AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Toyota Camry  (Read 4074 times)

ozarkman417

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 366
  • The "Living, breathing GPS".

  • Age: 16
  • Location: Birthplace of Route 66
  • Last Login: Today at 12:41:55 AM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #150 on: October 16, 2019, 08:03:40 PM »

Brings me back to the good old days when safety was an “optional” feature on cars.
Brings you back to the days before backup cameras weren't mandatory. This was a very recent measure by the Federal DOT where cars sold in the US as of the 2019 model year were required to have one.
I suppose this means we won't have anymore American cars without a big screen somewhere or another.
Logged
_________________
/  >0 0<   |   <-  ->   \______
\________|_______________
                Use it

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9848
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:33:33 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #151 on: October 16, 2019, 08:17:51 PM »

Brings me back to the good old days when safety was an “optional” feature on cars.
Brings you back to the days before backup cameras weren't mandatory. This was a very recent measure by the Federal DOT where cars sold in the US as of the 2019 model year were required to have one.
I suppose this means we won't have anymore American cars without a big screen somewhere or another.

Hell I remember when having an air bag, rear disc brakes and ABS as standard equipment was unheard of just a few decades back.  If I recall correct it wasn’t even mandatory to wear a seat belt in Michigan in the back seat until some point in the 1980s.  Although...my Dad (who said that it was okay) could have been full of crap, he did also say we would be cushioned by hitting the front seats of the Vista Cruiser in a crash. 

Stephane Dumas

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1916
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 10:32:04 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #152 on: October 16, 2019, 08:30:59 PM »


Brings me back to the good old days when safety was an “optional” feature on cars.

Also, when I was looking at the 2007-2011 Toyota Camry, the 2007-2009 models have yellow (amber) turn signals while the 2010-2011 has red. Which do you guys prefer? I may make a new thread on that, but which turn signals is better? In my opinion, I prefer yellow.


I prefer the old school method of signaling by hand?  Brings me back to the good old days when safety was an “optional” feature on cars. 

Signaling on hands, that reminds me of Tex Avery's "Car of tomorrow" cartoon at 0:31.

Brings you back to the days before backup cameras weren't mandatory. This was a very recent measure by the Federal DOT where cars sold in the US as of the 2019 model year were required to have one.
I suppose this means we won't have anymore American cars without a big screen somewhere or another.

We could wonder if having too much safety features might have some unintended consequences? I saw that old article from 2016 where a driving educator warms relying on technology could lead to failed test. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-driving-instructor-road-test-technology-1.3535863
Quote
Driving instructor Stewart Brookins is warning new drivers that relying too much on new technology — such as rear view cameras and blind spot monitors — could get them in trouble on their road tests.

Brookins, who is based in Summerside, P.E.I., said while the technology can be an asset, but drivers still need to shoulder check.

"Whether it's a touch screen or a camera, any of these things, number one is always that you're focused on the driving and that you're in control of that vehicle," he said.[/auote]
Logged

PHLBOS

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6891
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Greater Philly, PA
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 05:48:02 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #153 on: October 17, 2019, 11:46:24 AM »

Brings me back to the good old days when safety was an “optional” feature on cars.
Brings you back to the days before backup cameras weren't mandatory. This was a very recent measure by the Federal DOT where cars sold in the US as of the 2019 model year were required to have one.
I suppose this means we won't have anymore American cars without a big screen somewhere or another.
FTFY.  The Federal requirements are for all cars sold in the US market regardless of whether it's a domestic or import brand.

It's worth noting that a fair amount of newer vehicles (mid-2000s onward) manufactured prior to backup cameras becoming standard/mandatory have absolute garbage for sight-lines/visibility (comparable to cars of the 1930s & 1940s). 

Makes one appreciate the older-designed cars.  From the late 50s through the early 80s, increased glass area for better visibility was often advertised as a visibility virtue of those then-new models.

We could wonder if having too much safety features might have some unintended consequences? I saw that old article from 2016 where a driving educator warms relying on technology could lead to failed test. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-driving-instructor-road-test-technology-1.3535863
Quote
Driving instructor Stewart Brookins is warning new drivers that relying too much on new technology — such as rear view cameras and blind spot monitors — could get them in trouble on their road tests.

