Jump to content
Create New...

Industry News: NHTSA Testing Mirrorless Cars


Recommended Posts

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has begun testing vehicles that have cameras in place of real mirrors.  The request to test such devices goes back to March of 2014 when the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers along with Tesla filed a petition with the NHTSA to get approval to install based rear or side vision cameras and screens  in their vehicles.  Daimler filed a similar petition in 2015 for their heavy duty trucks. Japan and Europe have already approved the technology. 

The first car with cameras replacing the side mirrors was the Lexus ES sold in Japan, followed by the Audi e-tron in Europe back in December.  Both vehicles are sold in the U.S. with standard mirrors instead of the cameras.  Honda's coming Honda e will have the technology standard when it goes on sale in Europe later this year.

Mirrorless systems are an area where the legislation has not yet caught up with the technology according to Mark Dahncke of Audi.


View full article

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

But... they still have the pods on the side of the car... I'm not sure how much of an advancement it is.

I expect those pods to go away to numbs on the side.

I expect auto's to go this route:

See the source image

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SO much better to cast your eyes in the direction of where you intend to move (aka; merging left) than in the opposite directions. Easiler to catch someone coming out of your blind spot & into your peripheral. That said, some vehicles have pretty small side views.
I like some of the rearview tech, such as Cadillacs, but you're looking in the same direction in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, balthazar said:

SO much better to cast your eyes in the direction of where you intend to move (aka; merging left) than in the opposite directions. Easiler to catch someone coming out of your blind spot & into your peripheral. That said, some vehicles have pretty small side views.
I like some of the rearview tech, such as Cadillacs, but you're looking in the same direction in that case.

What do you think of an implementation like Lexus version?

See the source image

I myself do not mind it, while I hate BMW version.

See the source image

Audi's implementation is not bad, I think a better integration than Lexus.

See the source image

VW has a nice integration that is probably same parts as Audi.

See the source image

I can also see side nubs like this for the cameras.

See the source image

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Exactly my thought. When that tech goes on the fritz (and it will) one will wish they had that low tech mirror. 

The problem with mirrors is that somebody could just act like a vandal and break them.  The advantage is that mirror replacement is cheap compared to those cameras if someone vandalizes your car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mirrors aren't exactly cheap, either. Power control, sometimes heated, and almost always you have to buy the entire assembly. It's hundreds to start.

All the 'side view camera' images David posted above suck- both in integration, and field of vision. A distraction.

Only reason I can see for overly-complicating side views is for aerodynamics, tho at the average speed most cars travel, it's pointless.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Mirrors aren't exactly cheap, either. Power control, sometimes heated, and almost always you have to buy the entire assembly. It's hundreds to start.
 

Yeah, I had to replace a whole mirror assembly on my Jeep when the lower surround of it was cracked.  Was $380 to replace (incl. labor).   Have to take off the interior door panel to unbolt it and disconnect the wires..

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, riviera74 said:

The problem with mirrors is that somebody could just act like a vandal and break them.  The advantage is that mirror replacement is cheap compared to those cameras if someone vandalizes your car.

Which is exactly my point to my last post. Cheaper to maintain by a country mile. Oh and some insurance coverage plans will cover a broken mirror. Your HD side view screen goes out? Better talk to the manufacturer and hope it’s still under warranty. 

Edited by surreal1272
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good News cost of S-Class side mirrors have dropped in the last few years. Bad News ya still looking at $570 to $675 dollars for the mirror module and then installation, so I bet a cool $1,500 for the repair of a broken mirror. 

Estimate on the Camera nubs is probably  $1,500 to $2,500 depending on brand.

image.png

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dfelt said:

Good News cost of S-Class side mirrors have dropped in the last few years. Bad News ya still looking at $570 to $675 dollars for the mirror module and then installation, so I bet a cool $1,500 for the repair of a broken mirror. 

Estimate on the Camera nubs is probably  $1,500 to $2,500 depending on brand.

image.png

Thus solidifying my point. There’s a camera AND a screen to contend with in that situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love technology and advancement...but this continues to come off as more of a concept car experiment than anything. Mirrors still work.

Small gear shifters still work too, vs. haptic feedback buttons. Advance the efficiency, advance the refinement, advance the safety...but another HD camera and another screen?

Interesting but not needed. Curious to see who and what gets this first, if anything, here.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, caddycruiser said:

Love technology and advancement...but this continues to come off as more of a concept car experiment than anything. Mirrors still work.

