Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    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 [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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?"

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • google-news-icon.png

  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • GMC Hummer EV drivers can now charge their gargantuan EVs on Tesla Superchargers, according to an announcement on GMC's website. Enabling Supercharging requires an update to the myGMC app; however, users can use the Tesla app and register temporarily as a Rivian R1S until the app update completes. Drivers who expect to use the Tesla Superchargers network regularly may wish to sign up for a $12.99 subscription through the Tesla app, which grants a 10c/kWh discount.  With a 200 kWh battery, just two charges from 20% - 80% per month would cover the membership fee. The myGMC app will also allow owners to purchase an official NACS to CCS adaptor.  While third-party NACS to CCS adapters are available for purchase, they are not officially approved for use on Tesla's network. With this change, GMC says that Hummer EV drivers now have access to approximately 195,000 charge points across North America.  Most Tesla Superchargers are of the 250kw variety, and while not specified in GMC's announcement, we suspect that the Hummer EV is not eligible to charge on the 150kw chargers, much like the Ford EVs, which cite the same 15,000 number for eligible Superchargers.  Limited to 250kw charging speeds, Hummer EV drivers may wish to limit the use of Tesla stations to a last resort while traveling as they will not reach the full 350kw charging speeds their vehicle is capable of. GM has also partnered with Flying-J / Pilot to offer 350kw charging at truck stops nationwide and is a founding member of the new IONNA Network that will offer both CCS and NACS charging without an adaptor. There is no announcement yet on Tesla Supercharger Access for their other EVs.  Drivers can identify 250kw chargers by the black collar at the end of the charging cable. View full article
    • COST, Apartment owners are very stingy even here in Liberal PNW, there is city mandates now to get apartment owners to install chargers as renters are complaining. Yet up north by my area where I live around Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Edmonds and Mukilteo Apartment owners who have installed L2 chargers rarely have vacancy so yes, it is valuable I believe and of course the Tesla Supercharger stations are packed all the time. Workwise, Seattle has been very progressive in having building owners install chargers and I had at one time posted pictures of all the chargers at my work where 2 years ago, there were 4 and now there is 20 and still they are filled up, so demand is truly there, but resistance to change is still very hard among older folks. With GOP Trump having control of the Rural he has them sold on Toxic Diesel is the life and EVs need to die, so I doubt rural will get chargers without the Feds forcing the install and then we have to deal with the idiots cutting the cables or icing the chargers. I hope there is a future way to have the cables shock the idiots that attempt to cut the cables as it is just stupid.
    • That's hella ugly, but people will buy it because it says "off road"   Look at how it tackles that gravel road that a Nissan Sentra could easily navigate.
    • True, but some larger apartment complexes or parking garages could put in level 2 chargers, maybe even level 1 for places like an airport extended parking.  If people have their car sit 12 hours at their apartment, or 8 hours in a parking garage while at work, there is opportunity there also for charing without having to build out expensive super chargers. And really it is rural America that should be embracing EV's way more because there aren't many gas stations when you get into farm country, you might have to drive 30-40 minutes to find a gas station in some parts of rural America, but they have houses with electricity and can easily charge.  
    • Meh, just another forgettable appliance...styling very similar to the Polstar something something...
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.


Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search