Rear Cameras Required by 2014

[J86]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/business/us-rule-set-for-cameras-at-cars-rear.html?hp

[Eye of the Tiger]

I swear to fucking christ I'm just going to move to Mexico

[giant_mtb]

 ?We wouldn?t buy a car if we couldn?t see 30 or 40 feet going forward,? said Janette Fennell, the founder of KidsAndCars.org. ?We?re taking this big lethal weapon going in reverse, and we can?t see.?

It's called "watch where you're going" and "know where your fucking kids are."

[Onslaught]

With the high fucking belt lines it is hard to see in reverse. However you can't keep people from being dumb. So they
will still hit stuff.

[Rupert]

Just gimme a car that drives itself. Geesh.

[Soup DeVille]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/business/us-rule-set-for-cameras-at-cars-rear.html?hp

Fuck that shit.

"?We haven?t done anything else to protect pedestrians,? said Clarence Ditlow, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety in Washington. "

Yeah?? I'ma go and get me a big old cadillac with dagmars on the front, no left side mirror, a fixed hood ornament shaped like a rocket, bullet point tail lights, and I'm going to wrap the damned thing in barbed wire.

Rear view cameras suck. They use crazy wide fish-eye lenses and completely distort your depth of field.

Not to mention: its one more piece of technology I don't want and will resent having to pay for.

[Laconian]

It's called STOP BUYING CARS WITH MAIL SLOTS FOR REAR WINDOWS

[SVT666]

It's called STOP BUYING CARS WITH MAIL SLOTS FOR REAR WINDOWS

How do you do that when that's all that is available?

[SVT666]

I drove the new Taurus last year for a week and if it hadn't had a rearview camera I'm sure I would have hit a few things I couldn't see....like a VW.  What these people don't fucking understand is that when you start requiring cars to be built like tanks to protect the occupants, you get the visibility of a tank.  Fucking retards.

[Laconian]

I think the extreme cases of restricted visibility is from stylists, not engineers. Like the Camaro.

[LonghornTX]

Ughhh

[Soup DeVille]

I think the extreme cases of restricted visibility is from stylists, not engineers. Like the Camaro.

I think the fact is that car or truck is a two ton steel box that moves, and sits on four big rubber person crushing devices. I think the simple fact is that such a device is always going to have an element of danger to it, and the only answer is for people to pay attention.

[thewizard16]

I like the little cameras on SUVs or other cars with shit visibility, but required? Good lord that's unnecessary.

[Laconian]

I think the fact is that car or truck is a two ton steel box that moves, and sits on four big rubber person crushing devices. I think the simple fact is that such a device is always going to have an element of danger to it, and the only answer is for people to pay attention.

I agree, but things are what they are, and stylists have only contributed the visibility/awareness problem.

[Laconian]

I like the little cameras on SUVs or other cars with shit visibility, but required? Good lord that's unnecessary.

I like the TSux's rear view camera. The visibility is OK, not terrible, but the camera is a huge boon when parallel parking.

[thewizard16]

I like the TSux's rear view camera. The visibility is OK, not terrible, but the camera is a huge boon when parallel parking.

The gf's Murano has one and I definitely appreciate it when parallel parking that, but requiring it in all vehicles seems excessive. I don't think I've ever thought I needed it in the Camry (or any of the Camries), or even most of the rental cars. The Malibu might benefit from it due to crap visibility, but most of the other cars weren't a problem at all.

[Laconian]

Guh, the Malibu's rear viz is abominable. I had my boyfriend hop out and give guidance whenever I had to parallel park in SF.

[AutobahnSHO]

Not saying cameras wouldn't be nice. But required????

People get impatient with me when backing up- I go slow and careful. Only hit something once, but it was literally so blizzardy we could barely see 3-4 feet and I didn't know a car was sitting stationary behind me in the parking lot when they should have driven somewhere...

[cawimmer430]

Our E350 CGI has that - I've never relied on it when backing up, even though it automatically turns on. I prefer to turn my head and upper body to the right, stretch out my right hand and put it on the rear of the front passenger seat and back in manually without electronic aids. The only thing in such a situation which I find helpful are the Parktronic warning beeps which give you an indication of how close you are to the objects around you.

The Dodge Durango V6 I drove also had rear camera. Ok, in that car it came in handy since it's quite huge and hard to park in crowded Munich, but I am betting that if I got used to the car and knew its dimensions by heart, I wouldn't need them.

I swear to fucking christ I'm just going to move to Mexico

Carspin Mexico Meetup!  

Eye of the Tiger and MexicoCityM3!

[VTEC_Inside]

More BS. I really dont want to be on the road with people that REQUIRE a rear view camera not to hit anything. The first time they do anyway whos fault will it be? Then it will be, we need larger higher resolution screens!!