Brookins, who is based in Summerside, P.E.I., said while the technology can be an asset, but drivers still need to shoulder check.

"Whether it's a touch screen or a camera, any of these things, number one is always that you're focused on the driving and that you're in control of that vehicle," he said.
Solution for the above.  Utilize a vehicle that was designed prior to the mid-2000s for the driver's test.
Logged
GPS does NOT equal GOD

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10373
  • Age: 44
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:35:18 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #154 on: October 17, 2019, 01:20:14 PM »

New Jersey, a few years back, permitted testers to look at the camera image when backing up.

All technology, for that matter, is a chicken or the egg type thing.  Many of the features are developed to make it easier on drivers to avoid crashes.  Drivers want to rely on such technology to feel safer. 

And then people are just idiots sometimes.  I carpool with a guy that talks shit about these new features all the time...but at the same time he doesn't turn his head to look in the blind spots.  At least once a month he needs to serve back into his lane not realizing there was a car next to him.  I try telling him to turn his head...but he doesn't want to take his eyes off the road.  I just hope that the day he merges directly into another car I'm not in the car with him.
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6415
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 12:26:29 AM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #155 on: October 17, 2019, 02:02:29 PM »

I still have a 1994 Saturn as my daily driver partly because I can see the outer edge of the trunk lid through the rear window.  That kind of visibility is much more limited in the 2005 Camry I use for roadtrips, though the wing mirrors compensate to an extent.

I have seen consumer-advocacy magazines like Consumer Reports say flat-out that it is worth buying brand-new, even with lots of usable life left in currently owned vehicles, just to access safety features like adaptive cruise control, lane-keeping assist, automatic emergency braking, and so on.  I suspect some of the logic has to do with the rising cost of healthcare in the US; on a per-head basis it now costs four times as much as it did in 2000, and that in turn drives up the economic value of prevention.  However, I view the fact that accidents are contingent as cutting both ways.  It costs nothing not to drive like a fool, and until we have fully autonomous cars, the ensemble of passive and increasingly active safety features on new cars will probably not come close in terms of effectiveness.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

DaBigE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1770
  • Following the LEGO® brick road

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Southcentral Wisconsin
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:32:51 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #156 on: October 17, 2019, 03:16:54 PM »

I still have a 1994 Saturn as my daily driver partly because I can see the outer edge of the trunk lid through the rear window.  That kind of visibility is much more limited in the 2005 Camry I use for roadtrips, though the wing mirrors compensate to an extent.

That's the reason why my first car, had a spoiler (factory). I didn't buy it for looks (which didn't look bad), but rather because that way I knew where the back limit of the car was (within a couple inches) when looking through the back window. Reverse sensing systems weren't an option with the car, and cameras were a thing limited to concept cars.
Logged
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

Stephane Dumas

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1916
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 10:32:04 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #157 on: October 17, 2019, 06:40:59 PM »


I have seen consumer-advocacy magazines like Consumer Reports say flat-out that it is worth buying brand-new, even with lots of usable life left in currently owned vehicles, just to access safety features like adaptive cruise control, lane-keeping assist, automatic emergency braking, and so on.  I suspect some of the logic has to do with the rising cost of healthcare in the US; on a per-head basis it now costs four times as much as it did in 2000, and that in turn drives up the economic value of prevention.  However, I view the fact that accidents are contingent as cutting both ways.  It costs nothing not to drive like a fool, and until we have fully autonomous cars, the ensemble of passive and increasingly active safety features on new cars will probably not come close in terms of effectiveness.

Speaking of healthcare, that reminded me on another forum a topic about a NBC article posted in 2017 about self-driving cars who'll create donors organs shortage.
https://www.allpar.com/forums/threads/self-driving-cars-will-create-organ-shortage.166890
https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/can-science-curb-donor-organ-shortage-self-driving-cars-will-n719386?cid=public-rss_20170211
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10494
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 24
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:37:47 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #158 on: October 17, 2019, 08:11:24 PM »

I still have a 1994 Saturn as my daily driver partly because I can see the outer edge of the trunk lid through the rear window.  That kind of visibility is much more limited in the 2005 Camry I use for roadtrips, though the wing mirrors compensate to an extent.

That's the reason why my first car, had a spoiler (factory). I didn't buy it for looks (which didn't look bad), but rather because that way I knew where the back limit of the car was (within a couple inches) when looking through the back window. Reverse sensing systems weren't an option with the car, and cameras were a thing limited to concept cars.

