As auto hacks we spill a lot of ink crying and moaning about a car's interior. And unlike handling, there's not much to debate. Every other journalist I've ever spoken with agrees that Chrysler's interiors are in fact below the bargain basement. While you will find differences of opinions about the layout of a given cabin (I've been catching a lot of heat from my A5 review), crap remains crap while good stays good. Speaking of other journalists, I was sitting around drinking free booze with the usual suspects at a Ford event (soon, soon) and the age-old 911 vs. Corvette debate reared its head. As a natural contrarian I took up the Chevy cause. I explained how getting a hot lap on a runway in a Z06 piloted by King of the 'Ring John Heinricy was the most violent, exhilarating experience of my life. Their rebuttal? The interior sucks. All I could think to yell was, "Who cares?" But the truth is, I do care. A little. I think. Well, maybe just sometimes. Or not. Er, you?
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Alot. You sit in it all the time. The more time spent the more flaws you find which leads to a dislike for the vehicle. “I paid $30K for this piece of crap!!!”
I’m disappointed almost every time I get into a vehicle of any kind. Not because they are bad, but because they are the same. Black – beige – gray. While I don’t miss sticking to blue vinyl seats, I do miss some of the variation. Aside from the occasional special edition this or that, where’s color? Where’s the variation? I was intrigued by the Ford Flex show car just because the interior had a hint of texture.
Where do you spend the majority of the time when you are driving the car?? So yes, the interior matters a lot. Thats not to say you can have the best interior with terrible suspension, brakes, engine, et al. and call it a good car. But I want to enjoy what I am sitting in.
Oh they matter a lot! I wanted to buy a Hyundai Coupe (Tiburon, to you Yanks), but the thing which put me off was the interior. It was so plasticky and cheap feeling, I walked out of the dealership.
If I had to look at that interior everyday, I would cry.
It’s a bit like Dane Cook. He’s a good looking chap, but if I had to put up with his jokes EVERY SODDING DAY………!
Here's the thing, like anything else it's all relative. My daily driver is a 99 Ford Escort, so virtually anything is a step up. That said, the interior of my car is laid out just fine, all the controls are easy to reach, it's warm in the winter and cool in the summer (thank you heat and air conditioning), the steering wheel doesn't destroy my hands, and the shift knob is big enough to feel sporty. What does my dash look like? Gray plastic. But the thing is, the only time I even notice the dash and surrounding materials is when I'm cleaning it, the rest of the time I'm looking out the windshield while driving and I get all my surface impressions through my hands, bum, and feet. So I have to think that even the much maligned Sebring/Avenger and Cobolt/G5 interiors don't matter all that much as long as the seat doesn't inflame your roids, the steering wheel doesn't slip out of your hands, and the shift lever doesn't snap off somewhere between 3rd and 5th (like it did on my 89 VW Golf). The bottom line is, unless you're sitting in the car looking at the dashboard or glove box, it doesn't really matter. Are there some interiors that make me wince, sure, and would it steer me towards another car that had a better interior, sure, but that's more an intimately personal thing than any car review can capture.
I think jrderengo has a good point. Seats matter. The feel of the steering wheel matters. The positioning of the pedals matters.
But beyond that, do I care whether the plastic on the dash that I never touch is hard feel vs. soft? Not so much.
It seems silly to me how auto journalists make such a big deal over whether or not it takes 5 minutes or 30 minutes to learn how to use a NavSys or other system. Or how the shift paddles go forward to downshift when logically they should pull back. Whatever. If you own the car, you’ll have plenty of time to get used to it.
Interiors are make-or-break for me, most especially on long-term cars bought new.
I am contemplating what to do to replace my wife’s leased 2007 Sonata (with the provision that we want economical as possible AND the ability to tow 1500 pounds).
Believe it or not, the Toyota Corolla falls into this category (while the Camry does not – only rated for 1000 pounds towing). I was excited about looking a new 2009 Corolla over when I was at the dealer getting my 2008 Prius oil changed for the first time.
