Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-29-2012, 02:33 PM   #41
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by easysurfer View Post
The push back may be questioning should this be a law or just an option? IMHO, I have no problem having this as a law (like child seats) as I can't even imagine what a parent would go through if they lose a child by accidently backing into them.
That would be awful of course, no one would disagree. But does it warrant all of us spending $2.2B per year, for a solution that would be about 50% effective, and saving lives at a cost of $20M each? And if there are other safety mandates that could save many more lives at less cost, why back overs vs others?
__________________

__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is online now   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 02-29-2012, 02:35 PM   #42
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by easysurfer View Post
For the majority, the safetly device may not be required. But the one time it pays off can be a godsend. I feel that way about ABS brakes. I had that as an option when I bought my car (a long time ago).

Did I just blow my money on that option? The answer is "Yes" until one day driving in a blizzard and I had to press and keep on pressing (ABS brakes pumping and all) which without it I may not be here typing today.

The push back may be questioning should this be a law or just an option? IMHO, I have no problem having this as a law (like child seats) as I can't even imagine what a parent would go through if they lose a child by accidently backing into them.
I will also agree some of what you say...

I can still remember Honda sales people saying that Honda was not convinced that airbags were good, so that is why they did not offer them... it did not take long for them to change...

What concerns me is that they are mandating a CAMERA, not some back up avoidance system... why specify the solution when there are others that work just as well...

I will like this on my SUV, but am not sure that it will help that much on my cars... and if people only use it to back up we will have a lot more accidents as most of the problems I encounter are cars coming from the side... I will also like it since they are not offered as an option on the cheap model now...
__________________

__________________
Texas Proud is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 02:43 PM   #43
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
easysurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,884
Shhh! A gov't mandate? Where have we heard those words?

I actually think that if the feature was left as an option, most people would choose the rear view monitor as that'll be the last and greatest feature that most want in a car. Kinda like the the keyless remotes (though, I'm one of the hold overs who don't have a keyless remote).

In comparison to air bags, which were invented many years before becoming law, I think most will not even resist the rearview monitors.

I'm sure the in the arguement for the law, the gov't probably says studies show that having this would save so many lives, and therefore, it's required in all cars (like seat belts, air-bags, child seats).
__________________
Have you ever seen a headstone with these words
"If only I had spent more time at work" ... from "Busy Man" sung by Billy Ray Cyrus
easysurfer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 03:52 PM   #44
Moderator Emeritus
Bestwifeever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by W2R View Post
Overall, I'm actually glad the implementation is delayed since it scares me to think that some would depend on these cameras and stop looking directly and using their mirrors. The cameras just aren't as good as direct line of sight, IMO. ...
If we had direct lines of sight we wouldn't need the systems--the person I referred to who was run over was bending down near her own car, and no way could the driver have seen her as he backed out of his own space.

I don't really have an opinion on them (and I don't sweat about them being required--required back-up detection systems are on my "don't sweat it" list). If they're required, we'll have them whether we want them or not. I can see the auto mfrs. first making them part of an option package--you want the built-in kiddy video/the extra cup holders/the heated leather seats, you're getting the back up camera too.

I've been in a car with the backup detector that beeps when your car gets close to something behind you and that system seems adequate and less expensive, and doesn't visually distract the driver.
__________________
“Would you like an adventure now, or would you like to have your tea first?” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan
Bestwifeever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 04:10 PM   #45
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,418
I dunno. Should this be mandated? Not sure. Does it replace turning around and looking directly at the reverse path? It should not. But many drivers just look in the rear view mirror and back up. Is this an improvement over that and will it make those drivers less dangerous? Yes.
__________________
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 04:17 PM   #46
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
easysurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,884
My friend's van had both an audio beep and visual screen through the rear view mirror. Looking visually, the depth perception seemed difficult to judge. Of course, that could be since I was viewing from the back seat. I'd find the audio beep as really helpful as an aid to always headchecking.
__________________
Have you ever seen a headstone with these words
"If only I had spent more time at work" ... from "Busy Man" sung by Billy Ray Cyrus
easysurfer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 04:28 PM   #47
Moderator
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eee Bah Gum
Posts: 21,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestwifeever View Post
I've been in a car with the backup detector that beeps when your car gets close to something behind you and that system seems adequate and less expensive, and doesn't visually distract the driver.
Then you'd love the car we hired for our vacation in Spain and France a few years ago. DD and SIL came with us so we hired a large, station-wagon style car, and the place we stayed and villages round about all had very narrow streets and associated tight parking. The car happened to come with all round proximity detectors and they were brilliant for maneuvering into tight parking spaces.

Along with beeping that became more rapid as you got closer to an object you had a visual display (not a video) showing which parts of the car were close to colliding.