Cars with hatches have been a thing for quite a while. Rear glass + about 6 inches is basically it. My Golf is small, but having the rear glass be the rear end makes it extremely easy to parallel park, reverse park, etc.

I've never particularly enjoyed sedans, not just because of their weird shape, but because of the whole extra bit beyond the rear glass is too often hidden.
Logged

DaBigE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1770
  • Following the LEGO® brick road

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Southcentral Wisconsin
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:32:51 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #159 on: October 17, 2019, 09:37:45 PM »

I still have a 1994 Saturn as my daily driver partly because I can see the outer edge of the trunk lid through the rear window.  That kind of visibility is much more limited in the 2005 Camry I use for roadtrips, though the wing mirrors compensate to an extent.

That's the reason why my first car, had a spoiler (factory). I didn't buy it for looks (which didn't look bad), but rather because that way I knew where the back limit of the car was (within a couple inches) when looking through the back window. Reverse sensing systems weren't an option with the car, and cameras were a thing limited to concept cars.

Cars with hatches have been a thing for quite a while. Rear glass + about 6 inches is basically it. My Golf is small, but having the rear glass be the rear end makes it extremely easy to parallel park, reverse park, etc.

I've never particularly enjoyed sedans, not just because of their weird shape, but because of the whole extra bit beyond the rear glass is too often hidden.

The bolded parts are exactly why I didn't buy a hatch. I want to drive a car, not wear it.
Logged
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

ozarkman417

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 366
  • The "Living, breathing GPS".

  • Age: 16
  • Location: Birthplace of Route 66
  • Last Login: Today at 12:41:55 AM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #160 on: October 17, 2019, 10:48:35 PM »

Also, when I was looking at the 2007-2011 Toyota Camry, the 2007-2009 models have yellow (amber) turn signals while the 2010-2011 has red. Which do you guys prefer? I may make a new thread on that, but which turn signals is better? In my opinion, I prefer yellow.
Definitely yellow as it stands out from the brake lights. There are quite a few cars that have LED taillights but still have incandescent bulbs for the turn signals.
How about this: Turn signals mounted as the same height as the brake lights, or placed below (like on most of the new Hyundai SUVs)?
Logged
_________________
/  >0 0<   |   <-  ->   \______
\________|_______________
                Use it

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10494
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 24
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:37:47 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #161 on: October 18, 2019, 12:42:31 AM »

I still have a 1994 Saturn as my daily driver partly because I can see the outer edge of the trunk lid through the rear window.  That kind of visibility is much more limited in the 2005 Camry I use for roadtrips, though the wing mirrors compensate to an extent.

That's the reason why my first car, had a spoiler (factory). I didn't buy it for looks (which didn't look bad), but rather because that way I knew where the back limit of the car was (within a couple inches) when looking through the back window. Reverse sensing systems weren't an option with the car, and cameras were a thing limited to concept cars.

Cars with hatches have been a thing for quite a while. Rear glass + about 6 inches is basically it. My Golf is small, but having the rear glass be the rear end makes it extremely easy to parallel park, reverse park, etc.

I've never particularly enjoyed sedans, not just because of their weird shape, but because of the whole extra bit beyond the rear glass is too often hidden.

The bolded parts are exactly why I didn't buy a hatch. I want to drive a car, not wear it.

My Golf has more room than my sister's Jetta. Don't knock it until you've tried one...hatches have a square shape and are impressively practical and large when necessary. But more to the point...you have something against small cars? Clearly you don't live in the city. I have to parallel park quite frequently here in the Seattle area, including every night when a I get home. I sure as hell don't want to be parallel parking a damn Brougham every night. I've sneaked into quite a few spots that others haven't been able to.

Wagons also have a square rear end, and are much larger (closer to a sedan's length but with a squared-off back end), if you're so sure that hatches are too small.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 9848
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:33:33 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #162 on: October 18, 2019, 01:07:59 AM »

Speaking of Seattle last year I managed to reverse into the corner spot on the lowest point of the Sinking Ship garage in Pioneer Square in a Dodge Challenger.  Considering the garage was full at the time I thought it was a pretty good job at backing a small car in.  Seattle is one of the few cities I try to get the smallest car at the airport they have but it was either Challenger or Charger on the lot...a hatch back would have been really handy to have.

