RE: Visibility matters more than horsepower: TMIMW

RE: Visibility matters more than horsepower: TMIMW

Tuesday 13th December 2016

Visibility matters more than horsepower: TMIW

You can have all the power in the world but if you can't see what you're doing with it...



What is the most important attribute required for enjoying a fast car on the public road? Spring and damper rates perfectly matched for both body control and bump absorption? Easily accessible overtaking power? Steering feel? A rousing engine note to make the experience sound fast, even if it isn't?

All of the above are useful. But totally wasted without good visibility.

Drive an older car, be it an 80s hot hatch or performance saloon or perhaps a 90s sports car or rally rep and it's likely the first thing that will strike you is not how supposedly outdated they feel. But how well you can see out of them. Many are smaller too, of course. But size, ultimately, isn't the issue with modern vehicles. It's being able to see out of them.

This was brought home to me the other day, albeit at more modest speeds. The car park closest to PH Towers is a typical town centre multi-storey, clearly designed before cars piled on the pounds, adopted kerb-hungry alloys, tall beltlines, thick pillars and all the other things that make everyday manoeuvres such a stress. Navigating this car park in even a modestly sized hot hatch - recent PH Fleet examples like the Civic Type R and Focus RS spring to mind - demands Jedi-like spatial awareness. Or blind trust in the bleepers.


Wood for the trees
Then last week I was down to the office in my Forester and breezed in, through and out of the same car park without even a hint of the clammy palms I've had in the above. The Forester isn't a small car by any stretch. But I could see out of it. Zen-like calm prevailed.

Now apply the same logic to a B-road, at what we'll describe as 'fast road' pace. I had a taster session of police-style driving training a while back and the main thing I took away from it was reading the road and planning ahead. Maximising your line of sight through subtle alterations to road position can have huge benefits for this, improving both safety and enjoyment. Win-win.

But naff-all use if you're trying to peer around a massive A-pillar, only to find the front quarter of the side window filled with an equally enormous mirror. This, combined with quick steering and a very stiff chassis, is one of the reasons I moaned about the Focus RS last week. Even with that lofty seating position everyone moans about it's not an easy car to see out of or place accurately, robbing you of the subtle ability to position the car and exploit its unique dynamic abilities through the turns. And leaving little but point-and-squirt bursts of acceleration between them.


Dial 911
Same has happened with 911s. Drive a 3.2, a 964 or a 993 and you'll be amazed at how accurately you can place the car thanks to the upright screen, narrow pillars and the very obvious extremities afforded by the upright front lights. A 991 is a bigger car - especially in widebodied C4 or Turbo form - but it's the loss of visual connection with the surroundings that robs you of more confidence than the car's physical size. Same goes for 'my' F-Type Coupe - its (considerable) size and weight are less limiting factors when it comes to enjoying an inspiring stretch of road than inability to place it accurately.

There are two main reasons for this of course, the primary one being safety legislation that requires rollover protection to rival a fully-caged rally car. And I'd never begrudge that. It works both ways though; encouraging a sense of invulnerability (or, perhaps, blind confidence) isn't always a good thing. And when you look at those spindly pillars in older cars you can't escape the sense you really, really wouldn't want to rely on their protection.

Fashion is also to blame, the raked windscreens and chopped window profiles applied to even regular hatchbacks and crossovers meaning you can't drive them without a full suite of electronic bleepers to warn you of the things you can no longer see.


Answer to everything
There are some noble exceptions to the rule though. Colour me predictable but the fourth-generation MX-5 is one of them. Those peaks on the wings look weird in profile but, from the driver's seat, are actually aligned with an imagined line drawn from the kingpins around which the front wheels pivot. Meaning when you look through the corner and turn the wheel your line of sight is subconsciously linked with the action of steering and where you're placing the car. The standard MX-5 might not have much horsepower on paper. But on the road that kind of thing is worth much more.

At the other end of the scale McLaren seems to understand the value of good visibility too. Drive a 570S or a 650S along a B-road and you'd swear they were little bigger than an Elise or Exige. When in fact both are over two metres wide, making this measurement of on-road footprint near-as-dammit the same as a Range Rover Sport SVR. Weirdly that ability to appreciate your surroundings also extends to enjoying the cars at a speed (relatively) sympathetic to the public highway too. Credit due also to the new Honda NSX in this regard, skinny but strong '3DQ' steel tubes used to reinforce the pillars to meet safety tests while keeping them slim for visibility. Smart design and clever engineering can, it seems, satisfy all the requirements when required.

I'd like to see more of the clever folk involved in building modern cars get to use their skills to this end. Or maybe I'm wrong and should just learn to love the parking bleepers, blind spot assistance systems, reversing cameras and all the rest of the gizmos we now seem duty bound to rely on in lieu of actually being able to see out of our cars.

 

 

 

 

Author
Discussion

NJ72

Original Poster:

183 posts

98 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
I can agree with this.

I had a MK.I MX5 for ages and the pop-up headlights were actually really great aids when placing the car. Couple that with tiny A-pillars and it was fantastic - ignoring the fact it is an easy car to drive, you felt drawn to lining things up properly.

Same with the current RX8 I have, the wheel arches come up to a point which can be seen left and right from the driver's seat which again causes you to subconsciously line things up - that said, the A-pillars in the '8 could be a little smaller IMHO...

