3 ms·

Cars in the 80s and 90s definitely had more of a "greenhouse" feel to them, with mostly transparent glass and small framing. Due to a mixture of standards, thi

Cars in the 80s and 90s definitely had more of a "greenhouse" feel to them, with mostly transparent glass and small framing. Due to a mixture of standards, this has changed. The roof cap and pillars have thickened and curved for roll-over protection, and front pillars are also thicker to hold air bags that didn't exist in those older cars. The windows sills are higher up relative to the driver, to improve side-impact protection. There are other changes too, such as dark coatings around the edges of windshields and fat mounts behind the rear view mirror to hold sensors, cameras, etc. As a tall driver, I find these changes very frustrating. The rear view mirror is capable of hiding a crossing car at a 4-way stop, and I sometimes cannot even see overhead traffic lights when stopped in the first position at an intersection.

crote 3y ago
> Due to a mixture of standards, this has changed. The roof cap and pillars have thickened and curved for roll-over protection, and front pillars are also thicker to hold air bags that didn't exist in those older cars. The windows sills are higher up relative to the driver, to improve side-impact protection. I've heard this argument before, but I'm simply not buying it. Cars like the Honda Civic or Volkswagen Golf have an excellent safety record, outclassing many giant SUVs while still having relatively small A-pillars and large windows on all sides. It is much more likely that it is simply a design choice, making them look "tough", "manly", and "aggressive" - just like that giant snowplow front which has become popular over the past few years. If anything, giant SUVs are less safe, because they have to follow the less-strict safety standards for small trucks rather than passenger cars. They are especially prone to rollovers due to their high center of gravity. People feel safer in an SUV, because they are surrounded by similarly-sized vehicles rather than being surrounded by cars twice your size, but that doesn't actually make them safer.
- Tanoc 3y ago
  Well... There are a few regulations I know exactly that contributed to this. One was the roof crush rollover standard. I believe it was passed in 2007 and stated that any vehicle must be able to hold up it's entire weight upon it's roof in the even of rolling over and being upside down. The other was the front small overlap test, which hit the vehicle directly in line with one of the front wheels. This shunted the wheel and suspension directly back against the firewall, often completely collapsing the A-pillar. In response A-pillars were thickened and given a much more convex shape at the bottom. Aerodynamics also meant that the windshields are also raked further back. Beyond a specific angle an acute triangle begins to weaken, and the acute angles of many A-pillars and C/D-pillars are well beyond that weakening point, necessitating complex inner structures that one again make them thicker. Since 1996 the IIHS and EuroNCAP have also become more and more stringent with the rear passenger side impact intrusion test, designed to protect children in the event of a side-on collision. One of the unintended consequences of this test was the head restriction height for seats, where cars with higher shoulders (the bottom edge of the greenhouse) in the rear did better in preventing a child's head from escaping the vehicle than cars with even shoulders. This is why only very tall cars seem to have flat shoulders and why small vehicles such as the Mazda3 look like someone canted the entire car forward fifteen degrees.
- AlgorithmicTime 3y ago
  [dead]
- saltcured 3y ago
  I don't disagree that some cars are worse than necessary, and this probably comes from styling/fashion trends. But across all makes and models, there is a trend driven by changing safety requirements. The Hondas (and Toyotas) of the 80s had much thinner A-pillars than they do now. Barely enough to hold the weather gasket for the windshield and act as a frame for the front door. I was in an early 80s Toyota Hi-Lux during a relatively gentle rollover and watched the roof and windshield cave in towards me. I think I was saved by the fiberglass camper shell on the bed, so it only collapsed until the weight of the car was transferred to the hood and the shell. The cab roof got smashed into a linear interpolation of those high points...
- CRConrad 3y ago
  > Cars like the Honda Civic or Volkswagen Golf have an excellent safety record, outclassing many giant SUVs while still having relatively small A-pillars and large windows on all sides. The A pillar (and B and C pillars too) on a modern Golf or Civic is humongous compared to the first-generation Golf and Civic. You either just forgot what those looked like, or you're too young to even have seen particularly many of them.

crote 3y ago

> Due to a mixture of standards, this has changed. The roof cap and pillars have thickened and curved for roll-over protection, and front pillars are also thicker to hold air bags that didn't exist in those older cars. The windows sills are higher up relative to the driver, to improve side-impact protection. I've heard this argument before, but I'm simply not buying it. Cars like the Honda Civic or Volkswagen Golf have an excellent safety record, outclassing many giant SUVs while still having relatively small A-pillars and large windows on all sides. It is much more likely that it is simply a design choice, making them look "tough", "manly", and "aggressive" - just like that giant snowplow front which has become popular over the past few years. If anything, giant SUVs are less safe, because they have to follow the less-strict safety standards for small trucks rather than passenger cars. They are especially prone to rollovers due to their high center of gravity. People feel safer in an SUV, because they are surrounded by similarly-sized vehicles rather than being surrounded by cars twice your size, but that doesn't actually make them safer.

Tanoc 3y ago
Well... There are a few regulations I know exactly that contributed to this. One was the roof crush rollover standard. I believe it was passed in 2007 and stated that any vehicle must be able to hold up it's entire weight upon it's roof in the even of rolling over and being upside down. The other was the front small overlap test, which hit the vehicle directly in line with one of the front wheels. This shunted the wheel and suspension directly back against the firewall, often completely collapsing the A-pillar. In response A-pillars were thickened and given a much more convex shape at the bottom. Aerodynamics also meant that the windshields are also raked further back. Beyond a specific angle an acute triangle begins to weaken, and the acute angles of many A-pillars and C/D-pillars are well beyond that weakening point, necessitating complex inner structures that one again make them thicker. Since 1996 the IIHS and EuroNCAP have also become more and more stringent with the rear passenger side impact intrusion test, designed to protect children in the event of a side-on collision. One of the unintended consequences of this test was the head restriction height for seats, where cars with higher shoulders (the bottom edge of the greenhouse) in the rear did better in preventing a child's head from escaping the vehicle than cars with even shoulders. This is why only very tall cars seem to have flat shoulders and why small vehicles such as the Mazda3 look like someone canted the entire car forward fifteen degrees.
AlgorithmicTime 3y ago
[dead]
saltcured 3y ago
I don't disagree that some cars are worse than necessary, and this probably comes from styling/fashion trends. But across all makes and models, there is a trend driven by changing safety requirements. The Hondas (and Toyotas) of the 80s had much thinner A-pillars than they do now. Barely enough to hold the weather gasket for the windshield and act as a frame for the front door. I was in an early 80s Toyota Hi-Lux during a relatively gentle rollover and watched the roof and windshield cave in towards me. I think I was saved by the fiberglass camper shell on the bed, so it only collapsed until the weight of the car was transferred to the hood and the shell. The cab roof got smashed into a linear interpolation of those high points...
CRConrad 3y ago
> Cars like the Honda Civic or Volkswagen Golf have an excellent safety record, outclassing many giant SUVs while still having relatively small A-pillars and large windows on all sides. The A pillar (and B and C pillars too) on a modern Golf or Civic is humongous compared to the first-generation Golf and Civic. You either just forgot what those looked like, or you're too young to even have seen particularly many of them.