Feds delayed -again – a requirement for all new cars in the U.S. to be equipped with backup cameras, Bloomberg says. Regulators want time until 2015 to deliberate whether it might be better to simply give better safety ratings to vehicles with the gizmo.
The law had first been postponed in 2011, when the NHTSA needed time to sift through a flood of about 200 comments. The rule was then delayed a few times more.
Now the agency will look more into the cost of the rule. It is figured at $2.7 billion “or as much as $18 million per life saved,” (if, and only if, the moron that backs up without looking will now remember to look at the screen while backing up.)
Gizmo-makers in the greater Shenzhen, China, area, which were to profit from the ruling, could not be reached for comment.
“NHTSA needed time to sift through a flood of about 200 comments.”
A flood?
More like an average Baruth article.
It can be a flood if those comments are 100 page dissertations written by lobbyists or interest groups. They are required to respond to and evaluate comments so with low staff regulators at many agencies that can be an effective delaying tactic.
Good point.
I should know better. I work for the gummint.
Yes, there are boils all over my back and I love Hillary.
The few times I’ve driven back-up camera equipped vehicles I found myself still looping my arm over the passenger seat and looking back to get the proper perspective. I suppose like most newish tech I would get used to looking at the screen, but as long as my neck works, do I have to?
Maybe not a good idea to lose the neck-looking skill. Guy in his Cheviac Envoyukonburban backed into my aunt’s Miata while traffic was stopped for a construction crew. His backup camera and her frenetic honking did nothing to stop the low speed collision.
The new shoebox proportioned cars do little to help the situation. When you have a gunslit for a rear window, you will have to use that camera. You can turn your head all you want, you wont see behind you unless the trunk is open and the seats are down(I’m talking to you taurus) There is a reason why we didn’t design cars this way in the past, the reason being that it was STUPID.
Government mandates that helped make the cars safer in some ways made them unsafe in different ways. In the world of design there are only compromises.
Unless your aunt’s Miata was painted Fly Yellow and had a dual trumpet Franco-Italian horn, I reckon it was another case of contributory negligence?
Lie2me – – –
The back-up camera is no panacea. And reliance on it may cause worse back-up driving in marginal conditions, since the skill to back up using what you are describing, and using mirrors, will have been lost.
How good will the camera be in a blinding snow storm? Or in a drenching downpour? Or in fog, or in the middle of the night when your back-up lights may be too weak?
Sometimes, nothing beats getting out of the vehicle, walking back there to see what’s what, and then backing up slowly into the area/region you have just examined.
I am not opposed to new technology when it has a positive effect under all conditions, but when there are trade-offs, maybe we should just learn to drive and have proper driver education as mandatory (if you want NHTSA to make something mandatory).
————-
Amen, bro!
My new 2013 Accord Touring is my first car with b/u cam, but I still turn my head and use the mirrors, then use the camera as a “sanity check” once the car is moving a little; unlike lots of sedans today, the Accord has an excellent greenhouse for visibility, including out the back. (Although, the camera is equipped with guidelines that move with the steering wheel, so the assist in backing into parking spaces or parallel parking is really nice–it does make it easier. That said, if I ever have to teach a kid to drive, there WILL be a sheet of paper placed over the screen in the dash whilst they learn to parallel park and to back up! I would say the same about learning with three pedals, but since ** I ** couldn’t learn on a Honda stick on my brother’s ‘Teg back in the day, I can accept slushboxes!)
It’s the same with the “LaneWatch” camera mounted on the passenger mirror, which projects an image of the right side of the car on the in-dash screen; it’s cool tech., but it comes third behind a mirror-check, followed by a quick head-turn to check the blind-spot before moving over. (Honda put a convex “blind spot” piece on the left third of the driver’s mirror which isn’t as good, IMHO, as a little BSI light on the mirror–it just adds to confusion.)
Try backing up a Prius with the split back window sometime. The camera is absolutely essential.
Didn’t this whole mess start because some drunk doctor with political connections came back from dinner and squashed his son with his SUV and tried to deflect the blame onto everyone but himself? Suddenly the NHTSA is reviewing every case of some idiot running over a kid with an overly sized SUV, ignoring the stupid human factor, and deeming that the backup camera, like the CHMSL, should be a mandatory feature that will literally save tens of thousands of lives.