As to whether or not to make it mandatory, I have no view on the matter, but if a proximity detection system is offered for the next car we buy I would pay for it.
__________________
Retired in Jan, 2010 at 55, moved to England in May 2016
Now it's adventure before dementia
Alan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 04:35 PM   #48
Moderator Emeritus
Bestwifeever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16,372
You know what I really want in my next car? A detection system for the curb/car stopper thingies in parking lot. I wish I had a nickel for every time we pull too close to them in our low-bumper Honda and hear that crunch of the bottom of the bumper getting acquainted with the concrete. I mean, really, if they can put lighted makeup mirrors in my visor, why can't they....

I'm writing my congresscritter right now!
__________________
“Would you like an adventure now, or would you like to have your tea first?” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan
Bestwifeever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 05:36 PM   #49
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan View Post
As to whether or not to make it mandatory, I have no view on the matter, but if a proximity detection system is offered for the next car we buy I would pay for it.
Just generally responding to the many posts about mandatory or not mandatory - a compromise, that wouldn't really cost anyone anything would be: How about the Gov't require that any safety feature like this be sold 'unbundled'? Seems to me, you can only get this on some models by buying the $3000 navigation package and so on. Maybe the car cos would lose a little on people who buy the bundle to get that back-up camera, but I bet that number is small, and would be offset by a higher number buying the back up feature (whether camera or sensor). But unbundling would very likely increase the adoption rate of this technology. Maybe to the point it voluntarily becomes standard equipment?

Even though I'm a 'small govt' kind of guy, I don't have a problem with the govt mandating safety features for cars when it makes sense. Safety isn't always all that evident or 'marketable' to the consumer, and sometimes we want cars to be safer as everybody benefits, and don't really want some people 'opting out' on that feature. As some of us have said, there must be bigger 'bang for the buck' mandates than this one (and maybe that is why the delay).


-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 08:50 PM   #50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
easysurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,884
Was watching on the evening news today that the 2014 deadline has been delayed. Reasons for further study and also the automakers don't like the added cost.
__________________
Have you ever seen a headstone with these words
"If only I had spent more time at work" ... from "Busy Man" sung by Billy Ray Cyrus
easysurfer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 09:40 PM   #51
Moderator
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eee Bah Gum
Posts: 21,084
I agree that it would be a good to mandate that proven safety devices on cars that are not required by law should be offered as extras without bundling them with a bunch of other stuff.

I didn't know my 2007 car had electronic stability control until I needed it when I skidded on a wet road 3 years ago. I don't think it is a mandated safety feature in the USA yet, but it has a much bigger potential to save lives.

Quote:
The NHTSA in United States concluded that ESC reduces crashes by 35%. Additionally, Sport utility vehicles (SUVs) with stability control are involved in 67% fewer accidents than SUVs without the system. The United States Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) issued its own study in June 2006 showing that up to 10,000 fatal US crashes could be avoided annually if all vehicles were equipped with ESC[32] The IIHS study concluded that ESC reduces the likelihood of all fatal crashes by 43%, fatal single-vehicle crashes by 56%, and fatal single-vehicle rollovers by 77-80%.
__________________
Retired in Jan, 2010 at 55, moved to England in May 2016
Now it's adventure before dementia
Alan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 09:42 PM   #52
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Just generally responding to the many posts about mandatory or not mandatory - a compromise, that wouldn't really cost anyone anything would be: How about the Gov't require that any safety feature like this be sold 'unbundled'? Seems to me, you can only get this on some models by buying the $3000 navigation package and so on. Maybe the car cos would lose a little on people who buy the bundle to get that back-up camera, but I bet that number is small, and would be offset by a higher number buying the back up feature (whether camera or sensor). But unbundling would very likely increase the adoption rate of this technology. Maybe to the point it voluntarily becomes standard equipment?

Even though I'm a 'small govt' kind of guy, I don't have a problem with the govt mandating safety features for cars when it makes sense. Safety isn't always all that evident or 'marketable' to the consumer, and sometimes we want cars to be safer as everybody benefits, and don't really want some people 'opting out' on that feature. As some of us have said, there must be bigger 'bang for the buck' mandates than this one (and maybe that is why the delay).


-ERD50

Yes... I have mentioned that it is an option in either a expensive package OR only offered on the top of the line model... I would not have a problem with them saying it has to be offered unbundled... but, I think that the car companies would price it very high as a stand alone...
__________________
Texas Proud is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 09:21 AM   #53
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Just generally responding to the many posts about mandatory or not mandatory - a compromise, that wouldn't really cost anyone anything would be: How about the Gov't require that any safety feature like this be sold 'unbundled'? Seems to me, you can only get this on some models by buying the $3000 navigation package and so on. Maybe the car cos would lose a little on people who buy the bundle to get that back-up camera, but I bet that number is small, and would be offset by a higher number buying the back up feature (whether camera or sensor). But unbundling would very likely increase the adoption rate of this technology. Maybe to the point it voluntarily becomes standard equipment?