It can be difficult to see at night too. Might as well add night vision as well so the screen isnt wasted.

One feature I do like though is the auto dropping of the door mirrors when you put it in reverse. Seems to me that could be implemented on most cars with nothing more than some programming.

[ifcar]

Seems unnecessary, but at least the systems with a little image on the rearview mirror seem to have come down in price. And most people will find them useful from a convenience perspective, even if they might have preferred not to spend that much. It's not the worst requirement that's ever been put forward.

[Byteme]

Well, everybody has pretty much said all there is to say except........

What is missing is that rear view cameras are worthless if the driver doesn't pay attention to it.  Drivers today routinely backup without looking, what makes anyone think those same drivers will pay attention to a rear view camera.  Maybe the Safety Nazis will design it so the car can't be put in reverse unless the system is on and a retinal scan proves you are looking at the screen.

Why not address the real problem of poor vehicle design and poor driving habits?  All these crutches like back up cameras do is further reduce the already pathetic skills most drivers have.

[AutobahnSHO]

All these crutches like back up cameras do is further reduce the already pathetic skills most drivers have.

+1

Wonder how many kids are backed over in Europe, where they take driving seriously and have to go to "REAL" driver's ed.

[Byteme]

Some data points.

About 120 backing deaths in 1999, mainly infants and those over 70.
\
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/problems/studies/nontraffic-noncrash/images/noncrash.pdf

That's up to 228 by 2008, with most of the deaths caused by light trucks, vans and SUVs.  That shouldn't be a surprise.

See: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811144.pdf


I'd still argue the money would be better spent getting drunk drivers off the road.

[cawimmer430]

One feature I do like though is the auto dropping of the door mirrors when you put it in reverse. Seems to me that could be implemented on most cars with nothing more than some programming.

My dads E350 CGI does that to - I find it annoying. 

I don't like that feature. If I need to see what my rims might be hitting I'll manually adjust the mirrors.

[TurboDan]

Another element of the whole "backing over people" issue that's often overlooked is how many of these incidents occur in parking lots. I had to write a story of a lady getting backed over and killed about a year ago. It's amazing how people just don't pay attention to cars backing out of parking spaces. Personally, I tend to think it's a product of the trendy "yield to pedestrian" laws we've created in recent years that now empower people to believe it's their "right" to walk anywhere they want regardless of cars. That and texting, of course.

As for the camera requirement, I see this resulting in people thinking "oh, I have a camera" and not looking back AT ALL before moving.

[r0tor]

I love the camera in the jeep that is combined with the radar sensors... its so damn convenient for parking and I have to agree there is a tremendous safety advantage in parking lots.

[Madman]

How about teaching the little fucks not to run up to a moving car?  That's what I did with my two kids and would you believe they've never once been struck by a car?

This may sound cruel to some of you but I think this is a prime example of Darwinism at work.  If your spawn is stupid enough to jump behind a moving car, they deserve what they get!  This is how natural selection works.  Mankind survived because, ages ago, the stupid ones got eaten by wilderbeasts.  Today, they get crushed by a Chevy Suburban reversing at 2.8 miles per hour.

[Byteme]

How about teaching the little fucks not to run up to a moving car?  That's what I did with my two kids and would you believe they've never once been struck by a car?

This may sound cruel to some of you but I think this is a prime example of Darwinism at work.  If your spawn is stupid enough to jump behind a moving car, they deserve what they get!  This is how natural selection works.  Mankind survived because, ages ago, the stupid ones got eaten by wilderbeasts.  Today, they get crushed by a Chevy Suburban reversing at 2.8 miles per hour.

Yeah, I think you are a little over the top with that.  You can't expect an kid between 1 and 4 to fully understand the dangers of playing behind a parked or non-moving car.  

Wildebeests are herbivores; they aren't eating anybody.   

[Byteme]

Another element of the whole "backing over people" issue that's often overlooked is how many of these incidents occur in parking lots. I had to write a story of a lady getting backed over and killed about a year ago. It's amazing how people just don't pay attention to cars backing out of parking spaces. Personally, I tend to think it's a product of the trendy "yield to pedestrian" laws we've created in recent years that now empower people to believe it's their "right" to walk anywhere they want regardless of cars. That and texting, of course.

As for the camera requirement, I see this resulting in people thinking "oh, I have a camera" and not looking back AT ALL before moving.

More often than not I see someone using their mirrors as their sole source of ascertaining what's behind them when they back up.  What ever happened to turning your head around ahd physically looking out the rear window.  Most people have about 170 degrees of vision so they will be able to see what's behind them and what is approaching from the side.  You can't do that with a mirror.

Adding to the problem is the number of SUVs.  Park beside one and then try to back out. You've got to back out quite far to see around that high back end.  That problem didn''t exist when most people drove cars with trunks that you could see over.