DaBigE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1770
  • Following the LEGO® brick road

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Southcentral Wisconsin
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:32:51 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #163 on: October 18, 2019, 09:24:30 AM »

I still have a 1994 Saturn as my daily driver partly because I can see the outer edge of the trunk lid through the rear window.  That kind of visibility is much more limited in the 2005 Camry I use for roadtrips, though the wing mirrors compensate to an extent.

That's the reason why my first car, had a spoiler (factory). I didn't buy it for looks (which didn't look bad), but rather because that way I knew where the back limit of the car was (within a couple inches) when looking through the back window. Reverse sensing systems weren't an option with the car, and cameras were a thing limited to concept cars.

Cars with hatches have been a thing for quite a while. Rear glass + about 6 inches is basically it. My Golf is small, but having the rear glass be the rear end makes it extremely easy to parallel park, reverse park, etc.

I've never particularly enjoyed sedans, not just because of their weird shape, but because of the whole extra bit beyond the rear glass is too often hidden.

The bolded parts are exactly why I didn't buy a hatch. I want to drive a car, not wear it.

My Golf has more room than my sister's Jetta. Don't knock it until you've tried one...hatches have a square shape and are impressively practical and large when necessary. But more to the point...you have something against small cars? Clearly you don't live in the city. I have to parallel park quite frequently here in the Seattle area, including every night when a I get home. I sure as hell don't want to be parallel parking a damn Brougham every night. I've sneaked into quite a few spots that others haven't been able to.

Wagons also have a square rear end, and are much larger (closer to a sedan's length but with a squared-off back end), if you're so sure that hatches are too small.

Careful with what you assume. I don't impulse buy expensive items, and cars are no different. My wife has one (from before we were married) and I hate it. I'm a bigger person, and I need more room than what those beer cans provide (both for me and for cargo). For what it's worth, I do live in a city, and have not had a problem with parking. Do smaller cars have advantages? Yes. But in my case, the benefits of a larger car outweighed them (namely cargo room, passenger room, ground clearance, and step in height).
Logged
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10494
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 24
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:37:47 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #164 on: October 19, 2019, 03:40:59 AM »

Speaking of Seattle last year I managed to reverse into the corner spot on the lowest point of the Sinking Ship garage in Pioneer Square in a Dodge Challenger.  Considering the garage was full at the time I thought it was a pretty good job at backing a small car in.  Seattle is one of the few cities I try to get the smallest car at the airport they have but it was either Challenger or Charger on the lot...a hatch back would have been really handy to have.

Having a big car here does suck. The suburban roads are fine, but city streets are quite narrow for a western metro area. I used to have an SUV, and the sightlines were great, but it sucked going around the city. Sold it off quick once I moved to the city.

Careful with what you assume. I don't impulse buy expensive items, and cars are no different. My wife has one (from before we were married) and I hate it. I'm a bigger person, and I need more room than what those beer cans provide (both for me and for cargo). For what it's worth, I do live in a city, and have not had a problem with parking. Do smaller cars have advantages? Yes. But in my case, the benefits of a larger car outweighed them (namely cargo room, passenger room, ground clearance, and step in height).

You sound a lot like most Americans....big person = big car. I just don't understand that logic, since the vast majority of modern cars have enough adjustment to fit virtually anyone. The tallest people in the world, the Dutch, buy the VW Polo and Golf more than all other cars except three, with the Polo being #1. Surely they aren't driving around cramped? I understand our fuel prices are cheaper, so that allows us the freedom to buy bigger, but that doesn't mean you have to. Yes, bigger cars have better step-in height, more ground clearance, and more cargo room (well, SUVs and wagons...sedans do on paper, but their shape makes it impractical to use all the space at once); for me, those things are not important, as I'm young, generally live alone, and don't haul stuff all the time (I can rent a car for the few occasions where I need something gigantic).