Even though I'm a 'small govt' kind of guy, I don't have a problem with the govt mandating safety features for cars when it makes sense. Safety isn't always all that evident or 'marketable' to the consumer, and sometimes we want cars to be safer as everybody benefits, and don't really want some people 'opting out' on that feature. As some of us have said, there must be bigger 'bang for the buck' mandates than this one (and maybe that is why the delay).


-ERD50
Yes. That's a good intermediate approach.

If the estimated cost is $200 each, the reg says they must be available on all models as unbundled options for less than $400.
Making a car "camera ready" is probably very cheap (note that aftermarket systems are available), so they could even be available as dealer installed accessories.

My guess is that most new car buyers will opt for them. (I will on my next car, not because I have small children but because I figure one parking lot fender bender is more expensive than the camera.)
But, let people make that choice on their own.
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 09:27 AM   #54
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
Making a car "camera ready" is probably very cheap (note that aftermarket systems are available), so they could even be available as dealer installed accessories.
That was another thought bouncing around my brain. The govt could mandate that the cars be 'camera ready', and then you could choose dealer installed or aftermarket. Though I suspect it would be hard to find one that the dealer didn't install and add to the price on the lot. But at least un-bundling would happen.


-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 09:38 AM   #55
Moderator
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eee Bah Gum
Posts: 21,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
That was another thought bouncing around my brain. The govt could mandate that the cars be 'camera ready', and then you could choose dealer installed or aftermarket. Though I suspect it would be hard to find one that the dealer didn't install and add to the price on the lot. But at least un-bundling would happen.


-ERD50
That is a great idea. It happened in the UK around the 70's, I think, that all new cars had to have accessible anchor points for rear seat belts, and/or child seats, before it became mandated that all new cars had to have rear seat belts.
__________________
Retired in Jan, 2010 at 55, moved to England in May 2016
Now it's adventure before dementia
Alan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 06:55 PM   #56
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 486
This is what we have in the ups trucks Weldex Back Up Equipments - Weldex, WDRV-7041M, 7" RV Color Monitor 1 Camera View

The camera in the rear (mounted at the top of the truck frame) is tilted slightly down so I can view my bumper (for kiddies who want to joyride) and up to 2 car lengths behind me. I can also see the lanes on either side of the truck in the rear. FedEx has them too. Go investigate next time you see a delivery person!
__________________
tinlizzy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 10:44 PM   #57
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,616
I've learned that when I get in my Prius and there are people within a car length (loading their cars or walking by) that I have to stick my head out the window and say "Excuse me, I'm backing up!"

I still had a guy walk into my fender. In his defense, he was totally focused on his cell phone. Until he smacked it into the fender, anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ratto View Post
I'm not too familiar with the rear camera setup, but I have a couple of questions already.
Who or what can guarantee the camera lens to be kept reasonably clean? How about the device's view angel, height and minimal ambient illumination requirement? How effective is it to avoid object/person suddenly moving toward vehicle's backing path? From legal liability perspective, should vehicle transmission be disabled when it's is in reverse mode and the rear camera system malfunctions at same time? As an OEM safety device, how long should it be covered by warranty? How about its overall reliability and performance under severe environment and inclement weather?
So... from the tone of your questions I guess you're not going to want the hacker's guide to turning your Prius multi-function display screen into a mobile OTA TV receiver?
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 11:46 AM   #58
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
My guess is that most new car buyers will opt for them. (I will on my next car, not because I have small children but because I figure one parking lot fender bender is more expensive than the camera.)
Could be. It could also be the case that some auto insurers will eventually decide to give premium discounts for vehicles with this feature if it really does reduce the number of accidents and claims. That would be another factor in the cost analysis of these things.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 09:12 PM   #59
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
easysurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,884
From USA today: Chlid back-over deaths devastate families across U.S. - USATODAY.com

Pretty much the same discussion that we are having on this thread.
__________________
Have you ever seen a headstone with these words
"If only I had spent more time at work" ... from "Busy Man" sung by Billy Ray Cyrus
easysurfer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 09:28 AM   #60
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by easysurfer View Post
Awful without question, but why no broader context? Backup cameras should definitely be an option...not sure about a universal law.
Attached Images
File Type: gif Picture1.gif (11.1 KB, 1 views)
__________________

__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Polyp in Uterus???? Need some help with this one, please! Orchidflower Health and Early Retirement 18 03-02-2012 06:15 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:33 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.