Back up camera stupidity: NHTSA, look here.

[HRH]

Here's one for you:

 

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20130928/GPG03/309280260/Groups-sue-over-feds-failure-make-vehicle-backup-rules

 

 

Why mandate backup cameras when the problem is systemic?  We keep building bigger vehicles with more blind spots and huge pillars.  Here's an idea, build things so you can actually SEE!!!  Toyota is the biggest offender I know of in this area.  The Yaris is horrid, the trucks are horrid.  They're not the only ones though.  Our Chevy Sonic is equally horrid.  Pretty much every vehicle NAPA has as a delivery vehicle in our area besides the old S10s have shit for visibility.  I can't even see out the side of the Sonic when pulling into traffic at a 45 degree angle.  I have to crane my neck all around.

 

Would you like to know what the problem is?  WE'RE BUILDING VEHICLES TOO SAFELY!  Older cars were louder and more dangerous.  You know what that did?  It made you fear and respect the automobile, as it should be feared and respected!  It's a big heavy piece of sheet metal that will kill you given your inattention.  By definition, a MACHINE that you operate.

 

And as much as I hope kids don't get hit, are we seriously going to try and mandate back up cameras in ALL NEW CARS because of 2-300 deaths per year?  Seriously?  I don't mean to sound callous, but exactly what percentage of highway deaths is that? .00000009?  That's hardly a reason to require yet another system that masks the overall problem of vehicle construction and driver stupidity in this country.  Build more cars that are dangerous, and train people to operate them effectively.  Get rid of this "everyone gets a license at 16, it's their right" mentality.

 

Until we get our heads out of our collective asses, I will continue to drive old cars.  I'll fight to keep as many as possible on the road, without cupholders or other distractions.  We're becoming a nation of wusses!  Stop it!

 

End rant.

[freekwonder]

Your second paragraph makes any valid point you may have had in the future Null and Void. 

[DAT510]

Lol

[DanielC]

You can try to "idiot proof" almost anything, but trust me there is always a better idiot.

 

I do not know about other 1970 or so Datsuns, but my 521 has no neutral safety switch.

[Draker]

It's nice to see what's behind you while you're texting.

[Komeuppance]

Toyota drivers don't need to see what's behind them, the miles of traffic they're holding up and other's time they're wasting does not concern them since they're the only ones on the road.

 

Trying to correct ignorance with mandates of new technology for the lazy is ignorant itself, and creates a false sense of security.

 

-Robert

[Rocket Dog]

I drove a Honda Pilot for a year or so, it had the backup camera and displayed it in the rear view mirror.  My two cents, it was good at spotting a low hazard that was below the rear window, but that's about it.

 

When I walk out to the car I note what's behind it before I get in.  When driving, I turn my head before a lane change, never trust the rear view mirror.  That said, the exterior mirror(s) and interior mirror should be adjusted so you see a continuous left-to-right image of what's going on behind you.  It's surprising how many people don't think about that.

 

My take away from the original post is, you can load up the vehicle with safety devices, if for no other reason than to save us from the stupidity of others, but at the end of the day it comes down to the responsibility of the driver in operating their vehicle.  So sayeth the old guy.

[HRH]

Your second paragraph makes any valid point you may have had in the future Null and Void. 

Only if you value safety over function! :)

[HRH]

I'd like to start a new, national driving program where your ability to get a license is dependent on these drivers approving you:

 

[datzenmike]

I drove a tractor when I was 6. Ten years later I was ready for a car. :lol: My first car that I drove was 2 years old and didn't have seat belts or dual master cylinder. The dash was hard metal, with paint and chrome for padding. Radial tires were only seen on XKEs and MGs. Tungsten headlights that only showed you 1/4 of the distance needed to stop in the dark with no side marker lights and front parking lights that were normally off when the headlights were switched to ON.

 

Cars have come a long way in 50 years and are safer to operate and be in. The problem as I see it is that people have become worse drivers. Basically any half wit is allowed to drive with almost no training or oversight. Basically a driver's license is a right not a privilege.

 

Mrs.D has a Toyota Matrix. I don't drive it much. Our '97 Ford Econoline work van is easier to park and back up. You can do it with mirrors. The Matrix is a forest of headrests and the seat design, while comfortable, is impossible to turn and look behind you. I don't like reversing in it and do so, slowly so that others can see what I'm doing and react.

[yellowdatsun]

I like them, at least on my work van. Probably wouldn't mind one on the Frontier either, because it lets you see exactly how close you are when backing up.

 

The problem with mandating equipment like this, is that each time they do it it teaches the public to be even more lazy about their driving skills. People drive like asshats because they know there are 18 airbags to save them. And they're right. You drive a lot more cautiously in a car without them. The camera will teach people to just use that, instead of actually looking around when they back up.

 

All this extra crap adds a ton of money to the price of a car. The backup cameras aren't free. In fact, on some new cars they cost about $400. The consumer is going to end up paying for it in the purchase price. Hence why a lot of people can't afford a new car. Those 18 airbags, 5mph bumpers, and other crap all costs money, and adds weight. The old Honda Civics of the 80's and early 90's could get 40mpg, along with the Geo Metro, because they weren't saddled with all this extra safety crap. Now cars are catching up with that 40mpg rating again, but imagine where we'd be now without having to make up for all the extra weight. Maybe 60mpg? What I wouldn't give for a new car that's simple, light weight, and get's 50 mpg.....like a new version of the 88 Civic.

[datzenmike]

Safety 'crap' weight is fine with me. Back up cameras are not a safety item in my mind just a convenience for lazy drivers and an way around dead spots for designers who should be making cars easier to see out of not trying to dazzle with trendy designs.

 

Navigation systems, heated seats, electric mirrors, TVs, electric locks, keyless entry, GPS, power windows are all not needed, sure they are sometimes handy but look at my first post about driving my first scar. All add weight including the 200Km of copper wiring. 99.99999% of the time we knew were we were going back then. The other .000010% we found our way around by reading a MAP for fuck's sake. Yes, it required learning a skill instead of being spoon fed directions. Guess what? we got there just a surely but maybe not as fast, and so what? who was in a hurry then when you allowed for such a thing. What a concept that was to take your time, something slowly eroded away so that today everyone, I mean EVERYONE speeds, all the time. Next time you are driving, remember what I just said about speeding and look down at your speedometer. I guarantee, I GUARANTEE, you will be over the speed limit. Sure, you'll say it's only 2km or MPH (likely more than 10km / 6MPH)  It's still speeding. 

 

Cars may be safer now but one thing hasn't changed and that's a human's reaction times.

[john510]

Careless and or stupid people will injure or kill no matter what safety features they add to newer cars.Maybe they add all this crap so that its safer to use your cell phone while driving :rofl:

[thisismatt]

Any of you guys try to drive a new Hyundai Elantra?  Aweful. I've gotten them twice as rental cars.  Even at over 6'3" I can't see the hood at all, making parking a hope & dream scenario, and then can't see the traffic light while stopped at the light without craning my neck to the side.  Rear visibility is even worse.

[Guest Rick-rat]

I like my back up camera on my F250 for hooking up the travel trailer, much easier than directions from wife

[DAT510]

I have no problems with the 2013 accord.

Rear camera isnt obnoxious.

[OkieRA29]

I drive a Honda Pilot for work.  The only reason I use the back up camera is to make sure I have enough room to open the tailgate when backing into a parking spot.  Otherwise, my head is on a swivel, back up camera doesn't like weird angles on the sun and other bright lights.  Also, it is in a location that gets easily covered with mud and road grime.  Most of the time it is useless.

[GRpufnstuf]

I remember reading new cars mags as a kid in the '80's and railing to my friends about the testers obsession about blind spots.

I can't remember the last time I read 'blind spot' in a magazine (unless it was the '80's)

 

And I agree that saftey equipment is making cars more expensive, heavier, larger, with lower mpg as a result.

 

Peoe talk to me about the Prius like its magic and I refer them to the first honda civic VX where VVT and skinny tires were used to achieve close to 50mpg. No batteries or electric motors needed. Those items are heavy too by the way.

 

If this country took driver training seriously. Like Northern European countries or even Canada we wouldn't need the extra expense and weight of all this safety gear. I've been driving since I was 13 (legally since 19) and have ever collided with another car or caused property damage with my car.

And I drive like a maniac when there's nobody else in the car and nobody on the streets .

 

I have even been rear ended 2 times but have avoided many more than that by being aware of my surroundings and getting out of the way of the person talking/texting/putting on makeup as they rush up behind me.

 

I drive nearly every day in LA and see some of the worst driving this country has to offer.

