• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    Backup Camera Rule Pushed Back To 2015


    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    June 24, 2013

    The federal mandate for new vehicles to come equipped with backup cameras has been delayed, once again. According to Automotive News, the mandate has been pushed back to 2015 due to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration examining the cost of implementing this mandate.

    U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, said in a letter to Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., that more analysis on how much this rule will cost automakers is necessary. Previously, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said the cost of implementing the rule would be around $2.7 billion.

    Automakers aren't fully happy with this regulation due to the cost and that the regulation should apply to large vehicles, not all of them.

    "Automakers are providing cameras in cars today for greater vision and for new driver assists, and consumers should decide how best to spend their safety dollars on these technologies. This is a decision for consumers," said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

    Regulators are considering giving out incentives in their safety ratings to vehicles that have a backup camera. Currently, regulators give out incentives to those that have electronic stability control.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    I totally agree that this rule should NOT be a rule. At least it was pushed back but still this is going to move more and more people from having their own freedom machine to mass transit which is being cut due to the lack of tax dollars and the excessive social programs. States are going bankrupt and they do not see that they are to blame for this total attitude of we have to protect everyone from themselves.

    This needs to be killed along with all of the other electronic nanny devices.

    It is not the Governments responsibility to dictate what is and is not sold in a free market economy. Just as I believe it is NOT the states right to tell you, you have to wear a seat belt. Common sense tells me it is safer, but then where are the seat belts on the public buses and school buses.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    some folks need back up cameras on themselves to use the rest room........

    i think these cameras should be encouraged maybe not mandated.

    they really aren't totally useful. at least you can see if you are going to back up over your kid on his bike.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maybe because it's a new fangled item that I find useful, but I really like the backup camera feature. I'm glad to see GMC is putting it standard on many of it's vehicles, as I'd option this feature anyway.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Backup Camera is useful for SUV's and Trucks pulling a trailer as it does help ease the connection but otherwise making this a rule of must have is just stupid. If parents cannot manage their kids and teach them to not play behind a vehicle and the parent cannot check the vehicle to make sure no one is behind them when they back up then they have no one to blame but themselves.

    The GOV should not be having to think for you and protect yourself from your own lack of common sense and accountability.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is another example of why Government should take less and do less. I don't need the government forcing backup cameras down my throat or forcing me to pay for one. In fact, getting fixated on a backup camera instead of looking around when backing up is a bad idea. Also, there are other technologies (eg. sky view or sonar sensors) which if backup cameras are mandatory may be displaced -- for cost reasons or because the infotainment screen would have been occupied by back up camera imagery.

    Market demand and consumer preference should set equipment standards for automotive frills, not the opinion of some government appointee. From a purely libertarian standpoint, even mandating seat belts and airbags is an over reach -- individuals should have the right to self-endanger by driving without seat belts or buying a car without airbags, as much as they have a right to choose to ride a motorcycle, go surfing or go sky diving (all of which are arguably more dangerous that driving without a seat belt / airbag). But, this backup camera nonsense is getting to the point where government is mandating frills.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The GOV should not be having to think for you and protect yourself from your own lack of common sense and accountability.

    Actually, it's not that government should not have to do so. It is that government should not have the right to do so.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The other day I watched as a woman was trying to back her Lexus SUV into a tight parking garage parking spot while I was backing out. She was clearly using her sensors and camera... as she pulled forward towards me I was thinking, "Lady, my rear parking sensor is chrome and weighs over 150 lbs, which of us is going to win here?"

