The US started phasing in roof crush requirements in 2012, which caused manufacturers to put in more metal for the frame. That meant reducing visibility and all but requiring backup cameras.
Why do we need roof crush requirements? Because those SUVs have a high center of gravity.
This has been the way of things. Cars are just plain unsafe, and trying to make them safe also makes them worse at everything else, including being affordable.
That’s definitely a problem, but the ridiculously high belt line of modern cars isn’t really as affected by that though. All modern cars are basically the equivalent of the old man who pulls their pants up to their nipples.
Look at the 1990s impala vs the last gen Impala. Rear visibility is nonexistant in it because the trunk is so high.
Seems like a lot if manufacturers are just bad at design because my Forester has incredible visibility, easily the best of any car I’ve owned. It’s arguably a bit ugly because of it, but I don’t care about that much.
The US started phasing in roof crush requirements in 2012, which caused manufacturers to put in more metal for the frame. That meant reducing visibility and all but requiring backup cameras.
Why do we need roof crush requirements? Because those SUVs have a high center of gravity.
This has been the way of things. Cars are just plain unsafe, and trying to make them safe also makes them worse at everything else, including being affordable.
That’s definitely a problem, but the ridiculously high belt line of modern cars isn’t really as affected by that though. All modern cars are basically the equivalent of the old man who pulls their pants up to their nipples.
Look at the 1990s impala vs the last gen Impala. Rear visibility is nonexistant in it because the trunk is so high.
https://hips.hearstapps.com/autoweek/assets/s3fs-public/6FV55c1HMDfBR-BESdVCQJZvKOCe2KlT-ul3DTT4BpM.jpg
https://www.autotrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2020-Chevrolet-Impala-.5..jpg
Basically people just want to feel like their in some impenetrable fortress, at the expense of not being able to see shit around them.
Solution: Add a $10 camera and a $50 video screen, and markup the car $2,000 because it’s got a rear view camera now.
Seems like a lot if manufacturers are just bad at design because my Forester has incredible visibility, easily the best of any car I’ve owned. It’s arguably a bit ugly because of it, but I don’t care about that much.