High Belt lines vs low belt lines

[silvrsvt]

I was over at Lowes yesterday, and had a 2010 Taurus Limited parked next to my Mustang...and I was down right shocked at how tall of car it was vs the mustang. For example, the door handles where nearly level with the tops of my rear view mirrors on my Mustang. I felt like I had to look up at the Taurus while I was sitting in my Mustang. I still like the styling (its a huge improvement over the 500 and the 500...errr Taurus update pre 2010) but what just kinda shocked at how big it was vs my Mustang

 

Anyways, I know the reason why the Taurus has such a high belt line is because of its CUV roots from the Volvo platform, but at the same time, why do cars like the Chrysler LX and Camaro have such high belt lines? Is it because of crash requirements or is just a styling trend?

[rmc523]

I was over at Lowes yesterday, and had a 2010 Taurus Limited parked next to my Mustang...and I was down right shocked at how tall of car it was vs the mustang. For example, the door handles where nearly level with the tops of my rear view mirrors on my Mustang. I felt like I had to look up at the Taurus while I was sitting in my Mustang. I still like the styling (its a huge improvement over the 500 and the 500...errr Taurus update pre 2010) but what just kinda shocked at how big it was vs my Mustang

 

Anyways, I know the reason why the Taurus has such a high belt line is because of its CUV roots from the Volvo platform, but at the same time, why do cars like the Chrysler LX and Camaro have such high belt lines? Is it because of crash requirements or is just a styling trend?

 

I'm pretty sure just a styling trend. Five Hundred was on the same platform, and we all know how that looked. Camaro is the extreme when it comes to high beltlines though.

[RichardJensen]

Styling trend, but the real kicker is the H-point to belt line differential. The Five Hundred had a high belt line and a high H-point, so it didn't feel as claustrophobic as the Taurus (comparatively speaking). (BTW: H-point is, basically, where your butt goes).

 

Me? I'm a fan of moderately low belt lines. It flatters women with an hourglass figure--without being skanky.

Edited April 26, 2010 by RichardJensen

[2005Explorer]

I think one of the best looking belt lines is on the Fusion-Milan-MkZ. It sort of splits the difference between high and low and looks modern without making the car feel claustrophobic.

[ANTAUS]

It's not necessarily the fault of the donor platform, it's mainly about how the designers wish to design the vehicle. Usually a higher beltline will instill a feeling of "security" from impacts, if taken overboard, it can make someone feel claustrophobic, something I personally do not care for. I loathe having that high belt, sitting in a bathtub feeling... My LS has pretty good sight lines all around and do like the low cowl afforded by the front suspension...then sliding behind the MKS, I feel as if I'm peering out of a tank. Security is NOT what I feel when sitting behind that. I do remember the 500 having good decent lower belt line, whereas the new Taurus has a much higher one. The Explorer has traditionally had a good lower belt line all around as well, I believe they raised in the last redesign, about an inch. The Escape is another which ford decided to raise an inch as well.

 

Another trick is having very thick door trim on the belt-line area. Volvo has traditionally done this to impart of feeling of security on their doors. I know Ford has been using that trick recently.

[silvrsvt]

Styling trend, but the real kicker is the H-point to belt line differential. The Five Hundred had a high belt line and a high H-point, so it didn't feel as claustrophobic as the Taurus (comparatively speaking). (BTW: H-point is, basically, where your butt goes).

 

 

 

I hate the seating position on my parents 2008 Sable...I feel like up in the air too high. I sat in a 2010 Taurus a couple months ago, and that feeling is gone...but I know the seating position (along with the roof) was dropped an inch or two.

 

 

 

 

[SVT_MAN]

I hate the seating position on my parents 2008 Sable...I feel like up in the air too high. I sat in a 2010 Taurus a couple months ago, and that feeling is gone...but I know the seating position (along with the roof) was dropped an inch or two.

 

You were experiencing "command seating." Ford thought it would "elevate" the sedan. That marketing campaign was so weak. I don't think most of us remember how poor Ford's marketing was just a few short years ago.

[aneekr]

It's just another unfortunate styling trend. From an aesthetic standpoint, high beltlines are no more desirable in automobile design as they are in ladies' jeans design. From a functionality standpoint, even less desirable in the former.

This

beats this

regardless of what the trend du jour is.

 

Likewise for automobiles...

[mustang84isu]

Part of what I really like about my LS is its "lower, wider, longer" stance. It's more athletic. I don't really mind the beltlines on the Taurus and Five Hundred, but I can barely tolerate it on the MKS and can't stand it on the LaCrosse. What makes the LaCrosse even worse is that the hood is also about a mile high. It looks like an overgrown compact from certain angles.

Edited April 27, 2010 by mustang84isu

[JEMBSB]

There is definitely a positive outcome from a high belt line when it concerns side impact protection. At least that's what the safety guys I deal with tell me.

[jpd80]

There is definitely a positive outcome from a high belt line when it concerns side impact protection. At least that's what the safety guys I deal with tell me.

 

Could that the high belt line style eventually become standard across all of Ford's larger sedans?

[joihan777]

My guess is that the high beltline means smaller, lighter windows thus improving handling.

[silvrsvt]

Could that the high belt line style eventually become standard across all of Ford's larger sedans?

 

 

The only problem with that is it seems like the next gen Taurus will be a streched/widened CD4 platform, much like the Maxima/Altima is. The belt line is fine on the current Fusion IMO

 

 

[ANTAUS]

Part of what I really like about my LS is its "lower, wider, longer" stance. It's more athletic. I don't really mind the beltlines on the Taurus and Five Hundred, but I can barely tolerate it on the MKS and can't stand it on the LaCrosse. What makes the LaCrosse even worse is that the hood is also about a mile high. It looks like an overgrown compact from certain angles.

