Go ahead... take the humanity out of driving.

[McQueen77]

In 20 years there will be no human driven cars, only auto-driven and ZERO driver input. By then I will bust out my 67' mustang that I have hidden from the government and burn the only gas left on the planet.

Highly unlikely.

It's strange that OP picks the backup camera as a sign that the humanity is being removed from driving. Manual transmission diehards said the same thing when automatic transmissions came out...ages ago. How about drive by wire? Cruise control? Power steering. Come on.

 

[saladin]

Highly unlikely.

It's strange that OP picks the backup camera as a sign that the humanity is being removed from driving. Manual transmission diehards said the same thing when automatic transmissions came out...ages ago. How about drive by wire? Cruise control? Power steering. Come on.

I've got some level of beef against all of those as well. Cruise control and power steering, not so much. I wouldn't make the mistake of generalizing all driver aids as too much of an infringement and make a slippery slope argument as that is pretty asinine.

The issue is of reliance here. People won't be working as hard at driving anymore and will be led to depend solely on the cameras. And I hate the thought of being a bit more detached from doing so myself by having to crane my neck behind me and making sure I won't be running over some kid let loose, and shouldn't have to accept having a device in my car that tells me it is okay to back out.

 

[saladin]

I detest giant SUVs that have barely any more usable space than my GTI as well.
I often curse government intervention as well. (though I love my airbags, ABS, crash protection... :23
But the visibility - particularly rear visibility - is being styled right out of these vehicles.
The technology to supply a camera is nothing pricy anymore.
Got to be honest, I'm pretty happy with the idea of a driver being more likely to see my car, me, or my kids while reversing.

You do have a point there, I must concede.

I know I will always (sense any ego yet?) pay attention around my car and shouldn't be forced to have such a thing in the car I buy.

 

[danielj1]

Love my rear view camera. As a city dweller I can be forced into impossibly small spaces when having to parallel park. The camera makes sure I don't come into contact with anything behind me. Also makes backing out of my garage spot a breeze, keeping me from multi point turns to get out.

Nissan and BMW are doing 360 degree cams. I welcome new technologies....

 

[Draz]

They are helpful BUT they won't help the drivers that actually cause the accidents. With backup cameras, the drivers only focus on the monitor and don't look at how close they are to the cars next to them, possibly hitting a car with their front end when backing out of a spot. Also it won't help backing out when there's a car driving through the parking lot, as you will see it too late. Just like the "blind spot monitoring" light that cars have in their side mirrors. Some people don't even check their mirrors when changing lanes in the first place, what is that light going to do?

The people who are somewhat competent at driving will always be the safer ones, with or without the driving aids. The oblivious and clueless drivers will always be backing into things, cutting people off and causing deaths. Driving aids will make driving easier for drivers who are already decent drivers, not the idiots who cause the large number of accidents. Training and stricter licensing requirements are the only way to weed out those idiots.

 

[danielj1]

I was recently reading that side view mirrors will eventually go away. Blind spot cameras will take their place with interior screens aimed to proved a much better view than an mirror can.

An added benefit of doing away with side view mirrors is the removal of a part that creates drag thus decreasing fuel efficiency. This was noted in the article.

 

[johnny_p]

I wish I had a back up camera. But I live in the city so parking can get pretty tight. I see jackasses railing the cars behind them all the time here.

I don't buy the whole preventing backing over kids bs. If your kid is playing hide and seek under a running pickup truck's bumper he/she is a retard.

 

[mk6medic]

Why is this new to anyone? It was mandated for 2014 until it was delayed due to OEMs complaining about piece cost and such. Talk started well before 2012, I remember still working for Mercedes when this discussion came up.

It doesn't affect anything except provide better view for backing up. Weight is negligible and cost is almost absorbed through the astronomical volume it'll flow. Pc price alone probably dropped almost 60% especially for high volume models such as F150, Silverado, Camry, etc.

That being said, on a broader scale this is what you get when you have the government interfering with the driver. Eventually, everything will be autonomous anyways. That'll take the Human element out of it.

