Family cars riskier to reverse than 4WDs
Submitted: Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 02:02
ThreadID:
52251
Views:
2657
Replies:
4
FollowUps:
16
This Thread has been Archived
Trekkie (Member - WA)
Dont tell Scrubby about this
Family Cars
Reply By: Member - Barnesy (SA) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 03:24
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 03:24
The title is misleading.
It should read "reversing cameras lower risk". The article only mentioned a 4wd with a camera and family cars without cameras.
For more credibility it should have compared both types of vehicles WITHOUT cameras.
Barnesy
AnswerID:
275052
Follow Up By: Member - Doug T (FNQ) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 07:33
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 07:33
Barnesy
Your totally out of touch with the situation and what the program point was , I seen it and fully understood the point they were putting over .
#
FollowupID:
538719
Follow Up By: Member - Doug T (FNQ) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 07:35
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 07:35
Barnesy must know more about the subject than the NRMA
?
FollowupID:
538720
Follow Up By: Frank_Troopy - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:10
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:10
"NRMA spokeswoman Pam Leicester said seven luxury 4WDs fitted with the cameras scored five stars.
However, three out of four of the most popular family sedans, without the cameras, received a zero star rating on the index"
It couldn't be clearer that Barnesy is correct.
Doug, maybe you are reading what you'd like to believe rather than what is in the report. Did you actually read the article?
Cheers Frank.
FollowupID:
538732
Follow Up By: Jimbo - VIC - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:12
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:12
I read it and agree with Barnesy.
I would also add that based on the minimal cost of reversing cameras these days, it should become law that they are fitted to all cars. If that saves one child's life it is worthwhile.
FollowupID:
538735
Follow Up By: Member - Doug T (FNQ) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:33
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:33
Frank
three out of four of the most popular family sedans, without the cameras, received a zero star rating on the index" So would that not mean those cars be fitted with Camera's .And NO i'm not reading what I want to see or believe , When the real time comes just how many people will actually look at the screen, I feel it's a waste of money , and don't come back to me with all the bleeding heart stuff , I already know all about is a persons life worth this or that , I make my comments based on what I believe will be peoples laziness to actully turn it on after the novelty wears off , Kev&Deb made the most sensible and logic answer/reply , sensors will be more practible , there working 100% of the time ,
#
FollowupID:
538738
Follow Up By: Member - Doug T (FNQ) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:38
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:38
Jimbo
Be real, people are too lazy or in too much of a hurry , Sensors are a much better idea than camera's and screens , With a sensor it could be set up to apply the brake , or cut the motor , peole will hear something beter than they will see it .
#
FollowupID:
538741
Follow Up By: Shaker - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:46
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:46
What is the difference between looking in the mirrors or a reverse camera screen ??
Surely nobody, no matter how lazy, would reverse without at least using their mirrors!
FollowupID:
538742
Follow Up By: Member - Doug T (FNQ) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 10:01
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 10:01
Shaker
You don't have to turn mirrors on .
Mirrors don't show all,
Dual use screens GPS/Reversing have to be switched, Laziness takes over .
Radar type/Beam type sensors would be 100% effective, are you going to deny that.
#
FollowupID:
538747
Follow Up By: Member - joc45 (WA) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:07
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:07
"Dual use screens GPS/Reversing have to be switched, Laziness takes over"
Doug, screens, like reversing sensors, can be simply activated by the reverse switch. No manual intervention required.
Gerry
FollowupID:
538760
Follow Up By: Member - Doug T (FNQ) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:22
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:22
Gerry
I wasn't born yesterday , How else would you expect a sensor to work , or does your car have the reversing lights on when driving forward...hmmmm yeh .
