Worst (Modern?) Engineering Design Decisions on Automobiles

[AlvaroF]

This talk of buttons reminds me of a pet hate: inconsistency in placement of buttons between manufacturers.

The key one for me is always the door unlock button. Since most cars automatically lock over a certain speed, and my job often involves a lot of stopping, letting someone into the car and then heading on (niche, but bear with me), I'm constantly flummoxed by where manufacturers choose to put their door unlock buttons. Some are so obscure it's quicker to lean across the car and open the door manually. Experience tells me the best place is somewhere near the electric window switches, on the door itself. And that putting it say, next to the electric handbrake switch is illogical.

Talking of which, can we please standardise electric handbrakes? Ideally, in a similar position to where manufacturers used to put the release for a foot-operated parking brake, on the lower dashboard. Relatively acceptable: Placement somewhere obvious on the centre console, where a regular e-brake lever would be found.

Adding to the confusion, if it's somewhere under the dashboard, push to engage, pull to disengage works best (it's a button so pushing makes sense to engage, and the old levers used to disengage with a pull), but, on the centre console, arrangement more like a lever (pull to engage, push to disengage) feels more logical. It's all psychological.

Ditto hazard flashers. This used to be a big, obvious, red button in most cars, usually somewhere fairly central. Now? Could be anywhere, and usually it's no more obvious than any other button in the cabin. Worst offender is the AMG GT, where it's on the sodding roof with the interior lighting switches.

Other annoying button placements? Starter buttons, which end up all over the place. Cruise control... controls, which take all sorts of different forms. Any satnav system that hides the mute-voice-commands function within menus rather than being accessible instantly on-screen. Electric window and mirror controls anywhere but on the doorcard. Trip reset buttons that aren't obvious and accessible.

My family has 5 different cars: a '05 Renault Laguna, a first gen Ford Ka, a BMW 330e, a Mk7 Golf GTE and a '14 Seat Ibiza. I jump around those cars quite a lot (not so much recently, but I' m not living in Portugal atm) and my God, do I suffer from this problem... All of them have different locations for everything, except maybe the cruise control and the hazard lights are in the same place between the BMW and the VW. Some use start buttons, some have automatic handbrakes, different fuel lid release methods, it's a mess.

 

[Dennisch]

Dual mass flywheels and self adjusting pressure plate.

The flywheel adds technology to something that didn't need it for a negligible amount of comfort. It does however add extra steps for operating the clutch and getting the car moving.

Most of them don't like sporty driving with high torque engines, the Internet is filled with examples of people having to replace it long before the clutch itself needs replacement. An old fashioned single mass flywheel can easily outlast a car when used normally. The dual mass is advised to be replaced every 150 k kilometers, which is for something so dumb and expensive ****ing ridiculous. Luckily conversion kits are available for most cars to go back to single mass.

And that set (flywheel, pressure plate, clutch plate and release bearing) is cheaper than the dual mass flywheel alone.

The self adjusting pressure plate. Why. Another pointless invention for non noticeable comfort.

Forcing mechanics to buy a ****ing expensive tool that ridiculously simple to make, otherwise they ruin the pressure plate when installing it the old fashion way.

Luckily they're also replaced with the conversion set with the old school pressure plate.

 

[Crash]

On a similar note, it often takes me and my colleagues a little while to figure out how to open the fuel doors on Japanese cars since all the VW products we sell (SEATs, primarily) have a fuel door which you press on to open rather than a release inside the car, and we're very used to that. It's funny how those little regional differences imprint on you and you get used to doing very, very simple things a certain way, but when something different comes along you're so used to certain norms that it takes you longer than you feel is reasonable to adjust.

On my 3 cars, the fuel door release button is located in a different place from each other. One of them, is just push on the door to open, one has a lever on the lower dash that you can't see or read when sitting in driver's eat, and one has a pull button that is completely unmarked and tucked away in a corner on the upper dash.

Add that to all 3 cars have their actual fuel door location different from each other.

This talk of buttons reminds me of a pet hate: inconsistency in placement of buttons between manufacturers.

You are going to hate some of the old 911 interiors then. The hazard is a small button on the lower center console next to 2 other buttons of the same size (1 of which is the power door locks). If you want to manually unlock the door from the inside, you have to turn a dial on the door card. The toggle that selects which mirror is being adjusted by the stick on the door is actually under the gauges on the dash, hidden behind the steering wheel. The power sunroof open/close button is right next to the power mirror adjustment toggle.

 

[Aerocoupe]

I've come to dislike the "stair step" style of shifter recently.

My mom recently bought a 2010 Corolla to replace her old Sonata, and this weird shift pattern is my least favorite thing about it. It just doesn't feel intuitive to me, and having the third gear lock-out and drive next to each other rather than forward/backward like every other notch makes it easy to mistake third for drive.

 

[DesertPenguin]

Speaking of shifters...