Itsallicanafford

2,765 posts

159 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
My 106 Rallye has the benefit of good visibility and a small footprint (and light weight) which makes it ideal for B roads...

lets just hope that i never have the misfortune of crashing it...;)

Leins

9,467 posts

148 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
I agree, modern A-pillars might be good if you flip your car, but they also do a great job of blocking out things you can drive into

Always wondered why something along these (Volvo) lines never made it into production:




Actually, in reference to the likes of the MINI you pictured, I wonder why they couldn't have come up with tinted glass inserts in the A-pillar, which look no different from the outside but allow the driver see through

Edited by Leins on Tuesday 13th December 15:08

S10GTA

12,678 posts

167 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Leins said:
I agree, modern A-pillars might be good if you flip your car, but they also do a great job of blocking out things you can drive into

Always wondered why something along these (Volvo) lines never made it into production:

Structural integrity?

gdaybruce

754 posts

225 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Totally agree. My last company funded car was a 2011 Astra and the blind spots around the A pillars were atrocious. After a couple of near incidents when I just didn't see oncoming vehicles, despite looking, I became paranoid, spending time at T junctions craning my head this way and that to be sure I hadn't missed something. On a local stretch of road with a few bends, the A pillar totally obstructed the view of oncoming traffic. Once the Astra had gone I ran a Saab 9-3 and am now in a Mondeo ST220. Both are a decade older than the Vauxhall in terms of their design and both are so much more enjoyable to drive becuase I can see out! I don't know about the Ford but the Saab, at least, also had a good enough reputation for roll-over strength. Either way, I'd sooner avoid an accident in the first place by seeing it coming than survive one because I'm driving blind in a tank!

Vroom101

828 posts

133 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Manufacturers are clever buggers, y'see. Ford have ingeniously designed the bonnet a good three to four inches higher on my Mk4 Mondeo compared to my old Mk3, to afford space above the engine, so when I inevitably clout a pedestrian on a zebra crossing because I can't see them behind the massively thick A-pillars, they will die a slow painful death rather than a quick painful death.

Like I said, clever buggers biggrin

kambites

67,556 posts

221 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
This is one of my biggest bug-bears with modern cars - forward visibility is pretty much universally awful. The blind-spots behind the A-pillars in our Octavia are absolutely enormous.

The Elise may have awful rearward visibility but at least you can actually see out of the front.

Leins

9,467 posts

148 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
S10GTA said:
Structural integrity?
Perhaps, but I'd have thought a company like Volvo might have found a way around that in the last decade since it appeared

kambites

67,556 posts

221 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Leins said:
S10GTA said:
Structural integrity?
Perhaps, but I'd have thought a company like Volvo might have found a way around that in the last decade since it appeared
I think the limiting factor was cost - in the minds of 90% of European buyers, "safety" seems to be synonymous with "NCap" and NCap don't test visibility.

Rumblestripe

2,936 posts

162 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
The worst I've driven is the Insignia which was like driving a tank whilst looking through a letterbox.

In answer to the question about the triangulated a-pillar illustrated, cost. Far cheaper to bend a nice thick heavy bit of steel.

Leins

9,467 posts

148 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
kambites said:
I think the limiting factor was cost - in the minds of 90% of European buyers, "safety" seems to be synonymous with "NCap" and NCap don't test visibility.
I suspect you're correct, but that seems a large oversight on the part of NCap (excuse the pun). I wonder if there is any way to understand accident figures from this perspective. I can imagine the statement "I just didn't see them" is used frequently in such circumstances, but should a new collision cause of "Giant feckin A-pillar" now be utilised?!

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

255 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
I sussed this problem a while ago.

Simple remedy is to nab a periscope from an abandoned Panzer tank.

jamespink

1,218 posts

204 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
I had an open wheel MG many years ago, I had always held that the front wheels (mudguards) being visible made placing the car a breeze. After reading the article I see that the pivot point above the wheel and it's angle made plain the starting point and trajectory of the car. It just works!

Krikkit

26,527 posts

181 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Totally agree on the ND MX5 - it was so easy to place perfectly thanks to the lumpy front wings.

I notice the same issue when driving my other half's BP Outback - the A-pillar is quite raked (although not excessively), and the mirror is so huge that there's a massive blind spot which makes some town junctions and country roads very awkward indeed. Alright, it's not a car you'd hoon, but it's still a fundamental issue to smooth driving.

Rumblestripe

2,936 posts

162 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Whilst on the subject of visibility it should be against the law to obscure your view with dangly air fresheners, stuffed toys and especially Sat Nav/mobile phones. I honestly wonder how some people see out of their cars.

BigDave3243

30 posts

97 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
I recently have moved from a 2015 Focus ST into a 2011 Mini JCW and the difference in visibility is quite stark actually. It is much easier to place the car. As an aside to this because the Mini has less refinement than the ST, frameless doors a louder exhaust etc, means that it feels as fast as the ST at slightly more civilised speeds. It's a great little car and I'm loving life.

HorneyMX5

5,309 posts

150 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
From an MX5 driver I also find the difference between roof up and roof down very stark. You pick up so much more in your periferal vision with the roof down. This also applies to my wife's classic mini with its huge glass house.

My Yeti was very good for visibility. My FN2 Civic TypeR was terrible.

NJ72

Original Poster:

183 posts

98 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
My wife's old Mitsubishi Colt (2008) was attrocious for visibility. They made a whopping great A pillar and then put a little window in it to help you see out - it didn't work and just made things hairy when trying to go around stuff... For such a small car it felt quite big..



Lowtimer

4,286 posts

168 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Field of view is very important to me and I completely agree with the article. It's one of the reasons I like my old cars more than most new ones.

Yipper

5,964 posts

90 months

Tuesday 13th December 2016
quotequote all
Good article.

New car designs mean drivers need to learn and adopt new driving techniques. A thick pillar, wide mirror and big hood mean you gotta bob, lean and weave about in your seat much more than, say, 10 to 30 years ago.