[Torqy]

Why nobody wants to make airy, non-claustrophobic SUV designs like these anymore? There's so much light / glass area and room. No unnecessary grooves, curves, scoops, sloping roof, nothing. Why is everybody chasing the eggshell shape to be modern?

[IshaanIan]

Apart from mass market design appeal, you also need to consider growing efficiency demands made by government, i.e: aerodynamic drag.

[comfortablynumb]

Originally Posted by Torqy

Why nobody wants to make airy, non-claustrophobic SUV designs like these anymore? There's so much light / glass area and room. No unnecessary grooves, curves, scoops, sloping roof, nothing. Why is everybody chasing the eggshell shape to be modern?

I would think Tata Motors, to some extent, is still staying faithful to the classic shape via the Storme and Hexa. But don't know how many of their future models would go down that path.

Cheers,
Vikram

[Thermodynamics]

Unfortunately Space is inversely proportional to Speed, Efficiency, Stability, NVH. But I see what you mean, the comfort, the feel and the pleasure the spacious ones bring is amazing but appreciated by very few.

Since "Modern cars claustrophobic design" is your discussion point, you must try Super cars/Hyper cars, may be the Lamborghinis .

[paragsachania]

To start with looks, a lot of other reasons as most of them have mentioned here. Plus, the buying percentage for such cars again form a very small percentage of the overall lot too.

In case of me, the next set of wheels too shall be airy/roomy because of my kid. We have had cases where she's got into a normal sedan and soon after complained of nausea (I too have if I am not driving).

She does suffer from motion sickness for critical reasons like - Bad driving, Ghat roads and Bad driving and more than all this, claustrophobic cars even with good drivers. She's so far got so much used to taller headroom and bigger windows.

Quite easy to say that anything in future shall mostly be a spacious and taller cruiser rather than a scorcher on the tarmac.

They may not be the best when you compare them with the beauties we have on roads today but there are times when you would have got pampered enough with roomier designs that you don't want to look beyond that; certainly a momentary compromise for long lasting peaceful drives to satisfy the rest .

[dileepcm]

Lots of reasons. Pillars got to be thicker and stronger for safety reasons. Dashboards, unlike old days, will need to host a lot of equipment and functionalities. Boxy designs are not in favour of good aerodynamics and that means curvy, fluid structures. Newer design themes are behind what the mass wants.

[GTO]

There are many reasons for the same:

1. Low window lines look outdated; high shoulders are the "in" thing. See how outdated a large glass area + low shoulder looks:


2. Weight: To meet ever stringent fuel efficiency & emission norms, every manufacturer wants to build a lighter car. Glass is very heavy, heavier than the sheet metal used on doors.

3. Safety: Thick A, B, C & D Pillars for crash protection.

4. The popularity of black interiors is also a contributor in making cars feel more claustrophobic.

[The Brutailer]

Boxy designs are no longer implemented because it compromises :

- Handling
- Fuel efficiency
- Weight

Also, very minority of people like classic designs. Majority prefer “stylish” curvy designs (nonsense like ‘fluidic’ etc). Look where Hyundai is and where Volkswagen is in India.

[SmartCat]

A couple of UVs with huge glass area and relatively low window line.

This -





and this -





For the truly claustrophobic:

[Simhi]

A related thread: http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techni...nt-upward.html

[Torqy]

Originally Posted by comfortablynumb

I would think Tata Motors, to some extent, is still staying faithful to the classic shape via the Storme and Hexa.

Hexa is a shift towards egg shell.

Originally Posted by paragsachania

In case of me, the next set of wheels too shall be airy/roomy because of my kid. We have had cases where she's got into a normal sedan and soon after complained of nausea (I too have if I am not driving).

Same here. My family is spoilt by space.

Originally Posted by smartcat

A couple of UVs with huge glass area and relatively low window line.

For the truly claustrophobic:

Ha ha. The last one works.

Originally Posted by Simhi

A related thread: http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/techni...nt-upward.html

Thanks for bumping my memory. I see i have commented there too.

[JEHU]

That hemmed in kinda feeling being in cars with higher shoulder line makes the journey quite uncomfortable. The newer designs are actually nauseating to the kids and adults too. This could be due to the fact that the window line is at least at par or higher than the eye level which causes us to view the world outside craning our necks while the scenery slips backwards.

In some of the recent accidents, the rescue teams had to struggle cutting through sheet metal to help the victims which wasn't the case in the older models having a larger glass area.

Safety is compromised IMHO due to these high shoulder line designs. The other BIG SAFETY ISSUE that is being overlooked is the stacking up of turn indicators next to the headlights and the familiar AERODYNAMIC DESIGN is what the R&D Engineers would cite for this too

[vb-saan]

I feel it’s just the design evolution! Even with the modern looks some cars can really give that airy feel, even if it’s a sedan – for e.g.; the Octavia.
It may not go back to the typical boxy shapes, but I can see that modern cars are moving away from the overly curvy designs to a more muscular look.

The other day I got a Citroen C4 Grand Picasso as a Uber ride – it almost felt like a all-glass cabin

[Torqy]

Originally Posted by JEHU

Safety is compromised IMHO due to these high shoulder line designs. The other BIG SAFETY ISSUE that is being overlooked is the stacking up of turn indicators next to the headlights and the familiar AERODYNAMIC DESIGN is what the R&D Engineers would cite for this too

Indicators next to headlights is a big mistake in a country where people haven't heard of Low Beam where a high beam makes the indicator almost invisible. Also, it's dangerous when the headlights don't define the width of the vehicle after dark. Eg:- Thar / Tractors. In the night the headlights don't really give the width of the vehicle until near, even worse if they're in high beam.

[sandx]

Originally Posted by Torqy

Indicators next to headlights is a big mistake in a country where people haven't heard of Low Beam where a high beam makes the indicator almost invisible. Also, it's dangerous when the headlights don't define the width of the vehicle after dark. Eg:- Thar / Tractors. In the night the headlights don't really give the width of the vehicle until near, even worse if they're in high beam.

Valid point Torqy. I distinctly remember a very unfortunate accident where a relative of mine had lost his life when his car rammed into a truck coming from the opposite side with just one headlamp working. The passengers sitting behind had survived and described the fact that they had thought the light to be of a motorcycle.

Coming to the design part, because of the raised design at the rear with high shoulder lines most of the people i have come across don't like sitting at the rear on those cars. Even when i travel by the company provided cabs, folks prefer an Indica over an Eon.