Ugh. Pass. The new Corolla must have used Plastich for a supplier, and farmed out the design of the plastics to Chrysler…. awful.
Maybe a Hyundai Elantra… or another Sonata next year when the lease runs out on the 2007…
Interior design is the single biggest factor in my opinion, and indeed in my reviews you may have noticed that. It’s not just the seats, it’s every single surface you have to look at or touch, which special focus on the steering wheel.
Why on God’s green earth do we have Mercedes products with steering wheels that feel so cheap?
Why does Chrysler have such a love for nasty plastic?
Why does it seem that Toyota is going backwards on attention to interiors?
And will someone PLEASE tell Ford to deal with their panel gaps.
Now, when it comes to arrangement, that’s less of a concern for me than quality of components. Sure, the layout of Audi’s latest creations boggles the mind and it’s functionally inept, but from a fit and finish quality stand point Audi still gets top marks, so it’s OK in my book. On the flip side, the Mercedes systems which make more sense but whose quality “feels” iffy I’m not as keen on. Volvo’s latest wares show a good attention to detail and functionality so in terms of my interior ranking I’d say Lexus, Audi, Volvo, Merc/BMW in that order.
While I’m a huge fan of what Audi does, I still place all of my beans in quirky interiors. See: Citroën SM, Volvo 240, mid-nineties Preludes, Ur-quattros, etc.
As long as there’s a tach, steering wheel, manual shifter, and seat, I’m a happy camper. I think interiors are vastly overrated. Especially in performance cars.
I hate the C5 and earlier Corvettes because their interior is just so cheap feeling. However, the new C6 Corvettes have an interior that really surprised me. I’d honestly put it on par with the Cayman S interior in terms of layout and feel.
The interior is the same reason I picked a WRX over an Evo XIII. The Evo had the interior of a $12k car while the WRX at least looked and felt like it belonged in a car that was in the low $20k price range.
So, in this round-about way, I’m saying interior matters. I don’t have to be surrounded by dead cow, real wood and alcantera (although it is nice), but the interior should be well put together, not have Fisher-Price knobs (e.g. Toyota Land Cruiser) and not rattle after a few months of driving.
Seats are important. Solid, easy-to-reach controls are important.
One of the many reasons I still drive an ’84 Volvo 240 Diesel. Best seats EVER.
The interior matters to me in terms of the seats and the steering wheel.
Too many cars these days just feel awkward to sit in, and don’t adjust well. Thigh support seems to be largely absent in the industry (and I’m not tall: 5’8″), and seats in general don’t tilt all that well. Nice side bolstering is also hard to come by. (and I’m not thin: 180lbs. I blame American obesity)
As for the steering wheel, I just need something that looks nice and feels nice. Three spokes, small center, perforated/dimpled leather cover, and some controls for the stereo.
Other than that, make it smell halfway decent and don’t use confusing interfaces. Simplicity is beautiful.
I’m with quaismondo….as long the controls are easy to reach, I can read the instruments, the seats are comfotable, the sound system sounds decent and the A/C comes on when I press the button I could really give a rat’s ass about what it’s made of, how it reminds anyone of some artsy-fartsy design school from the ’50’s, etc. I think way too much emphasis is put on materials, aesthetics, etc.
OMG, how can anyone not see that the interior is the whole nut. spaciousness, ergonomics, seat comfort, audio system and its controls, HVAC controls, all the other “features” of a good interior like voice controlled nav, IPOD, the smell of the leather, sunroof, and how important is the greenhouse? hell, honda revolutionized design with their cars that provided excellent visibility and ergonomics. jeez, all audi has going for it is a nice interior and it apparently is enough to sell some cars despite the weight penalty and sucky handling and steering of most audis. OMG.
I think jrderego has made a good point. I drive a 2000 ZX2 as my commuter car 70+ miles a day round trip. The dash is all black soft plastic (looks like it’s melting). But the controls are all in the right place, the seat is very comfortable, the AC blows really cold, the wheel feels good, the stereo pumps out 250 watts with a subwoofer in the trunk (remember this is a small car), and I smile at the 35 MPG highway (it’s a 5 spd stick, woohoo!). I spend most of time looking out all the windows (driving on the same road with 18 wheelers and big pick ups and SUV’s will keep your attention on everything BUT the inside of your car).
