I totally think the scion engineers should have just stuck with a normal sunroof / moonroof rather than the "panoramic moonroof." I think that the opening for the front moonroof is too small, and the one in the back isn't even that big and doesn't open. Plus the passengers in the back can barely see out of the back moonroof anyways. The idea for the panoramic moonroof is novel for a sports coupe, but the cons of it plus the poor execution outweighs the benefits of the panoramic moonroof. If they some how designed it to be bigger (truly panoramic), and no rattles, then I think the benefits of the panoramic roof would outweigh the cons.
Pros with no panoramic moonroof:
1. LIGHTER!!! (panoramic moonroofs usually add 150-200lbs) which means faster, better handling, better braking, and better gas mileage. (a better sports car overall)
2. Stiffer Chassis with out all glass roof (less body flex and safer crash/roller over)
3. Cheaper: yes the tc is cheap, but it could have been even cheaper without the extra design/materials/engineer costs to the panoramic roof.
4. No cheap moonroof cover, could have used a solid sliding cover.
5. No squeaks, rattles, or wind noise do to panoramic roof.
6. More head room for all passengers.
7. (maybe) Could have made a single roof slide back into the roof, instead of up and out.
8. Not sure, but I think that the glass roof makes it like sauna in the the car on hot days, like a greenhouse. Regular moonroof might be cooler on hot days
9. Better looking roof from the exterior, with body color on roof
10. Bigger moonroof for front passengers (the ones who count
)
The reasons I mentioned above, the degree of the benefit might be minimal or substantial, but nevertheless, there would be the above improvements.
Yep, so due to all those reasons...I think for 2006 they should offer a standard roof, or a regular moonroof.
Just my 2 cents...more like 3 cents. But either way, I still think the tc rocks!!!