After a couple of weeks in assorted high-style cars with fast windshields, gracefully arching roofs, high protective doors and all the usual suspects of what passes for modern design, the 2009 Honda Fit Sport is a great relief. You can actually see the road again!
The tight little cabins of modern cars look really snappy in design renderings, but they leave you feeling like you're driving in some kind armored personnel carrier. In comparison, the Honda Fit puts so much glass in front of you that you feel like you've just walked onto the flight deck of some classic airliner from the golden age of air travel.
And for this you can thank Honda's big book of standards and practices, the manual of officially approved design and construction that determines the final form of every Honda built. In fact, it's this emphasis on visibility that has everything to do with the ease with which every Honda drives.
When Honda makes a car, it carefully plots the driver's field of view through 360 degrees, determining sightlines and minimizing the obstruction by the roof pillars. Even after crash-safety regulations have led to an increase in the width of roof pillars (both to accommodate curtain-type airbags and to improve rollover protection), you'll notice that Honda still does its best to keep the front bulkhead low, the beltline below your shoulder and the windows large and expansive.
The visibility of the Honda Fit can be a little bit of a shock at first. The windshield of the redesigned Fit seems farther away than before, and there are some unflattering design cues from the dustbin-style GM minivans of the 1990s, but the field of view gives you a great view of the metropolitan cityscape, which is just what you want when you're trying to thread your way through Ford F-250 pickups on city streets. When you can see, driving is a thoroughly naturally exercise. You just go where you need to go; it's as if there's no mechanical interface (you know, the car itself) to get in the way.
It gives me the same feeling that you get in old airliners, the ones built in the days when pilots were afraid of running into things. I still remember being led onto the flight deck of an old Boeing 377 Stratocruiser from the days when Pan American Airways flew this derivative of the WWII-era B-29 bomber between San Francisco and Hawaii. It was an airplane from a long time ago, when airliners actually carried a flight engineer to monitor the propellers and piston engines (the 377's four Pratt & Whitneys were notoriously sensitive to combustion temperature and were monitored with a crude cathode-ray device), but the idea of great visibility still seems as modern as tomorrow.
Everything is easier when you can see.
Michael Jordan, Executive Editor @ 8650 miles
canadia says:
12:19 PM, 07/ 6/09
I recently spent the better part of two days driving around in a loaner four-door '09 328i. The car handles famously, etc etc, but i felt as though i was at the helm of a ritzy sardine can.
In comparison, my usual daily driver (an '09 Civic coupe), feels much more open and roomy despite being appreciably smaller than the 3 series. I love its long, sweeping windows, the lack of a B-pillar obstructing my view, and the half-acre of windshield in front of me. Visibility is fantastic, particularly with the seat raised up all the way. (I'm 5'11" and i still have a fair amount of headroom.)
Too bad it doesn't ride like the 3 series.
firstwagon says:
12:20 PM, 07/ 6/09
Great post.
IMHO visibility is the most important safety feature on a car. In 30 years of driving I have never needed airbags or crumple zones. There are times when ABS or stability control can be helpful but I've managed without on most of my cars.
I use visibility ever time I drive though.
fuhteng says:
12:40 PM, 07/ 6/09
Very cool. So... the Camaro and Challenger designers didn't bother to read the Honda playbook did they?
Lemme see, what cars in the IL fleet follow the high-style criteria:
370Z (the poster child for this I think)
GT-R
Challenger (that C-pillar is MASSIVE)
S-5
Too bad those are probably the most striking (if not prettiest) cars in the fleet.
I even think my G8 is a little guilty too, with its huge C-pillar and its too-big A-pillar.
So what cars pull of the good visibility AND high-style criteria?
firstwagon says:
01:22 PM, 07/ 6/09
The Mini has great visibility and high style.
carguy622 says:
01:33 PM, 07/ 6/09
Curtain airbags, more complex crash structures, raised hoods for pedestrian safety, and lets not forget style, are killing visibility in most modern cars.
I can understand the thicker pillars, higher doors, and raised hoods, but the designers have been going overboard especially with the huge C & D pillars. Now cars need all manner of beeping sensors and cameras to see what's around you.
canadia says:
01:39 PM, 07/ 6/09
One car that specifically comes to mind whose manufacturers didn't follow the visibility playbook is the current Mustang. I remember the first time i sat in it, i felt as if i were being swallowed by a giant, black plastic whale. The dashboard is monstrous, and if you can see over it, the hood is equally gigantic. The view through the rear porthole also left a bit to be desired.