Those automatic cars that have a fake manual mode that lets you manually change gears like a sequential gearbox. Except they put shift up as push away and shift down as pull towards. That's the opposite of a sequential gearbox in a race car. You always pull towards you to shift up. Why do so many companies get this wrong?

And to that extent, is the sequential gearbox a thing because everyone loves those moments in a race when you only have to shift between 3rd and 4th and wanted that feeling for all gear changes? 3rd/4th is that golden spot that nice and smooth yea?

 

[Pupik]

Speaking of shifters...

Those automatic cars that have a fake manual mode that lets you manually change gears like a sequential gearbox. Except they put shift up as push away and shift down as pull towards. That's the opposite of a sequential gearbox in a race car. You always pull towards you to shift up. Why do so many companies get this wrong?

And to that extent, is the sequential gearbox a thing because everyone loves those moments in a race when you only have to shift between 3rd and 4th and wanted that feeling for all gear changes? 3rd/4th is that golden spot that nice and smooth yea?

This rankles me a bit when I have to up/downshift (oops, down/upshift) my wife's Mazda.

 

[DesertPenguin]

This rankles me a bit when I have to up/downshift (oops, down/upshift) my wife's Mazda.

At least my mom's Camry got it right and its fun sometimes in city areas

 

[Wolfe]

Speaking of shifters...

Those automatic cars that have a fake manual mode that lets you manually change gears like a sequential gearbox. Except they put shift up as push away and shift down as pull towards. That's the opposite of a sequential gearbox in a race car. You always pull towards you to shift up. Why do so many companies get this wrong?

Because automatics. D-3-2-L; people are accustomed to pulling the shifter back to downshift.

It makes more sense to me the other way around.

 

[Danoff]

Those automatic cars that have a fake manual mode that lets you manually change gears like a sequential gearbox. Except they put shift up as push away and shift down as pull towards. That's the opposite of a sequential gearbox in a race car. You always pull towards you to shift up. Why do so many companies get this wrong?

I don't know. I have one of each. I have a correct one (BMW 330i) and an incorrect one (FX35). It's like trying to write my name with my left hand when I use the infiniti. I need something to remember, like, in this car it's 2-3 instead of 3-4.

 

[Crash]

Those automatic cars that have a fake manual mode that lets you manually change gears like a sequential gearbox. Except they put shift up as push away and shift down as pull towards. That's the opposite of a sequential gearbox in a race car. You always pull towards you to shift up. Why do so many companies get this wrong?

I'm not sure I would call it wrong necessarily; I can rationalize that when you upshift to a higher gear, you would push a lever "up", and when you downshift to a lower gear, you would push the lever "down".

 

[GTV0819]

Speaking of shifters...

Those automatic cars that have a fake manual mode that lets you manually change gears like a sequential gearbox. Except they put shift up as push away and shift down as pull towards. That's the opposite of a sequential gearbox in a race car. You always pull towards you to shift up. Why do so many companies get this wrong?

And to that extent, is the sequential gearbox a thing because everyone loves those moments in a race when you only have to shift between 3rd and 4th and wanted that feeling for all gear changes? 3rd/4th is that golden spot that nice and smooth yea?

Lol why the hell is this even a big deal? If your car has this orientation for its manual mode but also has paddle shifter too, then just simply use the latter.

 

[MaxAttack]

A quick list, some of these have definitely been mentioned.

LED Headlights, particularly the AUDI ones, mean my dad basically can't drive at night anymore, especially if there is rain in the air. More than once we've pulled over while his eyes clear, and the man's vision isnt at all bad for a chap in his 60s.

SUVs with Sports Car levels of power, the absolute definition of putting in power that will never be used. 400+hp and a high center of gravity should make you very nervous.

Hatchback sized crossovers, again a pointless way to raise the centre of gravity as well as make everything about the car less economical.

BMW grilles.

Ford Focus/Fiesta ST (and other hatchbacks) and their fake, programmed exhaust popping. Listen closely the next time an ST wiggles its pedal at you. pop pop BANG. Same pattern every time. No visceral race engine spitting hot fuel as they would like you to think.

Citroen airbumps. I don't feel like I need to elaborate.

and finally, there are some MPV models from like the late 90s/early 00s, with a rear mounted mirror that shows the bumper. (Mazda Bongo Friendee, I think) Ive never seen one without a dented rear.

 

[AlvaroF]

Citroen airbumps. I don't feel like I need to elaborate.

Please do elaborate. I know they serve a very niche purpose that makes them almost useless (I don't know if they protect the door when you bang it into the wall or another car, which is so annoying).

 

[MaxAttack]

Please do elaborate. I know they serve a very niche purpose that makes them almost useless (I don't know if they protect the door when you bang it into the wall or another car, which is so annoying).