For the record, I use my Golf part-time as a Lyft vehicle, and have yet to receive a complaint about leg room (verbally or written). I don't know how old your wife's hatchback is, but the current ones are admittedly quite large compared to older ones sized closer to maybe the Ford Festiva or Subaru Justy.
Logged

DaBigE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1770
  • Following the LEGO® brick road

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Southcentral Wisconsin
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:32:51 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #165 on: October 19, 2019, 10:30:06 PM »

Careful with what you assume. I don't impulse buy expensive items, and cars are no different. My wife has one (from before we were married) and I hate it. I'm a bigger person, and I need more room than what those beer cans provide (both for me and for cargo). For what it's worth, I do live in a city, and have not had a problem with parking. Do smaller cars have advantages? Yes. But in my case, the benefits of a larger car outweighed them (namely cargo room, passenger room, ground clearance, and step in height).

You sound a lot like most Americans....big person = big car. I just don't understand that logic, since the vast majority of modern cars have enough adjustment to fit virtually anyone. The tallest people in the world, the Dutch, buy the VW Polo and Golf more than all other cars except three, with the Polo being #1. Surely they aren't driving around cramped? I understand our fuel prices are cheaper, so that allows us the freedom to buy bigger, but that doesn't mean you have to. Yes, bigger cars have better step-in height, more ground clearance, and more cargo room (well, SUVs and wagons...sedans do on paper, but their shape makes it impractical to use all the space at once); for me, those things are not important, as I'm young, generally live alone, and don't haul stuff all the time (I can rent a car for the few occasions where I need something gigantic).

For the record, I use my Golf part-time as a Lyft vehicle, and have yet to receive a complaint about leg room (verbally or written). I don't know how old your wife's hatchback is, but the current ones are admittedly quite large compared to older ones sized closer to maybe the Ford Festiva or Subaru Justy.

I'm not sure why I have to defend my purchasing decisions to you or why it matters so much to you, especially since this is getting far from the topic of a Toyota Camry, but I bought it based on my needs and wants. The fuel economy of my small SUV is roughly the same and occasionally better than the car I traded in. My SUV is actually shorter than the car I traded in, so parking is even less of an issue. I was tired of getting leg cramps from how low most sedans (and hatchbacks) ride. I don't have this problem (yet) but other taller people have issues with flexibility/arthritis of the knee, which cross most small vehicles off their purchase lists. Great that large people across the world buy small cars...I don't give a flying fuck about my next door neighbor's buying habits, let alone the Dutch's. If it fits their needs, that's all that matters; I'm not in the car selling business.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2019, 11:35:48 PM by DaBigE »
Logged
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10494
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 24
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:37:47 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #166 on: October 20, 2019, 03:28:28 PM »

I'm not sure why I have to defend my purchasing decisions to you or why it matters so much to you, especially since this is getting far from the topic of a Toyota Camry, but I bought it based on my needs and wants. The fuel economy of my small SUV is roughly the same and occasionally better than the car I traded in. My SUV is actually shorter than the car I traded in, so parking is even less of an issue. I was tired of getting leg cramps from how low most sedans (and hatchbacks) ride. I don't have this problem (yet) but other taller people have issues with flexibility/arthritis of the knee, which cross most small vehicles off their purchase lists. Great that large people across the world buy small cars...I don't give a flying fuck about my next door neighbor's buying habits, let alone the Dutch's. If it fits their needs, that's all that matters; I'm not in the car selling business.

It's not you. I'm not trying to make this personal or anything. After all, this is just a forum where we can bullshit about whatever (and I happen to like talking about cars). What ticks me off is people going "big" when they don't need to. They'll justify it this way or that way, but so often the reasons just seem silly to me. If it's for your health, go ahead! I would never argue against that; it's probably the best reason there is. If low cars are uncomfortable, obviously I wouldn't buy one either.

Here's something interesting to think about: the two tallest people I know, who are 6'7" and 6'11", drive an Accent hatchback and a Nissan Cube, respectively. If they can fit into a small car comfortably, I'll be damned if I'm gonna let someone who's not even 6' tell me they need a truck because they're too tall for a compact.  Another tall guy I know, 6'5", only finds his Civic uncomfortable because of the angle of the seat, not any lack of room.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2019, 03:33:13 PM by jakeroot »
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6415
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 12:26:29 AM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #167 on: October 20, 2019, 04:21:09 PM »

What ticks me off is people going "big" when they don't need to. They'll justify it this way or that way, but so often the reasons just seem silly to me. If it's for your health, go ahead! I would never argue against that; it's probably the best reason there is. If low cars are uncomfortable, obviously I wouldn't buy one either.