 

+1, Glad I wasnt the only one...

[FordBuyer]

Part of what I really like about my LS is its "lower, wider, longer" stance. It's more athletic. I don't really mind the beltlines on the Taurus and Five Hundred, but I can barely tolerate it on the MKS and can't stand it on the LaCrosse. What makes the LaCrosse even worse is that the hood is also about a mile high. It looks like an overgrown compact from certain angles.

 

Yep, I don't like the high beltline and slitty windows of the latest GM and Chrysler designs. No matter how great the vehicle otherwise, I would never buy a vehicle designed like that no matter how much safer it is in T-bone crashes. I like that Ford has not followed suit for the most part. However, I don't like Ford's new Taurus that much because it is very claustrophobic for me. If all of the new Ford's end up being that claustrophobic, I will just keep my 2002 Taurus forever. No big deal. The Ford's I do like are the Escape, Focus, and Fusion because they are so airy feeling and give you great visibility which I like. The new Fiesta is a little more claustrophobic, but not excessively so.

[lfeg]

A high beltline may have some advantages in side impacts with taller vehicles, but to me, stylingwise, they do not look good. And I cannot stand sitting in or driving a car with a high beltline. The Chrysler 300 is a good example. Even though by head brushes the headliner, I feel as if I am looking out gunslits when I look out the side windows. The new Taurus almost gives me the same feeling. And to me, the new Camaro is about the worst in that regard, while the Mustang is just right on the beltline.

[ANTAUS]

As I mentioned before, there is no connection in relation to safety with a higher belt line, other than a PERCEIVED notion that its safer because your cocooned. On any t-bone crash, whether you have 2 more inches of panel, or 2 more inches or window pane, its the airbag that will protect you...And when its your time, no airbag will be able to help you.

[Mr. Gumby]

I really like the Command Seating and visibility in our 500. But... I have noticed that with the window rolled all the way down, I have to raise my elbow above 90 degrees to rest my arm on the window sill which is uncomfortable. My Ranger's belt line is perfect for resting the arm on the door with the window all the way down.

 

Before the wife and I got the 500 we looked at a bunch of cars from several different manufacturers. One that we test drove was a Dodge Magnum. I really like the exterior styling but its high belt line definitely gave you the "looking through gun slit" feeling. The visibility was one of the reasons we didn't get that car (the other reason being the piss poor interior quality).

 

We were recently looking at used trucks at our local (craptastic) Ford dealer and I showed my wife the 2010 Taurus. She felt claustrophobic just looking at it. I don't care, I still think it's one of the best looking sedans on the market!

[2004BlackBird]

I was over at Lowes yesterday, and had a 2010 Taurus Limited parked next to my Mustang...and I was down right shocked at how tall of car it was vs the mustang. For example, the door handles where nearly level with the tops of my rear view mirrors on my Mustang. I felt like I had to look up at the Taurus while I was sitting in my Mustang. I still like the styling (its a huge improvement over the 500 and the 500...errr Taurus update pre 2010) but what just kinda shocked at how big it was vs my Mustang

 

Anyways, I know the reason why the Taurus has such a high belt line is because of its CUV roots from the Volvo platform, but at the same time, why do cars like the Chrysler LX and Camaro have such high belt lines? Is it because of crash requirements or is just a styling trend?

 

We took delivery of our 2010 Candy Red SHO on March 1st. We REALLY do like this car and it invariably attracts compliments and plenty of positive comments wherever we go. It is much more comfortable to drive than the previous Crown Vics (more front legroom) and you arrive after a drive of several hours without feeling cramped in any way. The power is quiet, effortless and extremely 'competent'. It is as much fun to drive as our 2004 Thunderbird. The 'gizmos' are great as well.

 

That being said, the high beltline adds to a sizable blind spot issue. The rear camera and (particularly) blind spot sensing system are definitely features to be considered with a purchase of this car.

[Project-Fairmont]

I like low-belt lines...although it is definately passe' now days.

[RichardJensen]

Classic BMW 3s & 2002s were pretty low beltline vehicles--as were Volvo 244s......

[TomServo92]

I just spent three days in a rental Charger and I didn't like the high beltline. I felt like I was in a tank. Otherwise, I kind of liked the car.

[grbeck]

Part of what I really like about my LS is its "lower, wider, longer" stance. It's more athletic. I don't really mind the beltlines on the Taurus and Five Hundred, but I can barely tolerate it on the MKS and can't stand it on the LaCrosse. What makes the LaCrosse even worse is that the hood is also about a mile high. It looks like an overgrown compact from certain angles.

 

The problem with the LaCrosse is that GM tried to mate Buick styling cues - big chrome grille, the old sweepspear pressed directly into the sheetmetal - with a fairly short and narrow platform. Add the necessary height for Buick owners, and the result is a car that looks awkward and contrived. And why put the porthole on the INSIDE crease of the hood, where only the driver and front-seat passenger can see them?!

 

The MKS isn't as bad in that regard.

 

What is really interesting is how different the MKS and Taurus are when sitting in them. To Taurus seemed cramped, and visibility was not the greatest. I didn't get those feelings inside the MKS. So Ford did a decent job of differentiating these cars from the driver's seat.

[grbeck]

Classic BMW 3s & 2002s were pretty low beltline vehicles--as were Volvo 244s......

 

I believe that Chrysler had a stepdown Hudson in the styling studio when it penned greenhouse of the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger.