News on Rear Camera
06-21-2013, 10:11 AM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
News on Rear Camera
Government delays rear camera for 18 months:
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...105/1148/rss25.
Should Chevy leave it in the C7 or pull it to save cost to buyer?
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...105/1148/rss25.
Should Chevy leave it in the C7 or pull it to save cost to buyer?
06-21-2013, 10:22 AM
#2
Moderator
Leave it. It is already designed in and the pricing has already been set. Since the C7 already has the screen, the camera adds very little additional cost.
06-21-2013, 10:22 AM
#3
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,657
Received 4,116 Likes
on
1,470 Posts
2020 C8 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
The cost is not the camera. It's the TFT screen. On a lot of cheaper cars, they don't have a fancy TFT screen.
This new requirement would mandate not only the camera and wiring but also the screen and hardware to run it for every car made and sold in America. So, it would increase the cost to everyone.
On the C7, it has the TFT screen already built in with their electronic package. Adding the Camera is a minimal cost, which is why they did it.
In a nutshell, this has nothing to do with expensive cars like the C7 but a relief to manufacturers who don't want to increase the cost and complexity to their cheaper / plain jane cars.
This new requirement would mandate not only the camera and wiring but also the screen and hardware to run it for every car made and sold in America. So, it would increase the cost to everyone.
On the C7, it has the TFT screen already built in with their electronic package. Adding the Camera is a minimal cost, which is why they did it.
In a nutshell, this has nothing to do with expensive cars like the C7 but a relief to manufacturers who don't want to increase the cost and complexity to their cheaper / plain jane cars.
06-21-2013, 10:31 AM
#4
Melting Slicks
I'm looking forward to having it. In the scheme of things, the minor cost isn't relevant. As pointed out already, the screen is already in the car, and the cost of the camera is negligible.
06-21-2013, 10:36 AM
#5
Team Owner
Member Since: Apr 2001
Location: S.W. Ohio. . . . . . NRA Life Member
Posts: 54,199
Received 173 Likes
on
107 Posts
When I replaced the head-unit in my 2002, the new one had a backup camera input.... which I didn't connect up for the first year or two.
I then added a camera... and it was great !!! I wish I had done it sooner. I mostly back into parking spaces with the Corvette; it sure made it a lot easier to be properly aligned, and I knew (better) when to stop.
I then added a camera... and it was great !!! I wish I had done it sooner. I mostly back into parking spaces with the Corvette; it sure made it a lot easier to be properly aligned, and I knew (better) when to stop.
06-21-2013, 10:39 AM
#6
Melting Slicks
It's not like Chevrolet is going to suddenly remove the feature from their system that is already being installed on the C7 cars that have been in production. That's ridiculous.
The government doesn't mandate a head-up display, so it's like starting a thread that ponders if Chevrolet will remove it because there's no mandate.
A government mandate of a backup camera is stupid in the first place. The marketplace should decide if backup cameras are important, not the government. Besides, I've seen too many people who backup their cars solely by backup camera, and that in itself is dangerous. Another case of the government solving a problem by introducing three new problems.
The government doesn't mandate a head-up display, so it's like starting a thread that ponders if Chevrolet will remove it because there's no mandate.
A government mandate of a backup camera is stupid in the first place. The marketplace should decide if backup cameras are important, not the government. Besides, I've seen too many people who backup their cars solely by backup camera, and that in itself is dangerous. Another case of the government solving a problem by introducing three new problems.
06-21-2013, 11:11 AM
#9
Le Mans Master
A government mandate of a backup camera is stupid in the first place. The marketplace should decide if backup cameras are important, not the government. Besides, I've seen too many people who backup their cars solely by backup camera, and that in itself is dangerous. Another case of the government solving a problem by introducing three new problems.
The impetus for the regulation are the few hundred kids that get run over annually, but another benefit are the millions of us whose property is used as a bump-stop - also non-participants in somebody else's car purchasing decision.
Will some people reverse into traffic with their eyes glued to the display and get T-boned? My guess is that these are the same people who are reversing into traffic with their eyes glued to the (significantly narrower angle-of-view) rear-view mirror and getting T-boned today.
06-21-2013, 11:18 AM
#10
06-21-2013, 11:24 AM
#11
It's not like Chevrolet is going to suddenly remove the feature from their system that is already being installed on the C7 cars that have been in production. That's ridiculous.
The government doesn't mandate a head-up display, so it's like starting a thread that ponders if Chevrolet will remove it because there's no mandate.
A government mandate of a backup camera is stupid in the first place. The marketplace should decide if backup cameras are important, not the government. Besides, I've seen too many people who backup their cars solely by backup camera, and that in itself is dangerous. Another case of the government solving a problem by introducing three new problems.
The government doesn't mandate a head-up display, so it's like starting a thread that ponders if Chevrolet will remove it because there's no mandate.
A government mandate of a backup camera is stupid in the first place. The marketplace should decide if backup cameras are important, not the government. Besides, I've seen too many people who backup their cars solely by backup camera, and that in itself is dangerous. Another case of the government solving a problem by introducing three new problems.
It's standard.
06-21-2013, 11:26 AM
#12
Moderator
06-21-2013, 11:57 AM
#14
Absolutely necessary to see the elderly guy driving the white GS with the poser black rims (admittedly doesn't track the car- now admits he just cares about looks) as you leave him in the dust babbling about how pretty his car is 
06-21-2013, 01:02 PM
#15
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Aug 1999
Location: Should this thoughtful, valuable contribution meet with no acknowledgement or 'thanks' this post----
Posts: 16,382
Received 399 Likes
on
257 Posts
I like mine, but if you don't keep the wide angle lens clean, it ain't worth chit! Now, can the gubment factor people's car wash habits into the scenario?
If they do, will you be able to wash your car on odd days, or even?
If they do, will you be able to wash your car on odd days, or even?
06-21-2013, 01:39 PM
#17
How are black wheels now poser? I thought only posers referred to wheels as "rims".
06-21-2013, 02:46 PM
#18
06-21-2013, 04:19 PM
#19
Melting Slicks
If it's anything like the camera in my wife's LaCrosse, it is a piece of crap. The resolution is terrible and there are no marking lines to tell how far you are away from an object. I think it's worth about $5, so removing it doesn't save much money.