Give better saftey rating to vehicles with the “gizmo”? How does this “gizmo” make the car any safer? It may make the people around the car safer from the idiot behind the wheel, but the car itself isn’t any safer. And isn’t the safety rating about how safe the car itself is?
Nobody can beat me when it comes to my loathing, mistrust and general disdain of the IQ and morality of anyone of such low achievement that they have to work for the gubmit…and the lowest of the low is a combination of the EPA and NTHSA. (Got D’s in science? Join our agencies.)
However, given the absolutely abysmal rear visibility of many (if not most) of our modern machines…perhaps this might be one of those two times a day that a stopped watch is correct.
I’m all for backup cameras, but not mandatory ones. The price increase to low end vehicles would make a real difference, and not everyone wants one.
So do you favor backing up blind? I’d mandate rear visibility. How they do it is up to them. For SUVs an minivans, that will almost certainly be back up cameras.
Why not just mandate people who know how to drive? Oh, wait, supposedly they did that already.
Yeah…
I have had to back-up with pick-up trucks for 40 years. Never had a problem. You get out, look around, then then slowly move using your BIG mirrors. It also helps to turn slightly as you back up, whenever possible, because it puts you into a newly visible viewing area.
————-
I’ve had occasion to drive box trucks on a couple of occasions, and am ** more confident ** with those huge mirrors! What blind spots?! My Dad drove deuce-and-a-halfs in ‘Nam, and showed me the ropes a couple times! Nothing to it! (Mind you, you won’t see a child or small object behind you, but that’s why you check things out first!) I wouldn’t try to PARALLEL PARK one, but they can be maneuvered in traffic and positioned easily, especially the ones on a 1-ton van/HD pickup chassis.
Perhaps some people are just too damn lazy to ** get out ** of the vehicle when need be!
Regarding the vid at the top of this post: the guy bumped the Eclipse in front of him when the jacka$$ rear-ended him! How did that driver not feel that..he just kept going!!
You can get an add on backup camera and display for under $100. I am sure the cost to the OEMs is a tiny fraction of that. I really like the GM integrated into the rearview mirror version. Should be dirt cheap compared to airbags, TPS, and all the other safety BS required, and should make life a little easier. Personally I simply won’t buy a car I can’t see out of, but that doesn’t help with my frequent rentals.
The initial cost is probably minor – although I’d like to see reliability stats on cheap cameras.
Possible issues:
Repair cost for this legacy electronic item if it craps the bed after 3 or 5 years.
And will your state’s mandatory ‘safety’ inspection require it to function?
Well, if you left it up to the manufacturers, then you might have a reverse beeper INSIDE the car! (2001 Celica)
I’m not convinced b/u cameras actually make a net savings in lives. Many of them give a decent view of behind the vehilcle, but certainly don’t give a full perspective of the surroundings. Many people use them as a crutch when reversing instead of actually looking 360*. It’s a handy gadget in my Charger which is rear visibility challenged, especially with a spoiler, but it’s no substitute for turning to look.
+ 1,000!
Since the gizmo makers in China weren’t available…call up Gentex Corporation (GNTX) who makes those rear view mirrors with rear camera displays integrated into them. Ever since the thought of the rule first came out, their stock has either bumped or dropped with each release and delay. They’ve been basically figuring this rule into their business model.
Fine, make ’em mandatory.
Any other solution is preferable to the madness proposed by some here to lower beltlines and raise greenhouses. No one makes money on a luddite solution like that.
I suspect people would keep buying the cars with high beltlines. Only us nerds like cars with real visibility.
Crash and roll over standards have killed visibility. And these standards exist primarily to appease the 1% mouth-breather demographic that can’t navigate curves and exit-ramps with a BAC of .20
I really like using backup cameras for parking small trailers or putting a small boat into the water. Small boats and especially jet skis are tough to see while backing up in the modern CUV. Bigger boats and trailers are just in the way of the camera.
Open the hatch. Then you have all the visibility in the world.