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. luquvelo
      luquvelo
      (31 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Fiat Chrysler Automobiles isn't out of the dog house when it comes to vehicles rolling away. A few months after issuing a recall on a number of models equipped with the stubby transmission lever for rolling away, NHTSA is investigating models equipped with the rotary knob gear selector for the same problem.
      The investigation is looking at the 2013–2016 Ram 1500 and the 2014–2016 Dodge Durango which have the rotary knob selector. NHTSA has gotten 43 complaints about these models moving away. Out of the 43 complaints, 25 have resulted in crashes and another 9 resulted in injuries. NHTSA also says that 34 complaints said the vehicle was moving while in park.
      FCA said it is cooperating with the investigation. In the meantime, FCA and NHTSA are urging owners to engage the parking brake
      Source: NHTSA, Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Fiat Chrysler Automobiles isn't out of the dog house when it comes to vehicles rolling away. A few months after issuing a recall on a number of models equipped with the stubby transmission lever for rolling away, NHTSA is investigating models equipped with the rotary knob gear selector for the same problem.
      The investigation is looking at the 2013–2016 Ram 1500 and the 2014–2016 Dodge Durango which have the rotary knob selector. NHTSA has gotten 43 complaints about these models moving away. Out of the 43 complaints, 25 have resulted in crashes and another 9 resulted in injuries. NHTSA also says that 34 complaints said the vehicle was moving while in park.
      FCA said it is cooperating with the investigation. In the meantime, FCA and NHTSA are urging owners to engage the parking brake
      Source: NHTSA, Reuters
    • By William Maley
      2018 was going to be the year that Ram Trucks would introduce redesigned versions of their light and heavy-duty trucks using a new platform known as DT. But it seems the light-duty truck will be the only one riding on this new platform as the redesign for heavy-duty model has been pushed back.
      Sources tell Automotive News that Ram will be refreshing the current heavy-duty truck for 2018. It is unknown when Ram will actually introduce the redesigned version using the new platform. 
      Why is Ram switching to a refresh of the current heavy-duty truck? It comes down to money. At the moment, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has nearly $7 billion in net debt at the end of third quarter. CEO Sergio Marchionne is trying to reduce this massive debt before he retires in 2018. This means a number of projects FCA is working on have been delayed in an effort to conserve cash.
      This is the case for Ram and their heavy-duty trucks. Currently, FCA only has one plant building heavy-duty trucks in Saltillo, Mexico. By taking the plant offline for a few months for retooling to build the redesigned truck, this could cause a shortage of the current-generation trucks for dealers. Going with a refresh allows Ram to continue an uninterrupted supply of trucks.
      But there comes a problem for Ram going with a refresh. Both Ford and General Motors have introduced revised versions of their heavy-duty trucks that boast better towing numbers and fuel economy.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
      Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers & Gears

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      2018 was going to be the year that Ram Trucks would introduce redesigned versions of their light and heavy-duty trucks using a new platform known as DT. But it seems the light-duty truck will be the only one riding on this new platform as the redesign for heavy-duty model has been pushed back.
      Sources tell Automotive News that Ram will be refreshing the current heavy-duty truck for 2018. It is unknown when Ram will actually introduce the redesigned version using the new platform. 
      Why is Ram switching to a refresh of the current heavy-duty truck? It comes down to money. At the moment, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has nearly $7 billion in net debt at the end of third quarter. CEO Sergio Marchionne is trying to reduce this massive debt before he retires in 2018. This means a number of projects FCA is working on have been delayed in an effort to conserve cash.
      This is the case for Ram and their heavy-duty trucks. Currently, FCA only has one plant building heavy-duty trucks in Saltillo, Mexico. By taking the plant offline for a few months for retooling to build the redesigned truck, this could cause a shortage of the current-generation trucks for dealers. Going with a refresh allows Ram to continue an uninterrupted supply of trucks.
      But there comes a problem for Ram going with a refresh. Both Ford and General Motors have introduced revised versions of their heavy-duty trucks that boast better towing numbers and fuel economy.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
      Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers & Gears
    • By William Maley
      Volkswagen and U.S. Government were going to have a hearing at U.S. Federal Court in San Francisco today for an update on the 3.0L TDI talks. But yesterday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer has pushed it back to next month.
      Reuters got their hands on a court order in which Breyer says "negotiations are continuing between the German automaker, regulators, and lawyers representing owners," and a delay "may produce a resolution of the outstanding issues."
      As we reported earlier this month, Volkswagen and regulators have possibly reached a deal for the 3.0L TDI with 60,000 of the affected vehicles being fixed, and the other 20,000 being bought back. There are still a number of issues that need to be worked out, hence the delay.
      Source: Reuters

      View full article
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)