PDA

View Full Version : Back up cameras to be required on cars.



Starbuck
02-28-2012, 01:15 PM
I view this as over-regulation. Yes, it will cost manufacturers 200 dollars to install the cameras, but what will they sell them for?! It ain't going to be 200$:rolleyes:

Auto manufacturers are generally silent about this sort of thing because it gives them something else to sell and repair (since the devices are required, states will begin to require that they are working).


Regulators to require rearview cameras in all new cars by 2014

WASHINGTON US federal regulators are expected to announce plans this week to require automakers to install rearview cameras in all new cars by 2014, The New York Times reported.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is expected to send its final version of the proposed regulation to Congress on Wednesday, after first proposing the rule change in 2010.

Government statistics show that 228 people of all ages die in the US each year after being hit by passenger vehicles backing up, while roughly 17,000 people are injured.

"We haven't done anything else to protect pedestrians," Clarence Ditlow, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety in Washington, told the newspaper. "This is one thing we can do and should do."

In a draft paper, regulators said it would cost automakers between $160 and $200 to install the cameras and viewing screens in each new vehicle -- as much as $2.7 billion per year overall.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/28/regulators-to-require-rearview-cameras-in-all-new-cars-by-2014/#ixzz1nh3Bam1A

fettpett
02-28-2012, 01:18 PM
then we'll get a whole slue of idiots that don't physically look behind them before backing up.

Novaheart
02-28-2012, 01:20 PM
I view this as over-regulation. Yes, it will cost manufacturers 200 dollars to install the cameras, but what will they sell them for?! It ain't going to be 200$:rolleyes:

Auto manufacturers are generally silent about this sort of thing because it gives them something else to sell and repair (since the devices are required, states will begin to require that they are working).

The only time I come close to hitting someone is when I am backing out of a driveway with a load of debris in my truck. A back-up camera would be completely worthless in this situation, because the person I am going to hit isn't behind my truck yet, he's mindlessly riding a bicycle up the street and not paying attention to me backing out with a full load of tree branches. My blindspot is not directly behind my truck, it's the passenger doorpost and headrest on the passenger side covering a critical part of the rear windscreen.

AmPat
02-28-2012, 01:55 PM
One day all this will be rendered obsolete. Once we have eliminated all accidental deaths and injuries through all these add-ons, we'll realize that we simply needed mandatory rubber suits in conjunction with public transportation. Cars should be immediately outlawed and turned in to the government collection points.

Starbuck
02-28-2012, 02:16 PM
For me, I don't even have a windshield mounted rear view mirror on my pickup; I use side mirrors exclusively. That's because I drove a big truck for some years and learned to rely on side mirrors. I never backed into anything in the 18 wheeler, nor have I in a 4 wheeler.

228 lives? I doubt it. Some of them are going to get hit anyway.

At a cost of 2.7 billion annually before the manufacturers mark it up? No.:cold:

Write your congressman.

Eupher
02-28-2012, 02:35 PM
*sigh*

The nanny state strikes again.

DumbAss Tanker
02-28-2012, 03:13 PM
The same people who do not look in their mirrors will not look at the screen.

noonwitch
02-28-2012, 03:25 PM
If you need a camera to replace your rear-view mirror (and the associated head turn look) to back up without hitting a pedestrian, you shouldn't be driving.

NJCardFan
02-28-2012, 04:46 PM
For me, I don't even have a windshield mounted rear view mirror on my pickup; I use side mirrors exclusively. That's because I drove a big truck for some years and learned to rely on side mirrors. I never backed into anything in the 18 wheeler, nor have I in a 4 wheeler.

228 lives? I doubt it. Some of them are going to get hit anyway.

At a cost of 2.7 billion annually before the manufacturers mark it up? No.:cold:

Write your congressman.
Ditto. I came quite adept at using my mirrors while driving a bread truck. As for the mandate, think about it. The gubment owns GM(basically). Knowing that, does this surprise you?

namvet
02-28-2012, 07:39 PM
I test drove a crossover with one. I think their great. plus my ins agent told me having one with AWD is a hugh dedcution in premiums. 180 bucks every six mons for full coverage. I have need of one in these damned crowed parking lots. people walking right behind your bumper or cars pulling out. plus the after market is full of em. an at resonalble prices. a lot of kids have been hurt or killed accidently because their parents never knew the were back there.
I take from the article these will be reto fitted and not factory installed


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ar85zcMYmo

JB
02-28-2012, 08:14 PM
So by using this backup camera, instead of just turning my head like I've been doing for 100 years, I have just reduced my field of vision by about 75%. Definitely a gubmint initiative.

namvet
02-28-2012, 08:48 PM
So by using this backup camera, instead of just turning my head like I've been doing for 100 years, I have just reduced my field of vision by about 75%. Definitely a gubmint initiative.

there's no substitute for the eyes and brain. the camera is an aid to vision.

Odysseus
02-28-2012, 10:09 PM
If you are driving a pickup or SUV where your vision is blocked by the height of the vehicle, it's not a bad thing to have, but I wouldn't make it mandatory. The difference between libs and conservatives is that a liberal mandates the good idea, while a conservative offers it and allows people to make up their own minds.

Starbuck
02-28-2012, 11:25 PM
I test drove a crossover with one. I think their great. plus my ins agent told me having one with AWD is a hugh dedcution in premiums. 180 bucks every six mons for full coverage. I have need of one in these damned crowed parking lots. people walking right behind your bumper or cars pulling out. plus the after market is full of em. an at resonalble prices. a lot of kids have been hurt or killed accidently because their parents never knew the were back there.
I take from the article these will be reto fitted and not factory installed......
No. Factory fit, and required on every vehicle.

If you like them you should be able to buy one. I don't believe we all should be required to buy one.

Odysseus
02-29-2012, 01:29 AM
No. Factory fit, and required on every vehicle.

If you like them you should be able to buy one. I don't believe we all should be required to buy one.

Exactly. A few years ago, I had an Isuzu Trooper, which had a very high back window. If something was close and low, like a fire hydrant, I couldn't see it. I'd have sprung for one of those cameras if it were available, but I'd never mandate it. If people want it, they'll shell out for it, and if it proves popular enough, then it will become a standard feature. That's how markets work. This is just nanny statism run amok.

AmPat
03-01-2012, 04:06 AM
Ditto. I came quite adept at using my mirrors while driving a bread truck. As for the mandate, think about it. The gubment owns GM(basically). Knowing that, does this surprise you?

I have a lifted Jeep and an F-150. The wind shield mounted mirror is of little use. I use the side mirrors when backing. The camera is a good idea for the aftermarket and as an option. As for government mandate, pure BS nanny statism-------------------AGAIN!

Nubs
03-01-2012, 11:52 AM
These backup cameras will be integrated into the rearview mirror. The will be manufactured by Gentex.

namvet
03-01-2012, 12:26 PM
a lot of these cams attach to the rear plates. I asked a local cop here if that was legal. you know he could not answer.

Starbuck
03-01-2012, 12:44 PM
a lot of these cams attach to the rear plates. I asked a local cop here if that was legal. you know he could not answer.

Not surprising. I had a local cop pull me aside once and ask me if the driver of a Salvation Army truck was supposed to have a class B commercial license. (yes) The reason he asked me is because I was the only trucker on the scene of the accident and he was confident that I would know.