#
FollowupID:
538764
Follow Up By: Member - joc45 (WA) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:51
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:51
Doug, then why the earlier comments? Hmmmm yeh
FollowupID:
538771
Reply By: Kevndeb - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:05
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:05
Our car ( pathfinder), has been fitted with reversing sensors, not a camera. The sensors are ultra sensitive, backing out of the driveway at home and at mum's place, both on slight
hill, the sensors go off at road. There is also a switch to switch them on and off, so backing trailers and caravans is not problem. Have tell you funny story, pre-delivery the car was damaged, they drilled an oval hole for one of the reversing sensors and not round hole, it is $55k PLUS car and they tried to delivered it damaged. We complained they said they would replace the bumper. They did and for next week noticed that the sensors were not working...went back to dealer the mechanic walked the car, agreed that they weren't working, opened the car boot and switch the sensors back on....I felt like an idiot, but no one explained at delivery that that switch was there....in cargo area, facing the front on the passenger's side...got them back the other day...had go back to dealer for some work and one of them left
tools in the car.. a cartonable offense
The good thing about this I have learned to back with my side mirrors, not just the reversing mirror,like in the station wagon. When we brought the car, we had the option to have a reversing camera and the dealer advised against getting one, strange for dealer not to ad value to a car, but the reversing sensors work better the dealer reckoned, and instead of watching about for other hazards, you would be spending all the time watching the camera, when you are backing and I have to agree with him.
AnswerID:
275064
Follow Up By: Off-track - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:09
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:09
How would you know there was a kid behind you when the sensor sends an erroneous signal from the road?
FollowupID:
538731
Follow Up By: Member - joc45 (WA) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:15
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:15
I've got sensors on the back of the Patrol. But they also are too sensitive, and often give false readings. But they work
well for
parking, indicating the actual distance.
I've thought of a reversing camera, esp for when the wagon is loaded to the gills and I can't see out thru the back, but given the amount of dirt and grime that builds up on the rear of the vehicle, I wonder how often one has to clean the camera.
And I don't know where I'd put the screen without making a dog's breakfast of the dash/console.
Gerry
FollowupID:
538761
Follow Up By: Member - Dunworkin (WA) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 12:51
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 12:51
Hi joc45, we have had a reversing camera on our Patrol for over 12 months now and have cleaned it only a couple of times. In that time we did close on a 9000km trip through the GCR, Tanami & GRR.
With a reversing camera on a Patrol it is hard to get the right positioning so that all the rear is covered because of the placing of the spare wheel.
If you do go down that track MM me and I will give you the details of where ours is set.
With ours we use it all the time, switching it on is not a problem because it comes up automatically when we start the car, it is set up with the GPS/DVD and when the vehicle is switched off it tucks away into the dash. Works
well for us.
Cheers
D
Cheers
D
FollowupID:
538785
Follow Up By: Kevndeb - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 14:31
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 14:31
I know about the sensor going off at the road on a
hill, it is the only time false alarms. The closer it gets to end of the driveway, the louder the beep, I don't rely on the sensor for backing, I still look and make sure that there is nothing behind me.
FollowupID:
538801
Follow Up By: Member - joc45 (WA) - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 15:47
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 15:47
Hi Kev, yeh, must admit, it is worst when reversing up the driveway, which has stone walls on each side. But even in the street, it occasionally goes off with nothing there. It certainly picks up people walking behind it tho!
Hi Dunworkin, thanks, if I go down that path, I'll get back to you. Sounds like you have a decent retractable screen which handles everything from Composite video thru to VGA - not so easy to find at the right price.
Gerry
FollowupID:
538811
Reply By: Hughd - Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:53
Wednesday, Dec 05, 2007 at 11:53
Getting back to the NRMA report... Seems to me the problem arises from the styling of cars in recent years. The high boot results in very poor rearward visibility. There is no substitute for taking a bit of care, but a rear
camera certainly helps.
AnswerID:
275091
Reply By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Thursday, Dec 06, 2007 at 11:27
Thursday, Dec 06, 2007 at 11:27
Fit both.
Neither device is the answer.
Reversing sensors give the audible warning -
camera lets you see whats there.
And while you're at it, can fit the reversing bulb that goes beep beep, like a truck.
AnswerID:
275249