2005 Pacifica visibility

I have read a lot of posts regarding poor visibility in the Pacifica.
After our test drive we do agree...but do you get use to it??

My wife is moving from a 4-door Acura TL. We like to Pacifica for
many reasons, but the poor visibility does have us concerned.

 

All SUV's are bad though I think one Acura has a camera system now. Also
camera systems can be added after market. How about a Dodge Magnum. Still
not great but not as bad as the Pacifica. I assume you are talking about
the rear view.

 

Whether or not you continue to notice how poor it is, the visibility will
not improve.

Try a top-spec Subaru Outback wagon instead.

DS

 

<< All SUV's are bad though I think one Acura has a camera system now. Also
camera systems can be added after market. How about a Dodge Magnum. >>
I didn't know the Magnum was 4-wheel or all-wheel drive.

 

I heard the folks at the dealer talking about the poor view in the Magnum.

Perhaps the will install the reverse sensing system like some SUVs have.

Ken

 

AWD Magnum and 300 are supposed to be coming.

 

I'm trying to decide between an Acura TL and a 300C. What is it that you
don't like about the Acura, is it just the size or are there other
characteristics that you don't like?

 

I own a Pacifica and drive it in a city/suburban envirorment. I am
aware of the rearward visibility handicap but have no problem with it.
I use the mirrors constantly. I MAKE SURE nothing/no person is
behind me, BEFORE I get into the PARKED vehicle (which should be done
with ANY/ALL vehicles). I have had no problems or close calls because
of visibility. Just being aware of what is around you, the same as
with ANY vehicle. Please don't let this PERCEIVED problem keep you
from enjoying the Pacifica. I don't.

 

The Acura TL-3.2 is a great car..The size of the vehicle is my only
issue. It is a 1998 with 50K and we have invested little over normal
maintenance. One other thing to consider...the sticker in '98 was
$33K, Acura offered me $7k as a trade-in..said they might be able to
get up to around 7.5/8..but since the car was 2 body styles old that
was the best. KBB shows a trade-in of $9,300

 

It's not a "perceived" problem, it's an actual problem. You've found
workarounds for the handicap, and they've been effective for you -- so
far. That's nice, but it doesn't mean the problem isn't real.

 

Since I first saw them and realised their actual size, I had been thinking
of the Pacifica more like a van than a regular sedan / station wagon.

Is the rearward visibility worse than a typical van or station wagon? If so,
what is the cause? Is it the relationship between the "eye line" of the
driver and the lower extent of the rear window?

 

My opinion comes from only rather brief experience, but I believe the
answer is "Yes", rearward visibility is worse than a typical van or
station wagon.

Yes; more generically, it's due to the interrelationships between the
body/glass line placement, the vehicle height and placement of the driver
within the vehicle. Station wagons work OK because the body/glass line is
low. Vans work OK because while the body/glass line is high, the driver
is also placed high. The Pacifica has an unfortunate combination of low
driver placement and high body/glass line, which gives poor rearward
visibility.

DS

 

I don't own a Pacifica, but I agree with you, Richard. I do own a '99
Concorde, which also has very limited rearward visibility - it used to
bother me a great deal when I first got it. But by overcompensating
(doublechecking rear and side mirrors, being aware of blind spots and
allowing time for things to move within the field of vision, etc.), it
is second nature to me now. I've even gotten pretty good at backing
into head-in/back-in type parking places and judging how close I am to
low dead-end barriers (still some guess work involved, but I'm now good
for ±1 foot instead of the ±3 feet for the first few months after I
bought it.

The only concern now is when/if other family members have to use/borrow
my car, it is bothersome to them and they are still *way* down on the
learning curve for the visibility peculiarities of the vehicle that are
now second nature to me (like when my wife wiped out the drivers door
and side mirror against a 6" diameter concrete filled pipe post beside
the car in a parking deck because she was so focused and paranoid on not
hitting anything immediately behind her as she backed out of a spot.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

I don't have problems with my 300M but with my 94 LHS, occassionally I had
to get out of the darn thing to check my rear end. Better safe than sorry.
I imagine the Pacifica would be the same way.

 

We bought ours at the end of last August. Yes, you do get used to it. After
18,000+ miles we are extremely happy with it.

RP

 

To some the problem is "perceived". To others it isn't. To you, who doesn't own
one, you say it is actual (though without owning one you cannot say actual, you
can only say perceived). After almost a year and 18,000+ miles there is no
problem to us. But, of course, I have never had a problem with the headlights
on my '96 T&C, but that's another subject..............!!

RP

 

Thanks Dan

 

Thank you for all of the replies...picked our '05 up on Sat., and so
far, my wife is very happy with it.

 

The more she drives it, the more she will like it. Last night when my wife was
driving home from dinner (I rarely get to drive it) she said she really likes
the quiet and smooth ride. My wife rarely makes comments about a vehicle just
out of the blue so that means she is very impressed and happy.

RP