Why was visibility completely forgotten as an important safety

>>16255991
I know that feel bro.

File: colors.jpg (559KB, 1516x1178px) Image search: [Google]

559KB, 1516x1178px

lord help us

>>16255991
Blame safety regulations.


I don't understand why, with all of these safety features in new cars and being able to drive a 2016 anything into the core of the fucking sun without a scratch, that in some places the speed limit is so fucking low

>>16255991
It's why I didn't buy the camaro in 2010. Side impact safety is the answer.

Notice how your arm isn't as comfortable restingredients on the door while driving? I found that in the high waistlines in pretty much all current model cars when I was shopping last spring

it's why my next car is going to be a truck

i don't even care anymore

>>16255991
Get a Honda Fit. Amazing visibility.

>>16256096
It's sad seeing people try to hang their arm out the window on modern cars.

So happy for my deathtrap.

Should probably fix those brakelines though, stopping has become... annoying.

You don't need visibility when you got 600hp to pass people and stay ahead of said people.

>>16256079
cars aren't as safe as you probably think they are

crashing a road car is still most likely going to fuck you up in some way, the designers aren't wizards

>>16256616
they don't even bother trying to design cars that will protect you from an impact at more than 40mph

actual impact speed is usually much lower than what was indicated before the accident because you usually at least get a chance to hammer the brakes

this is one of the reasons texting and driving is a genuine fucking menace

>>16256616
>the designers aren't wizards
No shit, because if they were worth anything, they would design the car to be strong enough not to have all the fucking airbags in the pillars that you can't see past, it's not for rollover protection, it's so some shitty company like Takata can sell 8 airbags per car instead of just 2-4

>>16256661
To add to this, it's basically lazy shit engineers or executives that for some reason think it's cheaper to stick 9 airbags in a car instead of a better overall design

I blame Demolition Man

>>16256616

The only thing that would realistically save you would be a full fire suit, HANS device, Helmet and a roll cage. If anybody hits you or you drive head on into a wall you'll probably die though.

tldr; you're gonna die anyways.

>>16255991
>Why was visibility completely forgotten as an important safety feature?

Because a passenger cabin box with the vertical beams being mostly verticle can be compressed and thus crumpled. But if the end beams are more horizontal, the cabin box is very strong against front and rear end compression forces. Unfortunately, the more horizontal the A and C pillars are, the worse your visibility. Hence, rear view cameras have been mandated by the DOT in future cars.

That implies touch screens will become a "mandatory" feature in all new cars. That's because if the rear view camera is required, a viewable screen is needed which implies the best use of screen real estate is to make it multi-purpose --> touch screen.

Some cars already put the rear view camera display on the central rear view mirror. My GM car has various features built into that main rear view mirror like that and even lights appear. Of course, it's also electrochromic.

>>16256661
lol dude, airbags aren't to compensate for body strength

if the car stops on a dime, with the body remaining perfectly intact, your body essentially wants to keep travelling at the speed you were doing

this will probably kill you after you have your own personal impact with the interior

>>16256836
Airbags are there to cushion the sudden amount of force hitting their vehicle, my argument was against how many of the fucking things they have in cars now and how you could design it to be just as safe with almost half the amount of airbags they shove in cars

>>16256888
Technically you can't unless you have some other form of restraints, like HANS, arm restraints and a helmet. Airbags are just inflatable cushions that (relative to the impact) slowly slow you down. To cover from multiple directions, multiple airbags are needed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsPvK1mgm3o
Look at what happens to the dummy's head, I find it makes a good case for multiple airbags, just not at the cost of visibility.
It's a delicate balance, and I hope it's found soon.

>>16256688
>That implies touch screens will become a "mandatory" feature in all new cars.
Not necessarily, you could still have mechanical HVAC and a base radio with a small rear camera screen in the rear-view mirror or instrument cluster. No need for touchscreen controls at all, even on the shittiest of shitboxes.

Could also just stream the rear cam feed to a cell phone or something. Automakers find a way to make everything cheap and shitty, don't you worry.

>>16256661
You're fucking retarded.
It's so each occupant has the same level of protection.
Four bags in the dash and four curtains is just barely enough to cover a full car.
Note even in an 8-bag configuration the rear seat passengers generally get the back of the front seats for their forward restraints.