Backup cameras

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like backup cameras, wish there was one on my grandpas '72 delta 98 4 door that I drove as a teenager. I would usually just find an open area (at least that I could pull thru) because that thing was looooong.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Barkleymut
I like backup cameras, wish there was one on my grandpas '72 delta 98 4 door that I drove as a teenager. I would usually just find an open area (at least that I could pull thru) because that thing was looooong.



Shucks, I wish there were still cars like the '72 Delta
 
It sounds like (at least some of) those older cars were just as hard to park and back up as the newer cars. Thus we've simply managed for the last few decades and are only just starting to deal with the problem.
 
Originally Posted By: supton
It sounds like (at least some of) those older cars were just as hard to park and back up as the newer cars. Thus we've simply managed for the last few decades and are only just starting to deal with the problem.


Newer cars are harder, IMO. My much larger 2001 Taurus was easy to park without the mirrors. Now that cars have higher belt lines (my focus is one), the back window is useless. The Chrysler 300 I have heard is super hard.
 
Originally Posted By: Miller88
The Chrysler 300 I have heard is super hard.


I have found it and the previous generation Ford Fusion to have massive blind spots. The current Fusion may be just as bad, I don't know...I just haven't driven one.

I don't like the current trend of high belt lines, and do my best to avoid cars like that. I don't like to feel "surrounded" by my vehicle. It gives me a feeling that it's driving me rather than me driving it.
 
Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
I think the difference is that today's generation relies on technology completely, instead of using it as an aid. I use a back-up camera in my dad's Grand Cherokee because it helps me hook-up the trailer quicker and line up the hitch better.

Many people rely ONLY on the camera though, and that is the problem. Its fine to use the camera for the areas you can't see, while also checking the areas with your eyes that you can see. Some of my friends have almost backed out into cars in parking lots because they just looked at the screen, they didn't look out the back window to see if a car was approaching from the side. That is the difference. Technology is a wonderful tool when used correctly, but it does not take the place of being aware of your surroundings.


Exactly; to quote the great Douglas Adams, "A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.”
 
subaru forester most in-class visibility, massive windows... and now... a standard backup camera.

They could add a basic backup camera for less than 50$ to most vehicles.. probably less than 20$ if using integration, (same screen for radio, info, camera etc)
 
Last edited:
Bumpers are more fragile to getting bumped. Now they are plastic that can crack etc instead of the good old days of metal/rubber.

When I used to parallel park in Boston in too tight spots I would lightly tap the car behind. Now I can see it in the camera of my MDX in nav screen.
 
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Trajan said:
Good question. Ask the goons at the federal level why it's now mandatory? Their reasoning? People were backing over their kids.


I'm betting that the next Safety Nanny crusade will involve the brain-dead morons who "forget" their kids are in the back seat and leave them in their car in the broiling sun.
I wonder what electronic panacea will be mandated to absolve those imbeciles of responsibility?
 
Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Trajan said:
Good question. Ask the goons at the federal level why it's now mandatory? Their reasoning? People were backing over their kids.


I'm betting that the next Safety Nanny crusade will involve the brain-dead morons who "forget" their kids are in the back seat and leave them in their car in the broiling sun.
I wonder what electronic panacea will be mandated to absolve those imbeciles of responsibility?


Don't give them any ideas...
smile.gif
 
Backup cameras, good idea IMHO.

My mother has limited ability to rotate herself in the driver's seat. The more she can see with mirrors/cameras, the better.

I find it sad people seem opposed to a common sense idea apparently only because it is being mandated.
 
Some BITOGers still hate GPS/Navigation systems and want to fiddle with a paper map while driving with one hand, or knees.
I once got yelled at when I was asking for opinions about a Garmin GPS -
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: sasilverbullet
Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Trajan said:
Good question. Ask the goons at the federal level why it's now mandatory? Their reasoning? People were backing over their kids.


I'm betting that the next Safety Nanny crusade will involve the brain-dead morons who "forget" their kids are in the back seat and leave them in their car in the broiling sun.
I wonder what electronic panacea will be mandated to absolve those imbeciles of responsibility?


Don't give them any ideas...
smile.gif



It's already happening. One of the auto podcasts I listen to was talking about an Interest group petitioning the government to fund a research project to develop just this type of technology. Of course the commentator said that this technology has been around a long time and was implemented many years ago on a Volvo (?? or maybe another manufacturer I don't recall exactly).
 
Having driven large and small vehicles from every decade since the 1940's and both backed and parallel parked them, I can assure you cars then were no easier nor were they more difficult to back or park. I never needed something like a camera-I always managed to maintain an awareness and sight picture of what is going on around my vehicle. No matter what direction I'm going, no matter what speed I'm going, no matter what maneuver I'm doing, I always know what is around my vehicle, and if something or someone comes close I know about it. If I'm in a position where I have to back out of a driveway I physically look behind and around the vehicle before I get in. When I do get in I maintain a constant awareness of what's around, and since I actually looked, I know what may be around to get near the vehicle.

