Why are new cars so TALL ?

[Zerohour]

I think people just need to man up and learn to drive their vehicles without seeing the end of the hoods/bumpers. People managed for 60 years. I truly think 99% of modern production cars look like crap. And I'm a buyer in the sub 30 age group....

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

For one thing, you get a lot more legroom when sitting upright.

That just isn't so. You have LESS legroom, because the uncomfortable (to me, anyway) bolt-upright seating posture forces you to keep your knees bent at about a 90 degree, instead of being able to stretch them out as you could if the car was designed to allow a proper semi-reclining posture.

(I'm not exactly short or small, but I'm far more comfortable in cars like the late 50s-early 60s Austin-Healey, my old CRX, or even the Insight than I am in any of today's muffin-cars.)

For the reason, I think it's just another facet of the reason so many people buy SUVs or oversized pickups: insecurity. They're just not confident in their own abilities (or for men, their masculinity), so they try to compensate by buying big/tall cars.

[Frank Lee]

I laugh when I see some shorty in, say, a Range Rover; they're sitting in there with about two feet of headroom and I wonder if the room was required because they are planning on doing some jumping jacks at the driver's seat at some point?

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I laugh when I see some shorty in, say, a Range Rover; they're sitting in there with about two feet of headroom and I wonder if the room was required because they are planning on doing some jumping jacks at the driver's seat at some point?

Pretty much all RRs near me are driven by 5ft bad tempered women, so probably they are.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

It does get a little silly some times though...

The taller a vehicle is, relative to it's width, makes it more prone to roll over. Center of gravity...

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I laugh when I see some shorty in, say, a Range Rover; they're sitting in there with about two feet of headroom and I wonder if the room was required because they are planning on doing some jumping jacks at the driver's seat at some point?

The design is logical if you are driving in rough terrain (which was what the RR was designed to do - go where roads are primitive or non-existent). It gives you two feet of headroom so you won't smack your head against the ceiling when you hit something nasty.

Of course people who buy RR's for use in countries that have well paved roads have different motives.

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

The taller a vehicle is, relative to it's width, makes it more prone to roll over. Center of gravity...

Not really, these rarely fall over.



I think its more to do with weight distribution and height.

In fact, how about 'drifting buses', - not so much The Fast And The Furious Tokyo Drift, more like The Sluggish And The Slightly Grumpy - Chiswick Snake :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVq9Gk08lLo

From the age where everyone in Britain called hands "hends"...

[Ryland]

Originally Posted by CapriRacer

If you want to lower the roof line and still accommodate the same height passengers, then you have to tilt them - and that results in a longer chasiss, longer doors and a longer roof - all of which add weight - and more weight than would be saved by using a lower roof.economy.

That's right, look at pickup trucks, if you get the extended cab on a truck you have to have a heavier frame to be able to handle the same amount of weight because the frame wants to torque and twist, the closer you can make a vehicle to being a bubble the easier it is going to be to make the body stiff and strong.

[max_frontal_area]

Originally Posted by CapriRacer

And as we all know, reducing weight probably has the largest effect on fuel economy.

HMMMMMMM

[Big Dave]

A seating position that is nearly bolt-upright is far more comfortable than a semi-reclined seating position.