I don’t understand peoples fascination with “soft touch” materials for something they will never touch (have you hugged or patted your dash lately?).
By the way I don’t like Fords. Never have. Something about their styling just turns me off. But I like this car. Well, I don’t like the headlights and grill (typical Ford blech!) but the profile and tailights are sweet.
Hmm, considering my console/armrest is still sitting in the rear seat of my car and there are flakes of carpeting and foam all over the place due to my need to replace the parking brake cable after hastily sawing through the old one in order to get the rear trailing arm off 2 weeks ago, I’d say they must not matter that much to me.
I have never understood the almost fetish-like fascination some folks have for interiors. jderego does have it right, the vast majority of the time is spent looking through the windshield, or at least I hope it is.
The only real interior-related deal breaker for me could be seats, due to the fact that my lower back has been injured in traffic accidents. But usually, the ‘sport’ variations of most cars these days have pretty decent seats.
It’s been a while since I have done time in a car that didn’t have good seats. My in-laws’ mid-90’s era Camrys were the worst. They were BMW hard with Hyundai support (which is to say, none). It was like sitting on a hard bubble.
The best were the Recaros in my 1981 Mercury Capri RS Turbo. Unfortunately, that turned out to be the ONLY redeeming value of that car…
I think interiors matter even more than exteriors. Inside the car is what I have to look at and touch every minute I’m driving. And, the more I spend for a car, the higher my expectations. I recently shopped for a new midsize sedan. I hit some dealers and I brought the kids along because the wife was working. Overlooked features and cost-cutting were even noticed by my kids (ages 8 and 11). The first thing they noticed about the new Malibu was that the back seat – where they sit – had no center armrest. I may not have noticed it if they weren’t with me. After that, I noticed every other non-GM midsize car I looked at had one. I immediately noticed that the door panels and door armrests aren’t padded and upholstered like on the Accord, Altima, 09 Sonata, Fusion or Camry. One look at the Camry’s interior and I knew I didn’t want it, padding and armrests be damned. I didn’t even drive it. The Sonata had a very nice interior, but felt like a Buick when I drove it. I felt the styling of the Fusion interior (although well made) already looked dated somehow, and I didn’t like the engine (the 3.0 V6 just discussed on TTAC recently). The MKZ, Impala, G6 , Sebring and LaCrosse are undesirable on so many levels including the interiors that it took no time at all to dismiss them. I have my list down to the Accord and Altima, and interior look and feel for the driver and passengers played a BIG part in my decision.
Whenever I read a car review that slams a decent, functional interior I take that review with about a tablespoon of salt and assume it was written by a high school freshman without a driver’s license. If seat comfort isn’t mentioned it’s pretty much over. My pet peeve is grading the “quality of plastic.” I have been through college engineering courses on polymer technology, so I understand there’s a broad spectrum. But it’s still plastic, which is cheap garbage. I don’t compare my garbage to the neighbor’s.
I care about the interior, but only superficially. I want the controls to be easy to use, I don’t want the pieces I use to break, I don’t want to be blinded by chrome trim, and I don’t want to receive 3rd degree burns after it’s been sitting in the sun.
I’m not interested in paying thousands of dollars more for tight panel gaps, soft dashboards, and materials longevity in a car I’ll own for five years or less.
OMG, how can anyone not see that the interior is the whole nut.
I’m more concerned with how a car will accelerate, brake, and turn than I am with the feel and texture of rich Corinthian leather. Seats, shift knobs, steering wheels, all of that can be taken care of by any automotive customizer.
interiors matter. how much? it depends. I love to think about driving performance cars at 9/10ths and if I did, interiors would not matter all that much (with all the looking through the windshield and all). But the fact is that I have a real job and a real family that requires me to spend time driving in real world conditions. Translation: my cars slolam and 0-60 time is completely irrelevant compared to the feel of the steering wheel / shifter, the support of the seats, and the quality of the controls.
