No recent car UX I've seen has been worse than the Hyundai Ioniq. The button to toggle reverse is right next to the cup holder / center storage, and placed & designed such that it's easy to accidentally hit it as you put your drink down[1].
I took a sip of my drink while waiting on a red light. When it turned green I unexpectedly backwards and just narrowly avoided crashing into the car behind me by slamming the brakes. Turns out I'd switched it from "Drive" to "Reverse" accidentally.
Toggling that button requires about the same amount of force you'd expect from a button that turns on the radio in any other car.
Having a look at the photo, the compartment in question was probably intended to house an ashtray (where it may make perfectly sense), but is now a nondescript storage space. (The actual cup holders are behind it, reasonably away from vital controls.) It's probably more at about repurposing this space appropriately – and they really should have closed the compartment rather than having it used as a spare cup holder.
If true, it's more about bad second thoughts (what are we doing with this in markets where smoking is practically banned?) than about bad design. Probably marketing is to be blamed and not the design department.
What they intended to use it for isn't relevant. It's still dangerously bad design. Steering, breaking, accelerating and shifting gears in a car should require deliberate and unambiguous action from the driver.
Some of the UX for these differs in ICE vehicles, but I don't know of a single example in an ICE vehicle where just e.g. dropping your phone on the center console could shift into reverse.
This is the case in the Hyundai Ioniq, and seems to be a trend as EV designers dangerously reinvent standardized control surfaces to optimize for some combination of trendy design and cost cutting.
In my case I was fumbling around the center console for the cup holder while keeping my eyes on the road. In no sane car UX should doing that unintentionally shift the car into reverse.
In pretty much any other car doing the same and accidentally bumping into some button between the seats will at worst turn on the seat heating, or screw with the radio.
I do not contest that this is a highly dangerous arrangement. However, I do think that the original design was safe and that there was no open space at all nearby. If I were right, this is actually a dangerous situation created by UX in the sense UX is more related to marketing than the more traditional concepts of human factors and usability had been. "What may we do with this space in those markets? Surely you want some convenient space in the central console to drop your things! Why didn't they think of this in the first place?" (A human factors expert, on the other hand, would have told you that there had to be at least some sort of self-closing lid, just like car ashtrays used to have them for decades.)
It's categorically dangerous to have a easily pressed button shift gears in the car. I don't see how it's relevant that some designer can say "don't put something that can be used as a cupholder next to it".
The design creates a hazard that's categorically avoided in other vehicles, without any benefit other than saving a few dollars for the manufacturer. I can't imagine what else they're gaining over having a traditional gear stick there, it would take up the same amount of space.
I don't think that the buttons are for cost saving, rather, buttons are thought to be modern (even, if they are not, think of the starter buttons found in recent cars as well as in early ones) and levers and gears are not. (UX again, probably aiming at a fly-by-wire experience.)
P.S.: The entire central console arrangement is always a bit questionable in cars with a manual gear shift, even in the traditional layout. If a passenger wants to access some in the console, s/he inadvertently interferes with the driver's action. Certainly not a good thing… – At some point, you need to know, what you may do and what not in order to avoid dangerous situations, and there will be probably always off-limits zones by convention. But, of course, you should do everything possible in your design to avoid hazardous situations and mishandling, and to communicate usage as clearly as possible.
That is awful. I can't believe you can accidentally put your car in reverse by dropping something. They created an unacceptable problem by solving a non existing problem like most car UXs these days.
God, it seems like all of the recent times an auto manufacturer deviates from an accepted gearshift design it goes horribly. The Jeep gearshift that killed Anton Yelchin comes to mind, but honestly the one you posted seems even worse from a design standpoint. I completely fail to understand what the hell auto designers are doing with UX nowadays.
Is it just the perspective of the picture or are those buttons not even recessed but prominently sticking up?
Ironically, the buttons for the seat heaters look flush/recessed.
Especially in these modern cars that have no "lurch" when you put them in gear to give a subtle hint what happened, that's really horrible design. (Maybe they should lurch slightly --- I don't think it'd be all that difficult given the degree of automation they already have...)
There are large vehicles with pushbutton shifters but they're usually mounted on the dash where falling objects won't hit them, and furthermore have recessed buttons so even harder to push accidentally:
It's not the perspective, it's actually like that.
The drive mode "island" is a sort of "peak" where "N" is a regular button, and all of "D"/"P"/"R" lean away from the "peak" when pressed instead of going straight down. So the "R" button has a lip you press right next to that storage compartment.
