Toyota Camry - view from the cabin

Side curtain airbags (the type blocking the view in the above picture) aren't designed to protect bad drivers from themselves. They're there to protect you from the idiot in the gigantic SUV/pickup truck running a red light and smashing their grille into your left ear.
 
I agree this is a very annoying feature... my car has the same problem.

I had my BMW serviced yesterday and the dealer gave me a loaner Camry. A brand new one with 2000 miles. It was a loaded model (XLE?) with 4 cylinder.
 
I found visibility to be quite good. I did lift the seat all the way up -- I do that in all my cars. The front view was actually suprisingly good -- almost as good as my BMW and much better than my Impreza. Not nearly as good as my SAAB, but nothing is.
 
Other than visibility, I found the 2007 Camry to be aweful. By far the worst driving feel of any car I have ever driven. And I have driven a lot of cars. I used to be a big Camry fan, ever since driving a rented 1993 model on a trip to Montreal. Not anymore. The new one is beyond bad.

"They're there to protect you from the idiot in the gigantic SUV/pickup truck running a red light and smashing their grille into your left ear. "
 
Sure. Only idiots in big vehicles can t-bone you, right? If you are so petrified of large vehicles then stay off the road.

"Sure. Only idiots in big vehicles can t-bone you, right?"No, but they pose the biggest threat to cars in those types of accidents. It was only when the IIHS introduced their new side impact crash test using a barrier designed to simulate an SUV or pickup that the need for side curtain airbags was really brought to widespread attention.My original point was that head curtain airbags are there especially to protect you from SUVs and pickups, not that SUVs and pickups are more likely to cause such an impact in the first place (that's a topic for another discussion, Mr. Crusher).

You make a good point tho the side impact test creates a false sense of security. Afterall, the tests use about a 3000 pound barrier going about 31 mph. Many crashes involve vehicles much heavier going much faster. Basically, if large suvs are such a danger to others, then it must be safer to be IN the suv. That is why it is so difficult to get people into tiny cars.

"Basically, if large suvs are such a danger to others, then it must be safer to be IN the suv."This implication is not necessarily true either. Just because something is dangerous to other people, doesn't make its owner safer. For example, carrying around a hand grenade in your pocket doesn't make anyone safer.
In fact, SUVs used to be a lose-lose proposition because of their propensity to rollover. As a consequence they were a bigger threat to both others and their owners (when compared to, say, large sedans or wagons). With the growing availability of stability control and the decreasing popularity of body-on-frame SUV designs, the risk of death due to rollovers is declining, though I'd argue that a large sedan or wagon is still safer.But I get the point you're trying to make: I've seen studies that argue that moving people from large trucks into small cars is bad because when small cars are hit by large trucks their survival rate is lower. They tend to ignore the fact that moving people from large trucks into small cars decreases the number of large trucks on the road, and would increase the survival rate of everyone in the small cars.