Small gear shifters still work too, vs. haptic feedback buttons. Advance the efficiency, advance the refinement, advance the safety...but another HD camera and another screen?

Interesting but not needed. Curious to see who and what gets this first, if anything, here.

More than that, but those of us who have been driving a while have been trained to look in the mirrors. It would take a while to get used to looking at a different spot.

The Center rearview mirror like Cadillac and Toyota have is different. You still look in the same spot for that.  They don't work as well at night though.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another issue is taking your focal point from a transparent surface (the window) and moving to an opaque one (the door panel). That’s a possible step back from the optimum.

A LOT of ‘new tech’ (OEMs have been toying with camera mirrors for around 60 years now) is ‘just because we can’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, riviera74 said:

The problem with mirrors is that somebody could just act like a vandal and break them.  The advantage is that mirror replacement is cheap compared to those cameras if someone vandalizes your car.

Who will make all of those videos on Youtube of guys on motorcycles busting off the mirrors of bad drivers if cars no longer have them?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Is the tesla semi concept really a 1-seater??

There are two more seats behind the center seated driver.

See the source image

4 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Appears to be only one seat in this pic of a prototype from 2018..they've been road testing them for a while.

 

tesla-semi-1-e1539187374903.jpg

Robert you can actually see the fold up seat behind the drivers seat.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Pretty sucky seating spot for passenger, back in the cave, but at least the capability is there.

Total of 3 people, not sure why 3 compared to the traditional 2 but that is how Tesla went.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/29/2019 at 12:19 PM, ccap41 said:

What was the need

There are two things that make an economy when you boil it down to the basic elements. The flow of money and the flow of goods/services.  Roads and cars make that flow much faster and cheaper than horse and buggy.  Trains are good for long distance, but suck for the "last mile".

Without the road network we have to day (and are letting crumble to bits) is why we have the economy we have today... which even in a recession is still better than 4th world economies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2019 at 2:54 PM, Drew Dowdell said:

There are two things that make an economy when you boil it down to the basic elements. The flow of money and the flow of goods/services.  Roads and cars make that flow much faster and cheaper than horse and buggy.  Trains are good for long distance, but suck for the "last mile".

Without the road network we have to day (and are letting crumble to bits) is why we have the economy we have today... which even in a recession is still better than 4th world economies. 

I know it was an improvement but it was still never a NEED. Everybody wanted to expand and grow but they never needed to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

That's pretty Amish of you.. 

Well, when one throws out the word "need" and you go back to the roots of it... It quickly becomes a "want". 

At this point of the economy and life automobiles are absolutely a need in one fashion or another. But, when they first became a thing and everybody was used to not using them, they were a luxury and everybody was okay and used to using horse and buggy for transportation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Well, when one throws out the word "need" and you go back to the roots of it... It quickly becomes a "want". 

At this point of the economy and life automobiles are absolutely a need in one fashion or another. But, when they first became a thing and everybody was used to not using them, they were a luxury and everybody was okay and used to using horse and buggy for transportation. 

Plus the Methan gas smell of Horse farts. ?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Well, when one throws out the word "need" and you go back to the roots of it... It quickly becomes a "want". 

At this point of the economy and life automobiles are absolutely a need in one fashion or another. But, when they first became a thing and everybody was used to not using them, they were a luxury and everybody was okay and used to using horse and buggy for transportation. 

We needed the advancements to keep up with the rest of the world. Germany and England weren't going to sit still and not produce.  We would have been at a disastrous disadvantage in WWI and WWII if we had just stayed Amish back in 1895. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

We needed the advancements to keep up with the rest of the world. Germany and England weren't going to sit still and not produce.  We would have been at a disastrous disadvantage in WWI and WWII if we had just stayed Amish back in 1895. 

Wouldn't those then be the first automobiles? If they weren't creating them then there would be no catch-up needed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO early automobiles in the U.S. (1900- say 1915) were primarily a 'want'. Lifestyles were not hugely changed as they came on scene; people primarily stayed in the same locations and farming was prevail ant. Most early cars (including Chevrolet) were quite expensive. After that, professions and even personal lifestyles started to change / embrace the automobile. The second lifestyle change was the widespread improvement of roads, but aside from the interstate highways, this was piecemeal.

Also keep in mind there was very very little in the way of 'global competition' during the beginning of the 20th century, countries were largely autonomous. I think it wasn't until WWI that most people began to evaluate just that.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   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.



×
×
  • 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.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

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