That day, i was teaching a female friend (the owner) how to parallel park. It felt like nuclear submarine driving lessons. Luckily she was cute.
Mad_Science says:
01:41 PM, 07/ 6/09
I was a huge fan of the new Camaro...until I sat in one.
Like a stylish blast shelter, that one is. The door came up to my jaw, and the visibility through the windshield was pathetic.
carguy622 says:
01:55 PM, 07/ 6/09
canadia: Funny thing is current Mustang has the largest greenhouse of the 3 current American-branded muscle cars.
hondacura4 says:
01:58 PM, 07/ 6/09
"The door came up to my jaw, and the visibility through the windshield was pathetic."
Mad, I haven't sat in a new Camaro but I plan to test drive one soon. Did you ever get to sit or drive a last generation Camaro? That car had the worst interior by far of anything Ive ever been in. The seats were cheap/flimsy, materials were worse than cheap, the seating position was awful. Too add to that it had a very high dash and low seating position so placing on the road the car was quite a job as it felt so big. I was hoping the new Camaro would have a better driver oriented interior...I guess Ill find it when I sit in one.
As for Honda and visibility, big greenhouses for the most part have always been part of Honda design. Although the ACE system and other safety regulations has made Honda do away with their famous low cowl design. I absolutely loved the view from my 2nd car, a 1991 Civic EX sedan.
Micheal, good call on the flight deck comparison as I know Honda studied jet cockpits with the design of the NSX. That design alone helped amplify that cars driving experience as it made the interior feel more open and gave the driver a much larger viewing area of landscape to blur. One of the best interior designs in a sports car by a large margin.
canadia says:
02:11 PM, 07/ 6/09
@carguy622:
Yikes. Given that, i can understand Mad_Science calling the Camaro a "stylish blast shelter." The comment about high door sills reminds me of the Chrysler 300C. I could never own a car like that.
jaeger1 says:
02:19 PM, 07/ 6/09
Great visibility out of this thing, no doubt. An important but often-overlooked automotive virtue.
bankerdanny says:
02:33 PM, 07/ 6/09
Hondacura, I felt the same way about the prev gen F-body. I drove an '87 Mustang LX 5.0 from 88-90. The comparable F-body always seemed interesting with the bigger, higher output engine. But whenever I sat in one (and I'm 6-4) I felt like I was sitting on the floor pan instead of a seat.
My Mustang had it's visibility issues (mostly the huge blind spot past the B pillar, but it never felt as claustrophobic as the GM's did.
konocar400h says:
03:28 PM, 07/ 6/09
I don't really like that interior. But its not bad. I just hate the new phase that all the designers are going through with the "metallic look" plastic that they all seem to love to use.
I think it looks cheap in every vehicle they use it in. The Camry is the worst offender, but a lot of cars are plagued with this problem. One of my own cars, a Lexus rx400h, has an expanse of that silver plastic, and although the quality is OK, it looks horrible in my opinion. I just hope they begin to move away from this trend. Gimme some high quality boring plastic and i'll be happy, as it is in my 03 530i.
mikeolan says:
07:55 PM, 07/ 6/09
Really? Good Visibility? Have you sat in a current-gen Civic and tried taking it on a twisty road only to have your visibility seriously impaired by those A-pillars? And all cars in this class have pretty good visibility- even the dumpy Suzuki SX4 does O.K.
gongal says:
04:12 AM, 07/ 7/09
@mikeolan - AGREED! I own a 07' Civic Si coupe and those A-pillars are very poorly placed. Almost every time I take a turn, I'm leaning to one side so I can see around the massive obstructions.
altimadude00 says:
08:18 AM, 07/ 7/09
So...we should rename the Fit "The Guppie?"
kingfish4 says:
08:10 PM, 07/ 8/09
This is just a ploy taken from the housing industry, much like a vaulted ceiling, it gives the impression that you have a much larger accommodations than you actually do!
My 67 Corvair had great visibility, and felt fast, but in truth it wasn't that fast, hence the illusion in the Fit, it seems quick, but really isn't.
brianknight says:
04:19 PM, 07/ 9/09
My mother's '07 Chevy Cobalt coupe with those tiny rear windows makes me feel like I'm sitting in a cave, even when my head doesn't touch the ceiling if the seatback angle isn't just right.
My '99 Neon coupe has much better visibility, especially to the back - the Cobalt's back window looks cludy when I use the rearview mirror, but oddly it's much clearer if I actually turn around and look backwards.
With my Neon, I don't have to turn around much since the side mirrors are so large, so the small rear quarter windows on it don't bother me- they're still larger than the Cobalt's, though.