Two weeks ago, I purchased a new Buick Verano and it is the first car I have owned with a back-up camera. At this point, I am still using it as a guide when backing up. The time proven, tried and true procedure of putting your right arm over the passenger seat and turning your head to look behind you when reversing is best, in my opinion.
Mr. Bill
I still look in my blind spot even though I have a blind spot detection system. Although, I do trust the system a lot more now.
When I had to drive panel vans the total dependence on big mirrors became second nature. Had no mishaps even in crazy-dense settings.
I’ll get used to these too, but I’d rather not have to.
Doesn’t that mean it’s not really a blind spot?
Someone needs to tell the government to just give it up. The industry already made the things available on just about every model, while they sat there wasting their time and our money.
Here’s a thought: why don’t they just design vehicles you can see out of.
Because you could only market that “novelty” for a MY or two.
Onboard video monitoring should give years of new features to crow about and work into expensive options packages.
“Well, yeah, you have to take the flashing chameleon skin paint option along with it, but you wouldn’t to be without the added safety for your family, would you?”
A smart company can recycle old cell phone cameras and screens and make a killing selling cheap back up cameras to car manufacturers… If they are that cheap it won’t matter if it is mandatory, will it?
I would use it scan from low wall and other car damaging obstructions in parking lots.
A smart fortwo does not need a back-up camera. Making such a car have one, is an exercise in absurdity.
It would make more sense to legislate visibility requirements; e.g. an object of a certain height in certain positions must be possible to detect behind the vehicle and whether one does so by looking back through the rear window, or looking in the mirrors, or looking at a rear-view-camera display screen, or getting an audible “beep” that one is about to hit something, is up to the vehicle manufacturer.
A Smart For Two is a ” exercise in absurdity” adding a back-up camera to it would only make it more ridiculous
I agree – if there is no issue, then there is no need for a camera. But I would rather have one and not need it than not have it and wish I did.
If the smart car gets a backup camera then motorcycles need one too! And Electric wheelchairs!!1!
This will just help to sell more Honda Accords, where every Accord comes with a backup camera.
In fairness, the new Accord is the first step away from the crushed roofline craze of which I’m aware. It reminds me of the pleasantly spacious sweep of the Ford Five Hundred’s roof.
See my post up the thread! My 2013 Sedan is loads better than my 2006, itself no slouch! Honda definitely kept from the longer, lower-greenhouse, heavier meme with this generation of Accord. A 6’5″ person could sit behind a 6’5″ driver in my car and have adequate legroom. Honda had to give up its legendary double-wishbone, multi-link front suspension to do it, but even at 99.999/1000ths, the car handles as well or better than its predecessors. (It just doesn’t feel as confident right off the bat–an adjustment is necessary. But the car WILL hang with you, and is easily one of the best handlers in the midsize segment, with the Mazda 6 probably a little better, and the Fusion around the same as, the Accord.)
I’ll never test or, hopefully, need the kind of handling competence you mention. I drive slow and turn slower.
But the blessed relief of a major mfr FINALLY showing signs of stopping this squashed greenhouse phenomenon is making me hopeful.
I have had my cheap Chinese backup camera for two years.. It is hooked up to a not-so-cheap Alpine double DIN touch screen bluetooth telephone stereo thungy, which gives a decent picture. From now on, all my cars will have a backup camera. Combined with the original audio parking sensors, it maks me confident that no child, cat or concrete block is behind the car. Or, if you want, you can use the camera to make sure your mother-in-law Is behind the car at the right moment.
The REALLY old geezers don’t look over their shoulders to back up, or even check their blind spots. If it’s not in their mirrors, it doesn’t really exist…
They back up slowly enough so that whatever they hit, won’t leave much of a mark.
They’re just waiting for Dorothy to come along with her oil can to lube their stiff necks
Anybody here remember their first time driving a minivan or an SUV?
Anyone remember when they were 16 and back parking for the first time??
C’mon guys besides relying on the IMAGINARY sense of distance between my bumper
and the bumper behind, VISION is NON-EXISTENT!Period
Especially when parallel parking in NYC or any other metro area.
I for one appreciate the technology, technology that is good and here to stay.
For which i am also curious to which lobbyist or corporate affiliate is to blame for this delay.
