High beltlines - please stop this trend

"wantafuncar" (wantafuncar) 02/26/2015 at 07:56 • Filed to: beltline

3

19

A recent comment about beltlines, got me thinking: Why are beltlines so high? Don't the designers know it comes at the expense of visibility?

!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! article on Slate seems to believe it is because it "looks better." To my mind, this does not work. Take the Camaro for example. 15 years ago, it appeared as if it had a bigger greenhouse. 15 years before that with the IROC era, it appeared as if it had even larger windows. 15 years before that was the beautiful 1970 Camaro so I don't really care what greenhouse it had. But that is the point — I personally would rank the appearance in order of the largest greenhouse (in theory - I couldn't find actual numbers for the window size). I find the 1970 the best, the 1985 second best, the 2000 third best, and the new one last. I get that this is subjective, but visibility shouldn't be.

I guess we have lost our way on viewing visibility and active driver involvement as the first step towards safety. People would rather be closed into a box that !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

The primary reason from the earlier article was this: When considering the proportions of a car, the smaller the upper third is in relation to the lower two-thirds, the sportier it looks. While I understand that the public wants sporty looking cars, can we not have good looking cars or sporty cars without sacrificing visibility? Especially on cars like the Prius or (insert vanilla commuter car / toaster here). I mean - its a Prius. Why does it need to even remotely look sporty? I really do not see the upside of ridiculously high beltlines.

Small side point - I'm sure others have had this experience, but I've ridden in and driven cars where the ridiculously high beltline has actually had a negative impact on ergonomics.

FalconHoon > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 07:59

1

because designers are old.

Funktheduck > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 08:03

7

It has more to do with safety standards. Increased requirements for roof structure means pillars have to be shorter and thicker to support the weight of the car if it were to be on its roof.

BloodlessWeevil > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 08:07

2

Impact standards. As much as people want better visibility, too many people refuse to buy cars with poor crash ratings. The strongest chassis in the world does not prevent things from going straight through the window.

E. Julius > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 08:07

5

Yep, funktheduck hit the nail on the head. This isn't so much a design trend as it is a design necessity to meet ever increasing safety standards. Pillars have to be thicker to increase the rigidity if the car lands on its roof. Doors have to be taller and thicker so that they can actually absorb energy in a crash (as opposed to glass). Unfortunately there are lots of neat looking design elements we're unlikely to see again given the dramatically different engineering requirements of modern vehicles.

wantafuncar > FalconHoon 02/26/2015 at 08:18

0

Get off my lawn!

thebigbossyboss > BloodlessWeevil 02/26/2015 at 08:23

2

I have bucked the trend and bought a car with a poor crash rating. Slow down for what???!

505Turbeaux > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 08:27

1

I like to open the windows and park my arm on the door card, so I get you on the ergonomics of it all. I think it is terrible, but if you start phasing in a lower beltline then noone can jerk off without feeling like everyone can see you

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 08:29

3

The reason automotive designers are lifting belt lines on cars of all kinds is because they think it looks better.

Has nothing at all to do with safety regulations. Nope. Designers have free reign to design what they want and choose this.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > 505Turbeaux 02/26/2015 at 08:30

2

Ass T-Tops to the mix, and highway drives get very lonely...

kanadanmajava1 > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 08:34

1

I think that the main reason is the side impact test. The impact barrier is placed annoyingly high which means that the easiest way to pass the test is to place the beltline above the barrier impact area.

And it seems that most people think that a car seems very safe if the visibility is pretty much totally blocked by the pillars high beltline.

Hiroku > Funktheduck 02/26/2015 at 08:37

2

You need thick-ass pillars for what now?

Funktheduck > Hiroku 02/26/2015 at 08:42

1

Sketchy ad. Look at the wheel gap/tires. Neither look like they have any extra weight on them. Stick 4 fat people in one of those and you'll see more signs of load baring than what's in that picture.

vondon302 > wantafuncar 02/26/2015 at 09:14

1

Blame Ralph nadar. If that a pillar gets any bigger I'm done with new cars!

Two Drink Minimum > thebigbossyboss 02/26/2015 at 09:21

4

Abarth driver here. You can only kill me if you can catch me.

wantafuncar > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 02/26/2015 at 14:07

0

I was quoting the article. Actually, thats why I posed this — I assumed oppo would know and chime in

wantafuncar > vondon302 02/26/2015 at 14:08

0

But old cars are unsafe. At any speed they could kill. Buy new!

thebigbossyboss > Two Drink Minimum 02/26/2015 at 14:39

1

I have never considered crash ratings in my purchases. #ain'tcare. Apparently.

Hiroku > Funktheduck 02/26/2015 at 15:05

0

Granted, the picture does seem to have been touched up, as you would expect from pretty much any picture destined for advertising.

However, as long as the statement that this car can hold over 6 tons on its roof holds true, I call bullshit on every new car needing fat A-pillars solely for rollover protection. It might very well make it easier to pass such tests, but is most likely not entirely needed if the designers really wanted to put more focus on ergonomics and visibility rather than design.

Funktheduck > Hiroku 02/26/2015 at 15:53

0

There's a difference between the static force of something resting upon something else and the extra force generated during a roll over.

It is probably easier to make a strong structure like an old Volvo when using a boxy design as well. But fuel economy regs mean no more boxy cars.