Now that does not mean I want to drive around in an A6. I like cars that corner quickly since that’s the most fun you can normally have on public roads. everyone has their own priorities, but I think it’s odd for someone to tolerate their crappy EVO VIII interior 355 days a year, so that they can enjoy the engine on the track once every couple of months. Even worse is the guy who never takes it to the track and just likes knowing that if he did, it would kick ass. sheesh.
Back in the early 90’s I used to carpool with a guy that had a Geo Metro. He installed some nice aftermarket seats and had a good stereo put in. His argument was “what more do I need to sit in traffic, this is just as nice as the guy next to me in the 911.”
I could put up with a cheap-looking interior as long as it’s ergonomically sound, but I’m also willing to pay the few hundred bucks it costs for them to put a nice interior that I’ll enjoy looking at and touching for the next 20 years. Of course, the seats, steering wheel, shifter, and armrests have to be decent quality since I’m in contact with them all the time.
Another disadvantage of low-grade interiors: harder plastic makes the stereo sound worse.
For me, the exterior is what gets me into the car and the interior is what makes me want to stay. A good car has to have both.
While I’m not into reviews that get into the grade of plastic used, certain interiors scream cheap and are insulting to the buyer. The BMW X3 dash is a great example of that. The dark grey ’08 Camry dash/door is another (somehow the camel colored interior comes accross much nicer). The Malibu Maxx interior was so bad I thought that only the legally blind would buy one.
A nice interior can make a lousy looking, not so fun driving, car seem better. The same way that the Audi A5 exterior makes up for a lot of the flaws everywhere else…
Interiors are a pretty big deal to me, honestly. I’m also quite concerned with the engineering of the mechanicals and the ride/handling compromise, of course, but I tend to narrow down the “short list” to cars which are all competent in that regard.
Once I have my group of generally desirable cars selected, the next item on the list is the interior design and quality, both in materials and ergonomics.
This time around my choices were down to the Subaru Impreza, Mazda3, Smart Fortwo (yeah, yeah), and Civic Si. So while the Cobalt is in that same sort of grouping, I dismissed it long before I cared about how its interior looked because of its overall level of GMness. Luckily, had the Cobalt made it to the final round I would have voted it off the island for its IKEA furnishings.
In the very end my selection narrowed to the Impreza WRX and the 3 GT. The Impreza was missing steering-wheel audio controls, had cheap-looking door panels and seats, and the instrument cluster was just completely lacking character. Oh, and the stereo sucked.
So the 3’s relatively upmarket interior swayed me. Both cars drove nicely, but I sometimes have to sit in my car for hours at a time and I feel cheated when I’m in a car with chintzy accommodations. My 3 feels nice inside for a shitbox, honestly. The seats have a chunky, solid look to them, and the black (dog?) leather kicks things up a notch. All the switches and controls feel slick and refined. There are no rattles (yet), the doors have a nice sound when opening and closing, and the instruments have a nice illumination scheme to them. The stereo sounds good and there are lots of surprising little features (rain sensing wipers!).
So the short answer is that yes, provided I’m shopping a group of cars already on a somewhat level playing field for their mechanicals, reputation, and fuel economy, the interior is the single-most-likely element to persuade me to sign my name on the contract.
I agree that interiors are overrated. But, that might be because I have a relatively short commute with little stop and go traffic. The quality of interior may matter more to people living in gridlock, or with long boring commutes.
In terms of aesthetics, nothing is of a lower priority to me. I don’t know anyone who sits around looking at dials for hours. I get into a car to drive. I’m not staring at the nasty plastic on a Lancer Evo’s dash, I’m looking at what’s beyond the apex to know if I can floor it.
However, I will say good back and thigh support, along with a telescoping wheel, are quite important. But only to improve the driving experience – and nothing else.
That’s why I don’t mind nasty plastic interiors. As long as they’re functional, I’m fine with it. Even Chrysler’s!
Where do you spend the majority of the time when you are driving the car??