It's a safety feature that doesn't make the car safer, and most airbump citroen owners seem to use it as an excuse for awful parking. Seems to me that Citroen looked back at volvo's SIBS (Side impact bars) and how strong an innovation that was for them and banked on this gimmick having a similar effect on their sales, but SIBS was an actual safety innovation and the cactus airbumps have never saved anyone from anything except a small amount of paintwork possibly. So its just one of those redundant innovations that only existed to try and boost sales, kinda similar to LED halos now i think about it.

 

[AlvaroF]

It's a safety feature that doesn't make the car safer, and most airbump citroen owners seem to use it as an excuse for awful parking. Seems to me that Citroen looked back at volvo's SIBS (Side impact bars) and how strong an innovation that was for them and banked on this gimmick having a similar effect on their sales, but SIBS was an actual safety innovation and the cactus airbumps have never saved anyone from anything except a small amount of paintwork possibly. So its just one of those redundant innovations that only existed to try and boost sales, kinda similar to LED halos now i think about it.

I belive Citroen never claimed to be a safety feature. I read it somewhere and they themselves advertised it as a style feature and only good to protect shopping carts.

Useless? Well, in reality, yes. Cool different and quirky? Also yes

 

[GTV0819]

Nowadays, you'd seriously wonder why this type of headlamp combination is becoming a common sight on new cars already.

 

[Volksauto]

Nowadays, you'd seriously wonder why this type of headlamp combination is becoming a common sight on new cars already.

But wait! There's more!!

 

[MaxAttack]

But wait! There's more!!

Ow, my soul.

I will now rectify this with the best headlights in the game; Volvo's

Ahhhhhhh so refreshing.

You know your design language is ****ed when it makes a Volvo look like it was handbuilt in Italy in 1962.

 

[GTV0819]

Ow, my soul.

I will now rectify this with the best headlights in the game; Volvo's

Ahhhhhhh so refreshing.

You know your design language is ****ed when it makes a Volvo look like it was handbuilt in Italy in 1962.

Lol I think that Volvo has a fine-looking design to it and I don't mind if it would look like it was hand-built in Italy or what, as long as it doesn't look like Chinese like the squinted designs above.

 

[MaxAttack]

Lol I think that's just a fine-looking design and I don't mind if it would look like it was hand-built in Italy or what, as long as it doesn't look like Chinese.

they're a great design, very functional and they don't dazzle at all, can confirm as I very often walk along roads at night with no streetlighting. Visually distinct as well so the brand is recognisable across the whole model range. Case study for good design. And they call them Thor's Hammer.

 

[GTV0819]

they're a great design, very functional and they don't dazzle at all, can confirm as I very often walk along roads at night with no streetlighting. Visually distinct as well so the brand is recognisable across the whole model range. Case study for good design. And they call them Thor's Hammer.

What design among those that have been mentioned? Lol.

 

[Tornado]

Nowadays, you'd seriously wonder why this type of headlamp combination is becoming a common sight on new cars already.

Because it allows you to put the headlights lower, which means you don't need to have them aimed as far downward without blinding other drivers, which means you get more distance out of them while also reducing glare.

 

[GTV0819]

Because it allows you to put the headlights lower, which means you don't need to have them aimed as far downward without blinding other drivers, which means you get more distance out of them while also reducing glare.

I see but the squinted design of the upper light doesn't look too good on larger vehicles like pickup trucks or SUVs.

 

[Ze Elephant]

If I recall, it seems like the Jeep Cherokee was the first to go with this style of lights. I think it was almost universally billed as a terrible piece of design, which makes me wonder why it's become so popular now. I understand Tornado's reasoning, but egads...

 

[homeforsummer]

In this thread: people complaining about styling things they don't like, rather than engineering decisions.

 

[TexRex]

In this thread: people complaining about styling things they don't like, rather than engineering decisions.

Or vehicle categories they don't like.

 

[GTV0819]

In this thread: people complaining about styling things they don't like, rather than engineering decisions.

Well, you're gonna have to look at the initial post of the OP and tell him that. Then ask him about the thread's title.

 

[homeforsummer]

Well, you're gonna have to look at the initial post of the OP and tell him that. Then ask him about the thread's title.

In the initial post they're complaining about the placement of lights because it's not clear for traffic behind. That's a poor engineering decision, and therefore fits the thread title.

"Squinty upper lights don't look good" is nothing to do with poor engineering, and therefore doesn't fit the thread title.

 

[DesertPenguin]

I think the idea is that everything on a car is an engineering decision. Whether that's the reason why we don't like it or not, it still means someone had to design it like that and we think that was a bad decision. I hope that makes sense.

 

[GTV0819]

In the initial post they're complaining about the placement of lights because it's not clear for traffic behind. That's a poor engineering decision, and therefore fits the thread title.

"Squinty upper lights don't look good" is nothing to do with poor engineering, and therefore doesn't fit the thread title.

That's your opinion. And btw, I ONLY said that it doesn't fit larger vehicles like pickup trucks or SUVs since it could look insignificant for their size, although it also depends on how they were designed. And in some cars, you still have to take out either the grill or the front bumper first before you can take those upper lights out.