THIS. Grammy knows.

 

[outshined]

The worst part is the mandatory gremlin that forces you to look at the camera's display. Ugh. I want to be able to choose whether or not to look at it.

 

[Tk_mkv1]

I was recently reading that side view mirrors will eventually go away. Blind spot cameras will take their place with interior screens aimed to proved a much better view than an mirror can.

An added benefit of doing away with side view mirrors is the removal of a part that creates drag thus decreasing fuel efficiency. This was noted in the article.

That would cause even more accidents if that technology doesnt work on the cars, why cant they use lightweight material on mirrors to increase efficiency, so dumb. Reverse camera is another thing, useful in city not so much in suburbs unless driving a suburban

 

[Tk_mkv1]

Training and stricter licensing requirements are the only way to weed out those idiots.

YES!

Compared to rest of the world, learning to drive in america is easy as learning alphabets, especially drivng a womens transmission. But the public transport in america sucks so driving is more of a need, if gov can upgrade public transport like in europe, fast trains (now trains do 180mph), better metro, etc. and stricter driving regulations especially to immigrants who transfer. Whats the requirement for US to become a US citizen, you get greencard, then wait for 5 years, then remember all about american history etc. why cant they make driving as requirement as well, get temporary license for a year then take requirement.

I think driving rules should be
- 16-18 yrs should not be driving a vehicle more than 150 hp or 0-60 in no less than 9 seconds(prob a specific license in case they borrow parents car)
- parallel park
- manual transmission should be a must to learn first
- adjust mirror properly
- reaction/defensive driving tests
- skid tests
- how to position for reverse
- anger testing (fails no license)
- w/e germany requires in order to get license iirc 18-20? They can only drive cars no more than 70hp as law

 

[trev1342]

I think backup cameras are great. They are helpful. The issue is, knowing drivers already here, people will become dependent on these cameras to the point where they won't be able to back up with a standard mirror. Society is getting less intelligent and we are enabling it.

 

[trev1342]

YES!

Compared to rest of the world, learning to drive in america is easy as learning alphabets, especially drivng a womens transmission. But the public transport in america sucks so driving is more of a need, if gov can upgrade public transport like in europe, fast trains (now trains do 180mph), better metro, etc. and stricter driving regulations especially to immigrants who transfer. Whats the requirement for US to become a US citizen, you get greencard, then wait for 5 years, then remember all about american history etc. why cant they make driving as requirement as well, get temporary license for a year then take requirement.

I think driving rules should be
- 16-18 yrs should not be driving a vehicle more than 150 hp or 0-60 in no less than 9 seconds(prob a specific license in case they borrow parents car)
- parallel park
- manual transmission should be a must to learn first
- adjust mirror properly
- reaction/defensive driving tests
- skid tests
- how to position for reverse
- anger testing (fails no license)
- w/e germany requires in order to get license iirc 18-20? They can only drive cars no more than 70hp as law

I cannot agree with this more. Drivers Ed is a ridiculous and pointless system, road tests are way too easy to pass. They require 50 hours of experience, I did 350, no drivers ed, passed road test without a single error. I will never text and drive, I'm always focused and careful. I'm 17, and not too many other people my age are like this when it comes to driving. There are so many bad drivers out there.

 

[mitsuplexnyc]

Finally! If anyone here is in the TRI-state area, you'd know how dinged and scratched bumpers become, from everyone parking by brail. This is a step in the right direction IMHO.

 

[PetrolHead]

I was a pretty strong opponent to these earlier in the thread (still am), but I must say that it's been incredibly useful in my wife's 9-4X. In that car, it has a much wider perspective, and being mounted on the tailgate, can give you a pretty solid view of oncoming cars when backing out of a parking spot where you're blind, for example. Further, the monitor is inside the rear view mirror (pretty awesome), so you're looking in the mirror anyway. If the gov't mandate has the monitor in the rear view mirror like that, I support it, I think. It could actually increase mirror usage.

My ATS has it in the center screen, and I find it less useful.