Rear Visibility

[ToniCipriani]

Seems like this is a common problem with the newer GM cars. I find it relatively difficult to park my G6, compared to my Cavalier. I suppose it's mostly because it's a larger car, but the rear seems to be "on the high side", and it takes longer for me to make sure there's no car in my blind spot and no one behind. I'm always freaked out that I might hit the cars next to me when backing in.

Other cases:

- MPH complained about the rear visibility on the G6 coupe in their video Q&A

- Gone through MSN autos in the user review section of the Cobalt, people who have one love it, but complains about blind spot visibility.

Anybody have the same trouble?

[Flybrian]

See the wraparound effect on the rear window of that Aurora? For some reason, it distorts the living crap out of everything coming up from behind me at a certain angle. Cars appear normal, then go into the Funhouse, then look normal again. Its weird.

Also, it is sort of narrow for the size of the car due to the headreasts and 3rd brakelamp housing, but I've had no problems. Talk about bad visibility, try a 300.

[trinacriabob]

Yes, I am quite pissed at the crimped greenhouse in a lot of GM cars. Chief among the culprits whithin GM is good old Pontiac. Yes, both the G6 and the Grand Prix take up the belt line way high compared to their predecessors. This does not make for the optimal driving experience, though I have yet to rent/drive a G6.

Also, have you seen the latest C/R in which the Charger is reviewed? They point this out for the Charger rear seating area as well. In fact, it shows an adult whose head is barely visible.

Auto designers - come back to angular slab sides and fuller greenhouses.

[Drew Dowdell]

My CTS has poor rearword visibility. The good thing about the car though is that because it's so square, it's easy to judge where it ends.

[pow]

Auto designers - come back to angular slab sides and fuller greenhouses.

I completely agree.

After dealer hopping and trying out a few cars yesterday, I was dismayed by this depressed, caved-in, sitting-in-a-bathtub feel of many new cars. Yes, it looks great on a few, namely the TT and CLS, but an airy feel really makes a car seem lighter, livlier, and happier. It gives a perception of agility, particularly noticeable when you compare the layouts of the Solstice and MX-5. In the Solstice, the senses aren't as keen because you sit hunkered down, which is great on the track (like in the cockpit of a fighter plane or something), but in casual motoring, you become oblivious to your surroundings.

This is spreading to mainstream family sedans as well. The interior of the new Passat seems less cheerful than the old one. The Impala seems to have so much more character than the G6. I don't know... it's weird.

[Robert Hall]

I test drove a Magnum a while back..truly awful trying to see out the back (tiny rear window, sloping roof). I remember the second-gen Chrysler LH models (Intrepid, Concorde, LHS) being hard to see out also, because they had a high tail and sloping rear window (I had a few of these as rentals a few years ago). I've driven TTs also and they are a pain to see out of, esp. the convertible w/ the top up..

After sitting in one at a car show, I think the Merc CLS--as beautiful as it is--would be hard to live with..tiny side windows, sloping back window and sloping decklid makes it very hard to see out of.

[MyerShift]

Gee, and I thought the raised rump on my Breeze gave me problems. Hehe. I guess it's something I could deal with in the name of automotive style if I wanted to look better. Yes better, not good, lol.