I hope you are spending more than just a bare majority of your driving time inside the car ;-)
You don’t want to be like this guy, do you?
The interior in some car classes is really the only point of differentiation between brands. Camry, Accord, Malibu, Altima and the Mazda 6 all bring reliable, relatively conservative 5-people & a trunk transportation to the table with not a whole hell of a lot of difference in the ride (some would argue otherwise, but not an average consumer). But sitting in a Camry and spotting all the quality cuts is a lot different than sitting in the new Malibu, which was artfully pulled off. I imagine it will be the interior and cabin noise levels that determine my next purchase, because after MPG there’s not a lot that actually matters to me.
I haven’t been in a new Corvette, but I have been in the previous generation. When a 45 thousand dollar car makes you feel like you’re in a Cavalier, there is a problem.
I just hate cheap feeling, cheap looking parts. When I’m spending thousands of dollars on something, the controls should not feel like they were ripped off of a child’s Power Wheels vehicle.
I think there’s a whole lot of people like me who feel that the experience of driving the car includes the feel, fit, and look of the interior. I’m willing to pay extra for a comfortable and attractive interior but auto makers are lining up none deep to satisfy this desire.
Good fuel economy: small, cheap, nasty car.
Nice car: over priced, big, poor economy.
If they ever figure out what people really want and start making a high-grade small car with good mileage they’ll have a winner.
But they’ll continue with their focus groups driving their designs: “do you prefer nasty 1 or nasty 2?” That’s fine for selecting between current options, but no good at all for finding out what people really want.
Even when they try, they get it so very wrong. Consider the Cadillac Cimarron; this was a really awful car.
whuffo – i totally agree . . .
my current car buying dilemma is just that – there are very few cars that have good fuel economy, driving dynamics, and accomodations. The GTI, Cooper S, and Mazdaspeed3 are on my shortlist. The question becomes: interior, fuel economy, or speed. decisions, decisions.
There seem to be a lot of variation in what people consider to be the important part of the interior. Some people fixate on the dashboard, some look at the whole interior from door panels to seat.
I find that my judgment in interiors tends to be very subjective and depends on personal expectations based on the car’s intent and price point. I give boy racer Japanese cars more leeway compared to entry level luxury sports sedans at the same price point. Then again, my opinion of interiors can be easily swayed by cold air coming out of the HVAC system.
Some of the German cars look great for 3 months, but push a few buttons and twist a few knobs, you wonder if those parts are worthy of the asking price of the car. Apparent durability scores big points with me, but by the time the dirt-capturing rubberized texture is rubbed away, the original owner won’t have the car anymore.
I think one of the most important and overlooked interior aspects is what the storage is like. How many cubbies are there, are the cup holders good, how big is the glove box. Also, the care of assembly is important too. I don’t want to drive a rattle trap with pieces falling off. For your weekend toys and performance cars these issues matter less, but for the daily driver they are important.
It matters alot. When I’m driving the Sienna, I always fumble around when I want to change the radio station because the placement of the buttons are so low. It’s irritating as hell. Ergonomics is super important. So is seat comfort. As for plastic quality? If you’re paying attention to the plastics on the dashboard when you’re driving your car, you’re definitely not looking at where you’re going.
I’d like to have good seats and layout but the materials don’t mean much to me. I hate that so many cars have the AC controls way down in front of the shifter.
Seating comfort for long drives, and proper ergonomics for the steering and pedals are very important to me. Interiors without mysterious squeaks and rattles are also very important. I absolutely hate random “wrong” noises.
Molding flashing and sharp edges should not be on any touchable surface.
Durability matters as well. Some interiors look great six or seven years on with reasonable care and some look ready for a redo by that point.
Styling isn’t a big deal as long as it is clean and ergonomic. Thus, for example, modern Mazdas are mostly too George Jettson for my taste.
So yeah, interiors matter a lot.
I suppose that interiors didn’t matter much before, when a great one was rare and required a lot of money. To have one was a luxury, and most people couldn’t afford it.
