors.
Thin pillars might be more elegant, but would you want to be in such a car when it flips over onto its roof?
|
>Thin pillars might be more elegant, but would you want to be in such a car when it flips over onto its roof?
No, but none of my cars has ever done that. Meanwhile I have enjoyed an unimpeded view out for well over 40 years. If I worried severely about extreme improbabilities I would likely stay at home.
|
|
|
|
|
