Is car packaging inefficient?
Discussion
[apologies, beer etc.]
Cars are now bigger than ever yet usable cabin/luggage space doesn't seem to be in step. I get that much of this is down to crash survivability, but it also seems like there is a load of apparently wasted space.
Once upon a time the interior of your boot closely resembled the bodywork around it, then it was lightly lined, but now significant amounts just seem to be inaccessible and wasted. Is it all there as 'crash structure' and not permitted to be filled with house bricks just in case? Stuff like that and the ridiculous voids between the engine and the front bumper are just plain irritating, so I'd be happy to hear if there's a good reason for it.
With the new cars I've been looking at there is certainly a cost with massive wheels, more elaborate rear suspension arrangements and hybrid gubbins over smaller wheels, torsion beam and a basic engine. It grates to see something ~15cm wider and ~50cm longer than my current car for no obvious space benefit.
Cars are now bigger than ever yet usable cabin/luggage space doesn't seem to be in step. I get that much of this is down to crash survivability, but it also seems like there is a load of apparently wasted space.
Once upon a time the interior of your boot closely resembled the bodywork around it, then it was lightly lined, but now significant amounts just seem to be inaccessible and wasted. Is it all there as 'crash structure' and not permitted to be filled with house bricks just in case? Stuff like that and the ridiculous voids between the engine and the front bumper are just plain irritating, so I'd be happy to hear if there's a good reason for it.
With the new cars I've been looking at there is certainly a cost with massive wheels, more elaborate rear suspension arrangements and hybrid gubbins over smaller wheels, torsion beam and a basic engine. It grates to see something ~15cm wider and ~50cm longer than my current car for no obvious space benefit.
hersh said:
I have a 2015 honda civic estate
The space inside is phenomenal
I can put full size wood pallets flat in the back, also took a full height bedroom cabinet and managed to close the boot
Bloody impressive honda
Yup. look in a Honda Jazz, or a Škoda Fabia. Great amounts of passenger space. All in around 4 metres length.The space inside is phenomenal
I can put full size wood pallets flat in the back, also took a full height bedroom cabinet and managed to close the boot
Bloody impressive honda
TheInternet said:
[apologies, beer etc.]
Cars are now bigger than ever yet usable cabin/luggage space doesn't seem to be in step. I get that much of this is down to crash survivability, but it also seems like there is a load of apparently wasted space.
Once upon a time the interior of your boot closely resembled the bodywork around it, then it was lightly lined, but now significant amounts just seem to be inaccessible and wasted. Is it all there as 'crash structure' and not permitted to be filled with house bricks just in case? Stuff like that and the ridiculous voids between the engine and the front bumper are just plain irritating, so I'd be happy to hear if there's a good reason for it.
With the new cars I've been looking at there is certainly a cost with massive wheels, more elaborate rear suspension arrangements and hybrid gubbins over smaller wheels, torsion beam and a basic engine. It grates to see something ~15cm wider and ~50cm longer than my current car for no obvious space benefit.
Wasted space isn't something I often come across when it comes to packaging - usually stuff is clashing in the CAD assembly right up until start of production Cars are now bigger than ever yet usable cabin/luggage space doesn't seem to be in step. I get that much of this is down to crash survivability, but it also seems like there is a load of apparently wasted space.
Once upon a time the interior of your boot closely resembled the bodywork around it, then it was lightly lined, but now significant amounts just seem to be inaccessible and wasted. Is it all there as 'crash structure' and not permitted to be filled with house bricks just in case? Stuff like that and the ridiculous voids between the engine and the front bumper are just plain irritating, so I'd be happy to hear if there's a good reason for it.
With the new cars I've been looking at there is certainly a cost with massive wheels, more elaborate rear suspension arrangements and hybrid gubbins over smaller wheels, torsion beam and a basic engine. It grates to see something ~15cm wider and ~50cm longer than my current car for no obvious space benefit.