But now that good interiors are available in various cars across the price ranges, there’s no need to compromise. You can have your cake (get a good interior, instead of settling) and eat it, too (get the performance, options, etc. that you want.) Pass the cake and give me a fork.
Wow. I’m shocked at the people who don’t think the interior is at least one of the top three most important aspects of a car.
Let me ask you this.. remember the crappiest restroom you ever had to endure? If you don’t care about interiors, then heck.. as long as there is a seat, right?
You’re immediate surroundings are so important to how good you feel. Even the subtleties, like color shade and surface hardness, can accumulate in your subconscious.
The crappier the interior, the more likely you are to express road rage.
Absolutely important. I’d rather have smaller engine than cheaper interior. For ex, I like hybrid concept, but I won’t buy Prius with its crapo seats and Echo quality interior. I want Lexus edition.
To me the whole package is what matters, exterior and interior. A great looking exterior with a crappy interior just doesn’t cut it. I’m lucky enough to have a car that has both and performance to boot. I have a 2005 Jaguar XK 8.
When I open the door and get a whif of the Connley leather and see the real wood dash shining back at me, climbing in is like taking a seat in heaven. The leather wrapping on the wood steering wheel reminds me of my grandma’s good gloves. The center stack is laid out perfectly, everything seems to be in the right place right down to the cruise control buttons. Reality sets in when I have to drive my Ram pickup, with its cheap seats and plastics. Talk about a contrast in vehicles, going from low slung luxury to top heavy crap.
FWIW, Connolly Leather closed down in 2002 after 125 years.
I can appreciate a really nice interior, but to be honest it’s probably near the bottom of my priorities list. I’m one of those weirdos that never listens to the radio or anything while driving, so as long as I like the seat and the basic ergonomics I’m good.
When it comes down to putting my money where my mouth is, the interior is secondary to driving dynamics for me. Which isn’t to say that a particularly hideous interior (or exterior for that matter) won’t make me walk (or in some cases run) away from a car without even driving it.
Wow. I’m shocked at the people who don’t think the interior is at least one of the top three most important aspects of a car.
Let me ask you this.. remember the crappiest restroom you ever had to endure? If you don’t care about interiors, then heck.. as long as there is a seat, right?
You’re immediate surroundings are so important to how good you feel. Even the subtleties, like color shade and surface hardness, can accumulate in your subconscious.
The crappier the interior, the more likely you are to express road rage.
My road rage comes from inconsiderate drivers, left lane bandits, and those who use the shoulder to pass me on the right. It wouldn’t matter if I was in an Audi or Aveo.
I can’t equate crappy interiors with crappy restrooms. There’s no graffitti on my doors and the Magic Tree air freshener I use guarantees my car never smells like fecal matter.
Besides, standards of comfort are sometimes compromised when you really gotta go.
Interiors are really important to me, but I weigh some issues more than others. I value comfort, space and ergonomics most, then interior fit and finish and material quality, then overall design and color.
A good interior to me says that the automaker took care to spend money on the car and didn’t cut corners, and that the people building the car took care to make sure everything was done properly. A poorly built or finished car makes me wonder if you didn’t take the effort on something I can see, what does that say about the things I can’t see?
For a lap racing sports car, I think interiors aren’t that important. But, for a daily driver, it’s vitally important, just like our homes’ interiors. We are in it every day, and a crappy interior makes the entire car seem crappy, although a good interior doesn’t necessarily make a car good, but it sure helps.
Interiors are absolutely not-important. When I drive, I’m driving. I don’t listen to the radio, and am comfortable in almost anything (I am used to sport bike seating so anything better than that — basically all cars ) is alot more comfortable.
The interior of my STi is great. Not showing wear and nothing broken after 3 years and 25k miles.
The interior of my wife’s neon is great. No fabric tears after 8 years & 160k miles. Seats are still comfortable. Car is cheap & reliable. Only thing broken is the snap on the center armrest (who cares?)
Interior is absolutely last in my priorities.
Give me good reliability, gas mileage, price, and power in that order.
Interiors are VERY important to me — as others have said, that’s where you interact with the car, that’s what you sit in all the time. How could it not be important??
Of course, I consider “the seat” to be part of “the interior,” and it is the absolute most important thing in any car. Have you ever had a car with a seat so uncomfortable that you didn’t want to drive it? That would be the all-time worst-case scenario.
Indeed, most “fuel-efficient” cars have AWFUL seats. Small, short, little seats with no padding, no bolstering, no thigh support. And no sales to someone like me.
Things like steering wheel tilt and telescope are important, along with seat adjustments. I’m like the proverbial over-50-year-old man: I want my eight-way power seat, dammit! So, seat comfort is the absolute most important thing to me, definitely.
Otherwise, I do want quality materials, at least to a certain level. It is a bit nicer to get beyond the econobox/Chrysler cheap plastic junk look. I also want materials that will stand up to decades of use.
I guess “design” is important to me — give me something beyond some kind of black, rectangular “double-DIN” stereo plugged into the middle of the center stack, for instance. I do like to see something “designed” beyond that.
I’m a hair lenient towards utterly-anal fit-and-finish complaints, though. I’ve seen vehicle reviews utterly RIP cars for fit and finish “problems” that can’t possibly be things more out of line than a millimeter or two — oh, it’s not “perfect,” but FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!! These are mass-produced vehicles, unless you’re in a different automotive universe than I am, and tolerances can’t be utterly perfect.
Finally, ergonomics ARE important. For instance, I spend several months a year wearing gloves, and there’s a big difference between rows of dozens of buttons, as compared to some bigger, chunkier controls that I can actually use just fine with my gloves on.
So, you bet — these things are important to me. I’ll spend more money — both for the car and perhaps for gas to cover perhaps a little less MPG — to get a pleasant, functional, comfortable interior.
Interiors are very important.
The quality of materials is important because I hang on to cars for a long time. My new car, a MINI, has a crappy plastic seam on the back of the door pull. I feel it every time I pull the door shut, and feel gyped.
Color is huge: I am sick of monochrome grey or biege interiors that have been standard fare for the last 30 years. Can’t things lighten up a bit, with a mix of colors, textures and, god forbid, even pattern? I swore that my next car wouldn’t have a monochrome interior, but given the options that were available, I ended up with a mostly black interior. The saving grace is the chrome bits and white piping on the seats, and white bolsters on the door and dash. I guess I hoped for something along the lines of an early 60’s mid-level Pontiac tri-tone interior.
Ergonomics is also really big. The old car has a decent drivers seat, but the passenger seat was so uncomfortable (fewer adjustements), that I always prefered to drive, even if a nap sounded good. The vent controls were so counter intuitive that after owning the car for 13 years, I still fumble with them. With the MINI I am learning the odd bits, but I don’t look forward to replacing the battery, because I am worried all my hard earned settings will go away.
It depends somewhat on the price point. Ergonomics always matter, but interior materials and look-and-feel matter more up the food chain.
My former boss had a 2002 Mercedes S500, and I was sorely disappointed by the interior. It was big, it was lavishly equipped, but it was a class-free environment. Gray leather seats that looked like elephant hide, fake-looking shiny wood that seemed glued on as an afterthought, mouse-fur headliner — I called it “a fat Camry.” For $95K, it was pretty unimpressive, both in design and in quality of materials, and that was pretty hard to swallow.
Down in more attainable price territory, I think features count for more. I have a Mazda3, and the interior styling is a mixed bag (the seats are nice, but the headliner is kind of cheap; the leather and steel gearshift knob is cool, but the silver plastic instrument surround is cheesy, and the fake carbon fiber on the dashboard is kind of tacky), but it has good ergonomics and a lot of thoughtful features. Steering-wheel radio controls is a nice touch at that price point (I was entertained when I saw that they were optional on the Volvo S40, which shares the same body and platform), the lighted visor mirrors are handy, and the split-level center console bins and flip-open cupholders are nice. The interior lights come up and fade out on a rheostat, rather than snapping on and off. Overall, it feels like they scrimped a little on some of the plastics and materials in order to add more features at an attractive price, and for less than $18K, that’s a compromise I can live with.