I don't think it's helpful to use height as the sole measure of whether a tall person can fit comfortably in a small car or, alternately, to evaluate whether a given model of small car can accommodate the 1st-3rd and 97th-99th percentiles of the population.  Leg length is another key variable, as is the extent to which seat height can be adjusted and the steepness of any incline in the seat track.

I am 5' 11" with long legs and a short trunk, and can fit comfortably in my Saturn in the nearly-upright driving position I prefer.  My father is 6' 2" with shorter legs and a longer trunk, so in smaller cars he generally finds himself obliged to tilt the seat well back for adequate headroom.  This is a driving position that is acceptable to him but, in my opinion, is less than ideal in terms of maintaining positive control.

We generally find one has to go above the subcompact and compact size classes to obtain seat height adjustment.  In the cars that do have it, I generally find I have adequate headroom at maximum height, while my father needs the seat bottom to be significantly lower.

My personal preference is for a car fairly low to the ground since it is easier for me to lever myself into a driver's seat by grasping the steering wheel or to squat down into a passenger seat.  Getting into a vehicle with a higher step-up, such as a minivan or SUV, is a more complicated maneuver since I have to climb up and duck down at the same time.  I've spoken to people who report that it is actually easier for them to get older relatives (90 years old or older) with mobility limitations into first-generation Saturns rather than the much newer SUVs they also have access to.

This is very much an area in which YMMV.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8287
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:24:07 AM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #168 on: October 21, 2019, 01:17:30 AM »

Height isn't the only dimension that dictates whether a car is comfortable to drive or not. With some body proportions, a driver can run into a situation where it is impossible to comfortably fit between the steering wheel and the seat while still reaching the pedals.
Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10494
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 24
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:37:47 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #169 on: October 21, 2019, 01:57:18 AM »

We generally find one has to go above the subcompact and compact size classes to obtain seat height adjustment.

I've found this to be true for a long time, but I'm not sure it continues to be true. At least Volkswagens offer height adjustment across their range. My sister, who just barely cracks 5', used to have to sit on a pillow in her Civic, but her new Jetta (base model...cheapest VW you can buy) offers height adjustment for the driver. My Golf offers it for both front seats.

I am 5' 11" with long legs and a short trunk, and can fit comfortably in my Saturn in the nearly-upright driving position I prefer.  My father is 6' 2" with shorter legs and a longer trunk, so in smaller cars he generally finds himself obliged to tilt the seat well back for adequate headroom.  This is a driving position that is acceptable to him but, in my opinion, is less than ideal in terms of maintaining positive control.

I've found, in my years doing valet, that many people sit much further back from the steering wheel/pedals than I would expect. Many seats are adjusted to the point where I'm surprised people don't nod off while driving. I may find these positions awkward, as I'm going on five years with a manual transmission (where sitting closer to the pedals is a bit more ideal, for comfortable clutch operation), but it almost seems dangerous no matter what the situation. Obviously airbags are deadly, and you shouldn't sit three inches from the steering wheel, but I have to wonder what role sitting too far back may have played in single-vehicle accidents, or even multiple vehicle accidents.

My personal preference is for a car fairly low to the ground since it is easier for me to lever myself into a driver's seat by grasping the steering wheel or to squat down into a passenger seat.  Getting into a vehicle with a higher step-up, such as a minivan or SUV, is a more complicated maneuver since I have to climb up and duck down at the same time.  I've spoken to people who report that it is actually easier for them to get older relatives (90 years old or older) with mobility limitations into first-generation Saturns rather than the much newer SUVs they also have access to.

I agree with this. Minivans seem like an excellent middleground between "falling" into smaller cars, and "climbing" into larger SUVs/trucks. I'm about 5'10", and have had to climb into trucks far more often than I would have liked in my valet years, usually driven by guys smaller than me (small dingaling syndrome??). I understand that, at least for my grandparents, my Golf has proved problematic because they have to pull themselves out of my car; they have an easier time with their minivan, as the seat level is closer to their waistline. My grandfather loves my car, just on a "fun to drive" and "efficient" level, but does admit that it is annoying to get into. Nevertheless, he prefers it over the climbing action required to enter his truck.

Height isn't the only dimension that dictates whether a car is comfortable to drive or not. With some body proportions, a driver can run into a situation where it is impossible to comfortably fit between the steering wheel and the seat while still reaching the pedals.

I assume you are referring to those with big...uh...stomachs? If so, yes that's understandable. Although perhaps a bit unfortunate (unless one is pregnant).
Logged

MNHighwayMan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4188
  • Blue and gold forever!

  • Age: 27
  • Location: Des Moines
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 05:58:38 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #170 on: October 21, 2019, 02:42:39 AM »

As someone who is both tall (more than six feet) and heavy set (read: fat :-D), in both of the last two cars I've owned, I've had to have the seat nearly or entirely all of the way back to comfortably drive.

I think it's also a bit much to think that seat position has anything to do with accident rates.
Logged

ozarkman417

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 366
  • The "Living, breathing GPS".

  • Age: 16
  • Location: Birthplace of Route 66
  • Last Login: Today at 12:41:55 AM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #171 on: October 21, 2019, 02:51:45 AM »



I think it's also a bit much to think that seat position has anything to do with accident rates.

That's the basis behind why my dad calls all sedans "death traps". Though ironically he dailyed a 3-series for the longest time.





SM-G965U

Logged
_________________
/  >0 0<   |   <-  ->   \______
\________|_______________
                Use it

jeffandnicole

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10373
  • Age: 44
  • Location: South Jersey
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:35:18 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #172 on: October 21, 2019, 07:57:22 AM »

As someone who is both tall (more than six feet) and heavy set (read: fat :-D), in both of the last two cars I've owned, I've had to have the seat nearly or entirely all of the way back to comfortably drive.

I think it's also a bit much to think that seat position has anything to do with accident rates.

Seeing how far some people sit back, I could see the door pillar being in the way of visibility when looking directly to the left.

Otherwise, while I don't know if seating position may contribute to accidents, but seating position could contribute to the severity of injuries when in an accident (ie: sitting too close to the steering wheel and the airbag deploys strongly into your face/body).
Logged

DaBigE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1770
  • Following the LEGO® brick road

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Southcentral Wisconsin
  • Last Login: December 05, 2019, 11:32:51 PM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #173 on: October 21, 2019, 09:04:27 AM »

My personal preference is for a car fairly low to the ground since it is easier for me to lever myself into a driver's seat by grasping the steering wheel or to squat down into a passenger seat.  Getting into a vehicle with a higher step-up, such as a minivan or SUV, is a more complicated maneuver since I have to climb up and duck down at the same time.  I've spoken to people who report that it is actually easier for them to get older relatives (90 years old or older) with mobility limitations into first-generation Saturns rather than the much newer SUVs they also have access to.

I agree with this. Minivans seem like an excellent middleground between "falling" into smaller cars, and "climbing" into larger SUVs/trucks. I'm about 5'10", and have had to climb into trucks far more often than I would have liked in my valet years, usually driven by guys smaller than me (small dingaling syndrome??). I understand that, at least for my grandparents, my Golf has proved problematic because they have to pull themselves out of my car; they have an easier time with their minivan, as the seat level is closer to their waistline. My grandfather loves my car, just on a "fun to drive" and "efficient" level, but does admit that it is annoying to get into. Nevertheless, he prefers it over the climbing action required to enter his truck.

My preference is a vehicle which I can slide into...not one that I have to fall into and climb up to get out of, nor one that I have to climb up to get into. That's where my current vehicle hit that sweet spot for me. If I have to climb up, it better be into a tractor or other large truck (other than a pickup).

Height isn't the only dimension that dictates whether a car is comfortable to drive or not. With some body proportions, a driver can run into a situation where it is impossible to comfortably fit between the steering wheel and the seat while still reaching the pedals.

I assume you are referring to those with big...uh...stomachs? If so, yes that's understandable. Although perhaps a bit unfortunate (unless one is pregnant).

Could also be well-endowed ladies, too.
Logged
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

tolbs17

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 849
  • Age: 17
  • Location: Greenville, NC
  • Last Login: Today at 12:22:05 AM
Re: Toyota Camry
« Reply #174 on: October 31, 2019, 08:22:32 PM »

All 2020 toyota models should have android auto, including the camry, i'm sure will. That's some exciting news if people want to look at the cheaper camry over the accord, it's fine.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.