If I ever get to the point that I have to rely upon something such as a camera to do what I should be able to do, then it's time to stop driving.


Originally Posted By: 97tbird
Some BITOGers still hate GPS/Navigation systems and want to fiddle with a paper map while driving with one hand, or knees.
I once got yelled at when I was asking for opinions about a Garmin GPS -
grin2.gif



Maybe you should do what I do-just look at a map before you leave and memorize the route. Then you don't need either your Garmin or your paper map. Simple concept, isn't it?

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts

My mother has limited ability to rotate herself in the driver's seat. The more she can see with mirrors/cameras, the better.



If her mobility is so limited that she can't actually look behind her then she shouldn't be allowed to drive.
 
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit


Maybe you should do what I do-just look at a map before you leave and memorize the route. Then you don't need either your Garmin or your paper map. Simple concept, isn't it?


My first drive to KY I blew a turn on I87 in NY. I had to drive ten miles (more?) to find an exit so I could consult a map to figure what I did wrong. That drive was 780 miles. Kinda hard to memorize all the side roads.

Hours later I thought I blew it again. Somehow I missed exit two... Nope no exit two in that state, it was in the next state!

I like looking at a map, and I generally print off the directions before I go someplace, but it sure is nice to have the gps.
 
None of our cars have backup cameras. Looks like we won't have a choice but to have them in future cars. OK, could be a worse and more intrusive system. I drive a lot of rental cars, but usually compact ones without the cameras. When Ive had them, they have been handy but nothing Id miss.

We parallel park all the time. Downtown areas in cities and towns large and small often have parallel park, diagonal park and other such setups to maximize parking space. I cant recall ever bumping another car, except once, when I was 17 (very lightly, fortunately, no damage or marks). But that said, I do see lots of cars with really bad bump marks on bumpers. Because there are a ton of people with no clue how to park. Has always been that way, Im sure. I recall many people I grew up with who failed their DL test because of the parallel parking requirement (oddly, it was mostly girls, but Im sure plenty of guys cant park worth a darn either).

Situational awareness and knowing points of reference to be aware of where your car is, is very important. Many people are poor drivers, that has always been the case, and nothing has changed recently to make it worse, IMO (cell phone talking while parking aside). So I see this as a tool that may actually make poor parkers more capable. That's not a bad thing. Might it make parallel parking issues a thing of the past? Maybe, but is that a bad thing?

What's humorous is that folks want to buy ATs because people are too incapable/lazy to drive MT vehicles, yet they might look at a tool like this as a bad thing.

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit

Maybe you should do what I do-just look at a map before you leave and memorize the route. Then you don't need either your Garmin or your paper map. Simple concept, isn't it?


Interesting. So you memorize the back roads when going exploring in some small town in the middle of nowhere eight states away? Because we do that sort of thing quite often, and having a GPS as a tool is certainly safer, more rapid and more straightforward than navigating with an atlas, even when there are two of us aware in the car vs me solo on a business trip. No way would I want to pay for an embedded system, because the lifecycle cost risk and update business model is just plain stupid; but belittling another excellent tool is silly.
 
So the memorized route is guaranteed to have no accidents, construction, or anything else that can happen which might make you take a diversion / alternate route?

GPS also displays info like where to find places of interest, gas stations, hospitals, restaurants, traffic conditions etc etc. Not to mention ETAs, fuel economy, also.

If someone thinks that looking at a map and memorizing a route is the same as a full function GPS....
IDK what to call that kind of thinking.
 
The whole map vs. GPS thing goes back to what I said about technology being a great tool if used correctly. GPS devices are great. You get turn by turn directions, they prevent you from having to fumble with a map while driving, and they often prevent last minute turns and maneuvers. With the voice direction, drivers don't even have to take their eyes off the road, or if they do, its just for a second to glance up at the route. I consider all of these advancements to be very beneficial over maps. Taking your eyes off the road to punch the buttons and search through menus on your GPS while doing 80 mph down the highway is not safe, and not the correct way to use it.

Technology isn't the problem, people are the problem. You could create the most helpful technology in the world, and some idiot is still going to use it incorrectly. Just as Ron White always says, "You can't fix stupid".
 
Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Trajan said:
Good question. Ask the goons at the federal level why it's now mandatory? Their reasoning? People were backing over their kids.


I'm betting that the next Safety Nanny crusade will involve the brain-dead morons who "forget" their kids are in the back seat and leave them in their car in the broiling sun.
I wonder what electronic panacea will be mandated to absolve those imbeciles of responsibility?


Judging b what we have seen so far, it will probably add $3000 to the cost of the car and explode the windows so your toddler doesn't overheat. Of course, these systems will be a bit problematic and wear out (like TPMS), so when you car hits 4 years old, there is a good chance the windows will blow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top