Seriously anyone here saying that the good ol arm behind headrest beats the camera
has either only used .2 mega pixel cheapo camera on either the Honda’s and Toyota’s 2inch screen
or has never experienced a car with proper backup cam commonly found in higher end makes/models.
In the future(100% sure/already going on in other countries) reliance on this technology will be inevitable.
Sure it has it’s faults, but you guys are already sounding like stubborn old grandpa with his spirit still stuck in 1969.
Embrace it. I know this countries got some talented drivers that can back up a forty foot trailer with hand mirror and 20/20 vision.
But this post here is about how we’re preparing for another safety standard being added on and the implied costs of manufacturing.
Not about whether you like it or not.
“Seriously anyone here saying that the good ol arm behind headrest beats the camera …”
… is driving something from 20 years ago where turning around doesn’t just give you a better view of the trunk lid and C pillar.
The camera law isn’t for for parallel parking. Many of us can do just fine parallel parking without a backup camera or proximity sensors. Further, the downside of a parking mistake is a scraped bumper or other cosmetic bump.
The law is to keep people from running into toddlers whose parents/nannies/daycare let them run wild in parking lots. To this end, I hope the government’s delay gives enough time to ditch the backup camera system and mandate, instead, a fully automated people-detection system that automatically applies the brakes if a human is detected behind the vehicle. Such a system would have no screen or other driver distractions. After automatically braking and sounding a warning chime, the system could allow the driver to back up again, which would cause a minimum of obtrusion while still letting the driver proceed.
The problem I see with backup cameras is that people either ignore them while backing up or they use them exclusively and so aren’t looking for much more common dangers like oncoming traffic. Having an automated safety system with no UI would give the best of both worlds.
Agree: Cars should be smart enough to stop themselves, forward or backward. A camera and display will just make drivers lazier than ever.
If you can’t keep control of your spawn, you deserve to have them run over. I am quite tired of little heathens running wild in public like savages.
Now, now… in the Global Village, they’re our spawn, too.
Having used a new car for a while with a backup camera it certainly makes driving easier and safer. That’s a rare technological win – unlike say an automatic transmission which just makes it easier.
They need to require rear amber turn signal before they try this.
Seriously, and NTHSA is slow!!! I looked on there websites and most of there initiatives are delayed due to lacking staff. All the more reason to ditch our own standards. At least the other regulation body in the word has enough people to get things done.
“They need to require rear amber turn signal before they try this.”
Absolutely! In fact, I’ve been noticing even some european cars with the red rear signals now. Actually, it really doesn’t matter about the signals because nobody seems to use them anyway. :-(
Red turn signals?! OMFG! My single largest pet peeve about today’s cars! Manfs treat rear lights like fashion accessories. BMW, VW, Subaru, Acura, et al go BACK AND FORTH on a semi-yearly basis between red and amber. WTF? How long will the USA be stuck in 1959?! JFC…
Good point. In the fraction of a second i need to make decisions I never know if someone is hitting the breaks or turning…
They need to require cars with robotic metal hands. As soon as the driver tries to blame his accident on the lack of a backup camera, or a front camera, or an amber turn signal, or a robotic hedgehog, the robotic metal hand will proceed to extend and (w)itch-slap the offending idiot.
That and mandate that people actually know how to drive before they get driver’s licenses. Make everything else optional. The smart people will get what they need. The stupid people who don’t know how to drive will quickly be killed on the road, and Darwin will leave us with a motoring paradise.
[/TONGUE] [/CHEEK]
Even the smartest people can make mistakes. Anyway, that robotic hand you describe is called a ‘lawyer,’ and it comes into effect once your mistake is gross enough.
I would much prefer the feds mandate visibility instead of a camera.
visibility is at odds with crash regs, looks and aerodynamics. Future cars will have no windows or mirrors and be entirely drive by camera.
I can dig it… Unmanned Ground Vehicles
Load it up in the driveway, say “Take this ammo to Grandma’s house; bring back pie and cookies.”
Cool, not only will cars drive themselves, we won’t even have to go with. Just stay home and send the car to do everything. At the end of the day it comes home with the kids, the groceries and Grandma’s pie and cookies
You got it… living life entirely from my nice, cool basement. Every 12 yr-old’s dream come true.