Every mm is fought over by different commodity teams, trying to optimise the location and integration of components and systems they're responsible for. When there is an empty space, the only reason it isn't filled is because there's no feasible or cost effective way of doing so without extensive re-design of the whole layout/area at that stage in development.You mention interior trim in the boot as an example. Customers would rather not see exposed metal and weird looking plastic trim so it gets designed as a cleaner shape, and then components/electronic modules are packaged behind them - win win!
Improved crash safety, more complex drivetrains, increased sound deadening, stiffer body structures, and the ever present desire to improve occupant roominess and loadspace attributes are always going to make the car bigger like for like, but that's a small price to pay for the customer who gets a safer, more refined, more capable product.
Of course, not all cars are bigger than ever! The latest generation MX-5 ND is actually shorter than the original NA from 35 years prior. Purely because, in this case, the customer does care about this core trait of the car and the development team made it work. It's amazing what can be done when automotive engineers put their minds to it...
TheInternet said:
[apologies, beer etc.]
Cars are now bigger than ever yet usable cabin/luggage space doesn't seem to be in step. I get that much of this is down to crash survivability, but it also seems like there is a load of apparently wasted space.
Once upon a time the interior of your boot closely resembled the bodywork around it, then it was lightly lined, but now significant amounts just seem to be inaccessible and wasted. Is it all there as 'crash structure' and not permitted to be filled with house bricks just in case? Stuff like that and the ridiculous voids between the engine and the front bumper are just plain irritating, so I'd be happy to hear if there's a good reason for it.
With the new cars I've been looking at there is certainly a cost with massive wheels, more elaborate rear suspension arrangements and hybrid gubbins over smaller wheels, torsion beam and a basic engine. It grates to see something ~15cm wider and ~50cm longer than my current car for no obvious space benefit.
Superficially, it can look annoying but remove the panels and it's remarkable the gubbins you discover. Even if you find a space that isn't filled by something there will be a model in the range that utilises it. As annoying as it can be there are generally valid reasons. Even if you take something like the most basic model from the lowliest VW brand you'll find another VW brand in top spec is using that space for some kit. Packaging is incredibly efficient but that efficiency isn't model specific but across the entire business. Cars are now bigger than ever yet usable cabin/luggage space doesn't seem to be in step. I get that much of this is down to crash survivability, but it also seems like there is a load of apparently wasted space.
Once upon a time the interior of your boot closely resembled the bodywork around it, then it was lightly lined, but now significant amounts just seem to be inaccessible and wasted. Is it all there as 'crash structure' and not permitted to be filled with house bricks just in case? Stuff like that and the ridiculous voids between the engine and the front bumper are just plain irritating, so I'd be happy to hear if there's a good reason for it.
With the new cars I've been looking at there is certainly a cost with massive wheels, more elaborate rear suspension arrangements and hybrid gubbins over smaller wheels, torsion beam and a basic engine. It grates to see something ~15cm wider and ~50cm longer than my current car for no obvious space benefit.
Thanks all, Gourockian in particular. I'll rest easy knowing people are at least trying. Design and manufacturing practicality is an obvious factor I left off my list, even if it's heading towards wasteful.
And yes, it's not a criticism levelled at all cars. At first glance the SUV types come across worse to me, but to some extent that's the nature of the beast.
Ps. Sorry about the thread title, I didn't mean to be one of those teasing w
kers. I've asked for it be corrected.
Pps. Thanks to whoever fixed the title.
And yes, it's not a criticism levelled at all cars. At first glance the SUV types come across worse to me, but to some extent that's the nature of the beast.
Ps. Sorry about the thread title, I didn't mean to be one of those teasing w
kers. I've asked for it be corrected.Pps. Thanks to whoever fixed the title.
Edited by TheInternet on Sunday 25th February 07:08
The one that got me is the Porsche Tacyan, a big car, no ICE engine, no hybrid gubbins but no room inside.
Compared to the Tesla Model 3, which has loads of boot space front and back, it's just weird in the Tacyan. And a lot of other EVs - no front boot, high floored rear boots and no space under. I don't get that.
The Q7 struck me as the same, enormous but not massive inside...