That makes it easy to press by accident as you bump it with the edge of e.g. a can of soda you're putting into that compartment. If you had to press it straight down and it was surrounded by plastic you'd at least need something as small as the button (or smaller) to press it accidentally, but no such luck.
Honda has a pushbutton shifter in the Accord, you have to push the button backwards to shift, which seems like it'd be a little harder to accidentally shift, but not impossible, like if you dropped a coin in the shifter button and tried to scoop it out.
Wow that setup looks frightening to me. I wonder if drivers are able to put their car in park without even looking like you can do with a conventional automatic shifter. I honestly can't imaging having to look down every time I go to park my car. Plus, no way to tactically determine which gear you're in. I see no benefit and only downsides.
The owners manual says that you can't shift to park if the car is in motion.
And it will automatically switch to park if the car is stopped, the drivers door is opened and the driver's seatbelt is removed (also when the car is switched off), so in that regard, it may be safer than a traditional shifter, it'd be nearly impossible for a driver to run himself over with his own car.
If the driver really wants to keep the car in neutral after exiting the vehicle, you can press N, then press it again and hold for 2 seconds.
I don't have a car with a push button shifter like this, but the reverse button is so distinctive that I'd think it'd be pretty easy to orient your hand and get used to pushing the buttons without looking.
I'm not sure if this shifter is on all of the Accords, or just the Hybrid, but in the hybrid there are no other driver gears, there's no transmission at all, just some clutches to connect the engine directly to the wheels or to a generator, or both -- the engine uses a fixed gear ratio when connected to the wheels, if the car is outside a speed the engine can handle, then the electric motor drives the car.
And isn't it a personal safety issue if the door unlocks everytime you stop?
I've never seen a car that unlocks the doors automatically when stopped, only when placed into park.
I'm not sure what personal safety issue you're referring to, but if you're talking about a carjacking, if someone opens your door at a stoplight and unbuckles your seatbelt (or forces you to do so), I don't see how it's any less safe for you if your car shifts into Park automatically -- less chance that it will run you over when you're pulled from the car.
"And it will automatically switch to park if the car is stopped"
So it switches to park when you stop, and by extension unlocks the door and unfastens your seat belt.
Which doesn't match:
"I've never seen a car that unlocks the doors automatically when stopped, only when placed into park"
But then we do still seem to be talking about the car shifting to park you stop.
" I don't see how it's any less safe for you if your car shifts into Park automatically".
And a seatbelt unbuckling automatically whatever the situation seems like a massive anti-feature to me.
Edit:
I get it.
If (stopped && door_unlocked && seatbelt_unfastened) switch_to_park();
Not
If (stopped){ unlockdoor(); unfasten_seatbelt(); park();}
You still have to hold the brakes to switch anything with these buttons.
But they're definitely the thing that immediately stands out as dangerous. Could use a different type of controls, a safety cover or additional safety switch.
> You still have to hold the brakes to switch anything with these buttons.
Which is what one do when stopping at a triffic light, which is precisely the best time to pick/drop something in that compartment. Whoever designed those buttons should be fired and never allowed to work on cars again.
That’s a shame because a lot of elements were copied from the Prius / Lexus CT200h for the IONIQ (I own the latter) and I was starting to think of switching up for the newer IONIQ hybrid power train since the CT200h has had a decade long technology stall. And the Prius is butt ugly.
Well the CT200h is still on the same gen 3 Prius power train as when the model was originally launched and on the actual Prius they’re up to gen 5 where the fuel economy is about 50% better.
And luxury car but lack of plug-in hybrid option despite Prius having one ...
Don’t get me wrong it’s a lovely car way ahead of its time, everywhere in the cabin (especially the UX), but outdated under the hood.
Understood now (I own a CT too :-)). On the other hand it's cheaper than the Prius, which despite being ugly as heck is almost 10.000 euros more expensive than the CT (so here in Italy only taxi drivers buy it).
That's a surprise lapse in design testing by QC. Hyundai actually has very good interior ergonomics. As a car guy, probably one of the best in the business. They stick with common, predictable convention.
I took a sip of my drink while waiting on a red light. When it turned green I unexpectedly backwards and just narrowly avoided crashing into the car behind me by slamming the brakes. Turns out I'd switched it from "Drive" to "Reverse" accidentally.
Toggling that button requires about the same amount of force you'd expect from a button that turns on the radio in any other car.
1. http://www.cleanmpg.com/community/index.php?media/31669/full...