"thebigbossyboss" (thebigbossyboss)
07/16/2014 at 20:40 • Filed to: None
2
8|
"thebigbossyboss" (thebigbossyboss)
07/16/2014 at 20:40 • Filed to: None | 2
| 8 |
Earlier today some of you agreed and some of you disagreed when I said the BMW i3 was pretty ugly from a side angle.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
This led to a discussion about the belt lines on cars and how new cars have really tall belt lines these days. Here's the thing for me: I am okay with high belt lines and ridiculous sight lines on sports cars.
For true sports cars, terrible sight lines have been a part of the equation since about 1955. (pre ww2 sports cars generally had no roof and thus great sight lines).
One of the worst offenders in this category is the Lamborghini Countach. If you need proof of that, you can watch this excellent video about a man and his Countach. Of particular note, watch him reverse the car at 3:50. He has to stick his head backwards out the door to reverse. You can't see anything out the 4 inch back window.
And you know what? I think it's great. It doesn't matter that sports cars and especially exotics have terrible sight lines. I expect a Countach owner to know "they can't see shit" and be fairly careful on the road, because the Countach is not an average car. I think the Countach is one of the best cars ever made.
What's not great is when vehicles like the Ford Expedition have tall belt lines.
Your average Ford Expedition is piloted either by parents, law enforcement or other random governmental officials.
The Dodge Charger is another contender for your average vehicle with a high belt line.
And on average, I think the Expedition drivers are pretty average. Some are undoubtedly good (generally cops tend to be good drivers, lots of wheel time) but some Expedition drivers undoubtedly suck.
(edit remove repeated sentence).
And therein lies the rub. Not just anyone drives a Lamborghini Countach or a sports car around. Everyone drives Expeditions, Chargers, the Chrysler 300 and so on.
Pairing an average driver with a car with large blind spots (especially in a big vehicle) is just asking for trouble. I nearly had my car (at that time my 2003 Cavalier was lowered) run over by a Expedition reversing. When the driver got out he said "sorry man I didn't see you at all". I was too low to be seen.
So car designers: Let's keep our sports cars looking good. The more exotic the less practicality is needed. But when we're building something like the Expedition, the Volvo XC90 and the Chrysler 300, let's keep rear visibility in mind ok? The rest of us want our little economy cars to last a while, and not be crushed to death by some idiot in a highbelt line car who can't see anything.
Thanks for reading Oppo.
Milky
> thebigbossyboss
07/16/2014 at 20:48 |
|
#Designer saying high belt lines look better. Look at any car sketch.
Also parking sensors, lane keep assist, blind spot monitor systems, back up cameras, etc.
ranwhenparked
> thebigbossyboss
07/16/2014 at 20:56 |
|
This is a fad that just needs to stop. I don't know anyone who likes high beltlines, even non-car people I know that aren't normally attuned to such things can recognize how annoying it is to not be able to see out of newer cars.
I imagine it stems from a desire to make people "feel" safer by encasing them in metal, along with just the normal groupthink that goes on in the tight knit world of auto design.
Textured Soy Protein
> Milky
07/16/2014 at 21:05 |
|
I'll take the ability to actually see out of the car over a bunch of sensors.
|
Milky
> Textured Soy Protein
07/16/2014 at 21:14 |
|
I'm a fan of no sight and no sensors personally, but to each their own.
|
Textured Soy Protein
> thebigbossyboss
07/16/2014 at 21:22 |
|
Aside from styling considerations, high beltlines are all about safety, and trunk space.
The best car I've owned, in terms of being able to see out of the thing, was a '92 Integra GSR.
So much glass. Such a low beltline. It was great.
Now though, you have high beltlines to surround people with metal to protect them in crashes, and taller trunks give more volume without making the car longer. So you end up with cars with fat asses that you can't see out of, like the Chevy Malibu.
I've had a few of these as rentals, and the rear visibility blows.
Such is progress.
JGrabowMSt
> thebigbossyboss
07/16/2014 at 21:44 |
|
i can agree with this. I want my regular cruisers to be comfortable, visible to everyday obstacles, and something easy to get in and out of.
I want my sports cars to be a challenge. They should give me a hard time. I should connect to it more and be uncomfortable. It should be hard to just cruise around. Theyre built to do more than that anyway.
Zipppy, Mazdurp builder, Probeski owner and former ricerboy
> thebigbossyboss
07/16/2014 at 22:04 |
|
A good example is my mother's Odyssey. visibility is mediocre, blocked by a high beltline and large pillars. I'm tempted to park with my head peering out the door. It has a rear camera which helps, it seems like all the years we've owned it she's been reliant on it, and won't know how to maneuver without it and the parking sensors.
|
thebigbossyboss
> Textured Soy Protein
07/16/2014 at 22:11 |
|
Yeah. Nice choice on the Acura btw.