Compared to the Tesla Model 3, which has loads of boot space front and back, it's just weird in the Tacyan. And a lot of other EVs - no front boot, high floored rear boots and no space under. I don't get that.
The Q7 struck me as the same, enormous but not massive inside...
dontlookdown said:
It seems to me that small cars are pretty good when it comes to interior space still.
But as the outside gets bigger, the interior doesn't keep up.
I would agree with this.But as the outside gets bigger, the interior doesn't keep up.
I also think that wheel wells are huge compared to part cars, particularly crossover/4wd type things.
Add on top really curvy body shapes, and no matter how hard designers work, there's just a lot of space missing.
Anyone else remember the original 1959 Austin Mini?
Huge dashboard shelf, storage bins in both doors, storage bins alongside both rear seats, storage under the rear seat, battery,spare wheel and petrol tank in the boot with a bottom hinged lid that made an extra loading platform.
Not much crash safety, so one drove accordingly on the crossply tyres and 10'' wheels!
Progress?
Current BMW MINI is twice the size, with far less storage, but far less likely to kill you!
Huge dashboard shelf, storage bins in both doors, storage bins alongside both rear seats, storage under the rear seat, battery,spare wheel and petrol tank in the boot with a bottom hinged lid that made an extra loading platform.
Not much crash safety, so one drove accordingly on the crossply tyres and 10'' wheels!
Progress?
Current BMW MINI is twice the size, with far less storage, but far less likely to kill you!
Gourockian said:
Wasted space isn't something I often come across when it comes to packaging - usually stuff is clashing in the CAD assembly right up until start of production Every mm is fought over by different commodity teams, trying to optimise the location and integration of components and systems they're responsible for. When there is an empty space, the only reason it isn't filled is because there's no feasible or cost effective way of doing so without extensive re-design of the whole layout/area at that stage in development.
You mention interior trim in the boot as an example. Customers would rather not see exposed metal and weird looking plastic trim so it gets designed as a cleaner shape, and then components/electronic modules are packaged behind them - win win!
Improved crash safety, more complex drivetrains, increased sound deadening, stiffer body structures, and the ever present desire to improve occupant roominess and loadspace attributes are always going to make the car bigger like for like, but that's a small price to pay for the customer who gets a safer, more refined, more capable product.
From a designers perspective, we are always seemingly asked to make more space for parts on either exteriors or interiors. We often like short overhangs and our first design concept models often show something really tight, or sometimes if we feel strongly about the cars proportion, under package. Then we get an update to crash beams and foams etc and the car piles on the weight as you realise you are compromising package too much. It never happens the other way, where we get the opportunity to lose height on a roof, or flatten a hood section Every mm is fought over by different commodity teams, trying to optimise the location and integration of components and systems they're responsible for. When there is an empty space, the only reason it isn't filled is because there's no feasible or cost effective way of doing so without extensive re-design of the whole layout/area at that stage in development.You mention interior trim in the boot as an example. Customers would rather not see exposed metal and weird looking plastic trim so it gets designed as a cleaner shape, and then components/electronic modules are packaged behind them - win win!
Improved crash safety, more complex drivetrains, increased sound deadening, stiffer body structures, and the ever present desire to improve occupant roominess and loadspace attributes are always going to make the car bigger like for like, but that's a small price to pay for the customer who gets a safer, more refined, more capable product.
I can with a lot of certainty say, as Gourockian says, the design process is usually a set of hard fought discussions trying to find space for everything and every mm (sometimes less) does count.
carinaman said:
I love the styling of the original Juke. I may own one day just because I like the styling so much but the amount of road space it occupies doesn't correlate to useable interior room.
I don't think I have ever heard anyone say that before, so much so I assumed it was sarcasm! MikeM6 said:
carinaman said:
I love the styling of the original Juke. I may own one day just because I like the styling so much but the amount of road space it occupies doesn't correlate to useable interior room.
I don't think I have ever heard anyone say that before, so much so I assumed it was sarcasm! I don’t get the hate for the Juke, not something I have on my radar but it obviously does the job for a lot of people.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff