Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Aerodynamics
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-21-2013, 10:01 AM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Miami FL
Posts: 121
Thanks: 1
Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts
Will regulators end up requiring a minimum head to windshield header distance?

While I admit I drive a bit too close to the steering wheel, modern cars feel so cramped inside.
I'm having a hard time feeling roomy in most non-SUV cars.
Even if this is aerodynamically helpful most people wouldn't tradeoff comfort for aero.
I also guess this windshield header closeness might be dangerous in a crash.

Would regulators step up and mandate a minimum head to windshield header distance?
Of course it will depend on how far back you move the seat so maybe it will be related to the steering wheel position?

If a windshield needs to be very inclined for aero that's ok but why can't automakers move the windshield forward?
I guess the reason is not aerodynamically or structurally related. I guess its based on styling as cars with short hoods tend to look feeble as compared to long hoods.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-21-2013, 10:39 AM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
nemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: US
Posts: 994

Chief - '06 Pontiac Grand Prix
90 day: 19.41 mpg (US)

SF1 - '12 Ford Fiesta S
90 day: 20.31 mpg (US)
Thanks: 192
Thanked 235 Times in 182 Posts
Do we really need more regulation. I do understand what your are talking about. The Grand Prix has very little head room (I'm 5' 9") and the windshield ends above the steering wheel. But my take on it is the drivers seat is too high. Looking straight forward uses the upper 1/3 of the glass.This is of course a personal preference having driven many sports cars with the seat very close to the floor.

I also drive in what is considered less than optimal seat location, too far back and with a slight recline.

I agree most of it is about styling and compromise.
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 12:22 PM   #3 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,190
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,522 Times in 1,123 Posts
In light of the "new" 1/4-offset NHTSA "crash" test requirements, the answer will probably be "yes" more mandated regulations are (continually) forthcoming.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 03:14 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 13,218
Thanks: 21,151
Thanked 6,429 Times in 4,006 Posts
windshield header

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big time View Post
While I admit I drive a bit too close to the steering wheel, modern cars feel so cramped inside.
I'm having a hard time feeling roomy in most non-SUV cars.
Even if this is aerodynamically helpful most people wouldn't tradeoff comfort for aero.
I also guess this windshield header closeness might be dangerous in a crash.

Would regulators step up and mandate a minimum head to windshield header distance?
Of course it will depend on how far back you move the seat so maybe it will be related to the steering wheel position?

If a windshield needs to be very inclined for aero that's ok but why can't automakers move the windshield forward?
I guess the reason is not aerodynamically or structurally related. I guess its based on styling as cars with short hoods tend to look feeble as compared to long hoods.
The NHTSA has some stringent regulations for automakers which deal with pedestrian safety if struck by an automobile and also roof strength/rollover standards.
*The hood cannot collapse enough so as to expose the pedestrian to rigid structures underneath the hood.The windshield base/cowl must be able to deform in a pedestrian impact.
*The steep windshield is actually beneficial in an impact,but aggravates A-Pillar strength as well as ingress/egress issues.
*Occupant restraints and airbags are designed to limit front seat occupant incursions into the header.
*GM was attacked by consumers for their Cd 0.30 Pontiac Trans Sport type minivan which possessed a greenhouse positioned far from the occupants head.They've cast other pearls before swine and were summarily punished by the mindless automatons.
*It's funny that some of the richest men in the USA will crowd into the cramped low-roof cabin of a business jet for their commutes.
*It's quite a juggling act,building cars for sale in the USA.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 09:30 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,662

Volt, gas only - '12 Chevrolet Volt Premium
90 day: 38.02 mpg (US)

Volt, electric only - '12 Chevrolet Volt Premium
90 day: 132.26 mpg (US)

Yukon Denali Hybrid - '12 GMC Yukon Denali Hybrid
90 day: 21.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 191
Thanked 392 Times in 282 Posts
I try to mitigate this by lowering the seat (power seats) as much as possible.

__________________




  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com