 

I say we start by making penalties for accidents more severe like the Euros do.

 

I worked at a Volvo dealer for a few years and had many customers tell me they buy "...a safe Volvo because I'm a bad driver"

 

I tried to point out he problem to the public's safety once or twice. It it never went over well.

 

If you are a constant problem on the road here is your bus pass.

 

This will remove the dangerous drivers quickly and the actuarial tables will change so our insurance will drop. Cars won't need redundant safety features mostly designed to protect the bad driver and not the outside world. So cars will get lighter and cheaper.

 

If our government cared more about people than money this would already be the case. But just about anyone can buy their way back into a car seat no matter how many DUI, hit and run, traffic accidents, speeding tickets etc. they have.

 

I like my cars like Lotus designs cars. Light and nimble. My 620, a truck, is 2300lbs (2550 with me in it) and my 2006 Mini Cooper S weighs over 3000lbs with me on board and its borderline subcompact! It also gets mediocre mileage for a car so small. If it was lighter it would need less tire and less power to be as fun while getti g a lot better mpg.

 

ANYway, light weight old cars are awesome I just wish I didn't feel like I need the extra weight of a roll cage to be safe on the streets these days.

[Z-train]

Your second paragraph makes any valid point you may have had in the future Null and Void.

Quite the opposite.If you buy a vehicle based on safety,then you are planning to get in an accident.

[king bee66]

i look at it this way, the more idiot proof that new cars become, the less likely it will be that someone will back into my parked car.  someone recently was pulling out of a parallel spot and knocked over my friends bike.  it was a blue suzuki ninja, not a small bike that could easily be overlooked. he ended up getting a settlement but he was without a bike for a couple of months.  look at the bright side, unless you are intending on buying a new car, this will help alleviate fenderbenders from happening

[thisismatt]

Uh, people hit cars that are plainly visible during parking.  The only way I see idiot proofing cars is to have ejection seats where nearby drivers can vote the driver off the island.

[Z-train]

There must be a rip in the space/time continuum as we agree again.

[datzenmike]

Quite the opposite.If you buy a vehicle based on safety,then you are planning to get in an accident.

.

 

Not always. Nothing wrong with safety devices. If available, a prudent driver takes the most advantage of them he can. Driving is a form of risk management. You should reduce your exposure as much as you can.  People didn't buy cars with safety glass windshields and tempered glass sides and back because they planned an accident. They didn't buy cars with seat belts and padded dashes for this either. Accidents CAN happen to you while you sit parked or safely driving along. Safety equipment (not the ridiculous rear view cameras for lazy drivers) protects YOU from THEM.

 

 

I think I see where you are going with this Bill. Correct me if wrong, but you're saying that a safe driver doesn't need them as much as a poor driver.  To a point I agree if you are the only one out there driving.

[HRH]

Here's the thing, I'm all for rear view cameras.  It's a great idea, especially for vans and Toyotas you can't see out of.  What I'm opposed to is MANDATING them by government enforcement.  Same thing with those stupid tire pressure monitoring systems.  It's now going to be ILLEGAL to bypass those.  Which means if you want aftermarket wheels on your whatever car, you're going to still need a set of expensive TPMS sensors, or the tire shop won't relinquish your vehicle.  That's already in place and it's fucking stupid.

 

Regardless of an idiot device telling you your tires are low, 90% of people will ignore it anyway.  How about oil lights?  Those aren't government mandated and are fairly important, yet people still continually drive with them on until they grenade their motor and wonder what happened.

 

Fuck the government mandating bullshit parts that add increased costs for manufacturers and ultimately the consumer.

[Z-train]

.

 

Not always. Nothing wrong with safety devices. If available, a prudent driver takes the most advantage of them he can. Driving is a form of risk management. You should reduce your exposure as much as you can.  People didn't buy cars with safety glass windshields and tempered glass sides and back because they planned an accident. They didn't buy cars with seat belts and padded dashes for this either. Accidents CAN happen to you while you sit parked or safely driving along. Safety equipment (not the ridiculous rear view cameras for lazy drivers) protects YOU from THEM.

 

 

I think I see where you are going with this Bill. Correct me if wrong, but you're saying that a safe driver doesn't need them as much as a poor driver.  To a point I agree if you are the only one out there driving.

If we didn't need "them" then (when you & I started driving)we don't need them now.