Ioniq5 better than IX3 and Q4 e-Tron

Without even reading the German car magazine, I'm sure their test gave a pass on one important criterion:



(I admit I'm fixated on both Hyundai and Kia dropping the rear wipers from their expensive CUV EVs.)

 

I think it's funny how everybody focuses on the missing rear wiper. In my experience no other driver on the road ever looks behind themselves, or even left or right for that matter.

 

Why not make the rear wiper an option--even an expensive option--for the few who want a better look at the car following them before exercising the Ioniq 5's considerable torque? It's good to be able to ascertain if that following car is a police car.

 

I know there's a bit of tongue-in-cheek going on here but I have to say that I am just stunned by the number of people, drivers, who seem to believe that rearward visibility is a trifling matter. If you're not actively looking to the rear then you should not be driving. If you can't (or don't) look behind you then you are dangerous and are, in fact, in danger and if a car prohibits a clear rear view then IT is dangerous. A wiper could easily be tucked up under the spoiler and have zero aerodynamic impact. There's really no excuse for the exclusion.

 

Yeah. I had cars in the past that didn't have rear wipers, but they were 2 door or 4 door cars. Those didn't have any issues at all. After a few miles of driving, or even less if driving faster the water blew off. That doesn't really seem to work right on the Ioniq5 even though they seem to have it designed like that. Maybe they dialed up the wind channel too much and figured it works without realizing that the car can't drive 200 mph by itself.

 

So we should ban all vans, minibuses, lorries, buses, ambulances...

 

Yes, that's what I said. /s

 

Vans, minibuses, lorries, buses and ambulances are all inherently more dangerous than passenger cars. They are more dangerous to other drivers and to pedestrians in large part because their rearward visibility is compromised. The real question here is do we really want to add to the population of more dangerous vehicles on the road for the sake of a manufacturer saving on parts, for a designer sacrificing safety and utility for appearances? I would say no. Apparently you (and others) would say otherwise.