http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...eID=62121&vf=1
Holden's Commodore is one of 29 cars to get the lowest rating in a world-first study into the visibility afforded drivers by today's new cars. By JAEDENE HUDSON.
Improvements in crash safety have led to a design flaw in some cars that could obscure the driver's view of pedestrians or vehicles, an NRMA study says.
The first-of-its-kind blind spot study tested 138 cars using lasers and computers to assess the visibility they afforded drivers.
None achieved the maximum five-star rating and 80 per cent scored just one or two stars, indicating poor frontal visibility.
The reduced visibility is a result of the pillars on either side of the windscreen being made thicker to improve occupant protection and achieve favourable crash ratings.
"It is quite possible that someone could quite easily turn into the path of an oncoming car in a roundabout, a pedestrian or a motorcyclist [due to poor vehicle design]," Robert McDonald, the NRMA Insurance head of research, said.
The motoring group picked popular vehicles in segments of the market from city cars to four-wheel-drives and commercial vehicles. The best-selling Holden Commodore was among 29 cars - including two other Holdens - that scored just one star in the car blind spot rating.
Other one-star performers include the Toyota Yaris sedan, Audi Q7 soft-roader and BMW 1 Series.
Honda, a brand that performs strongly for pedestrian impact protection according to independent NCAP testing, fared poorly with Odyssey (now superseded), City, Accord and Legend models, which all scoring only one star.
Holden defended the Commodore's poor performance in the NRMA study.
"The VE Commodore has been designed to accommodate the latest safety technology to protect occupants if crashes do occur," a Holden spokesman, Jonathan Rose, said.
"We do not believe the blind spots are more significant than other large cars."
The cars rated best for forward visibility were the Volkswagen Golf and Citroen Picasso, which each scored four stars.
Mr McDonald acknowledged that makers faced a difficult design challenge combining safety with visibility, but he called for better driver sight lines.
"Modern vehicle design has improved the safety of cars for drivers and passengers remarkably in recent years," he said.
"But manufacturers may need to help drivers [by] striking a better balance between crash safety and visibility. It is a concern that in some cars a pedestrian or cyclist can be lost in a blind spot from as close as nine metres and a driver can lose sight of another vehicle from about 20 metres."
The NRMA testing involved rotating a laser 180 degrees from the driver's seat to determine where the line of vision was broken by the roof pillars.
I don't see why you would do anything other than some rudimentary testing with the window down especially when nearly everyone drives with them up. Aerodynamics to me is about getting the air over the car with minimal drag, if you want a car where you can open the window without any buffeting you have to compromise on the aerodynamics when the windows are closed which means the car uses more fuel.I wish it were easier to have a discussion about the aerodynamics, but I find it very hard to find any information about the aerodynamic efficiencies of various cars, and even more difficult to find uniform measurement practices.
Holden and Ford both have cars that are not smooth on the sides around the side windows like the Golf is, I guess they figure most of their customers like to have their knuckles dragging when cruising so making the car more efficient would alienate their customers.
Bookmarks