I think interiors matter a great deal, probably more than we consciously realize. I hate black interiors and won’t buy a car that’s black inside. In Canada many brands don’t offer the interior colour choices they do in the US, citing the smaller market as their excuse. I hate seats whose bottoms are artificially short (thus giving no underthigh support) just to make the interior look larger. I hate cars with back seats that normal humans can’t sit in — take note BMW. And I can’t stand door panels that are obviously made of one single injection moulding, with no padding on the armrest. And I agree with all the people who would like to see some more colour combinations in the interiors. Would it really bring the price of a Toyota Camry into the stratosphere to give it two-toned door panels or seats? I also can’t stand cars that force you to sit so low that you feel like you’re driving a bathtub, with your legs straight out in front of you. Let’s for goodness sake provide enough headroom so that normal humans cannot only sit in the car but can scoot forward or back in the seats without hitting their heads on the headliner. Finally I want an interior whose centre dash vents don’t blow air directly into my face no matter how I position them.
The best seats I’ve ever experienced were in my 66 Volvo 122s and my 68 Mercedes 250SE; the nicest door panels were probably on my 74 BMW 3.0S sedan; and one of the best dashboards was on that same BMW. Currently I drive a Mercedes E500 with the Designo interior option. It’s beautiful, with lovely real wood, Napa leather in two contrasting colours, and so on. The seats adjust perfectly and it actually has room for real people. I feel good when I open the door and sit in the car and that’s an important part of ownership I’d say.
But why should one have to pay for a Mercedes to get all of this? Why can’t Honda or Acura do this for half the price?
Lots.
One thing I absolutely cannot understand is the term ‘mouse fur headliner’ I have read it hundreds of times over the years, but I really can’t understand how the feel of a headliner matters whatsoever. I don’t think I have ever even once needed to touch the headliner of a car for any reason. To the best of my knowledge ‘mouse fur’ headliners look just like other headliners but don’t feel as nice. Who are these people touching their headliners? My car doesn’t even have a headliner, it has a glass targa top, I really don’t get it
The seats are the most important part. BMW has this nailed. VW also at a much lower price point. Chrysler has “short seats” which probably make the car look larger but hurt if you have long legs. Honda used to but fixed this in the most recent cars and trucks.
When the BMW’s were ‘bangelized”, I wasn’t put off by the exterior, but the change from a fully functional interior to an “artsy” interior sucked. Form must follow function inside.
by far, cheap seats are the biggest flaw of most cars. My BMW sport seats are the best chairs I’ve ever sat in, but likewise, cheap seats make an otherwise decent car unworkable.
The VW beetle had decent seats.
There is no excuse, not even money for badly designed seating. You may not get forty functions, but the basic lines are not news.
Seat tracks that move…. now don’t get me started on that one.
Car shopping fall 07. Sat in a Forester. Was depressed. Why? Who knows, but it wasn’t nice in there. Sat in a Jetta. Felt like my old Golf, a bit austere, but well done. Sat in a Passat with the leatherette. Felt vaguely S+M to be honest. Sat in an Audi A4. My wife wanted to know why there was a shiny band of aluminum on the dash and doors that made her squint. I didn’t know. But the car was all around me waiting for me to drive it. It felt businesslike and well put together, though dour, and far too serious for me. Finally sat in a Volvo V50. It felt cheerful (it had the Nordic Oak trim which is light wood). It felt roomier than than the others, though it isn’t. Perhaps I mean airier. It gave me a great position to drive. And the seats were made of wetsuits which I thought was brilliant. The interiors meant a lot. We bought a V50.
Very important – I am a big fan of the Audi interiors – real quality switchgear, solid & heavy doors, good plastics and so tightly put together that a squeak or rattle is cause for a trip to the dealer !
Went in a Dodge over here (UK) the other week – oh dear it was like stepping back in time to the early 90’s in terms of the design and feel – urgh.
In my opinion the Audi interiors are the best in the world at that price point.
veefiddy- the new Volvos do have bright interiors.
The Forester rules all in outward visibility though.