Get Ready for Back-up Cameras
Because US drivers apparently can’t back up, the Federal government is mandating all cars sold by 2018 have back-up cameras standard. Good, bad, stupid? Let us know in the comments.
>WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) today issued a final rule requiring rear visibility technology in all new vehicles under 10,000 pounds by May 2018. This new rule enhances the safety of these vehicles by significantly reducing the risk of fatalities and serious injuries caused by backover accidents.
>”Safety is our highest priority, and we are committed to protecting the most vulnerable victims of backover accidents — our children and seniors,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “As a father, I can only imagine how heart wrenching these types of accidents can be for families, but we hope that today’s rule will serve as a significant step toward reducing these tragic accidents.”
>Today’s final rule requires all vehicles under 10,000 pounds, including buses and trucks, manufactured on or after May 1, 2018, to come equipped with rear visibility technology that expands the field of view to enable the driver of a motor vehicle to detect areas behind the vehicle to reduce death and injury resulting from backover incidents. The field of view must include a 10-foot by 20-foot zone directly behind the vehicle. The system must also meet other requirements including image size, linger time, response time, durability, and deactivation.
>”Rear visibility requirements will save lives, and will save many families from the heartache suffered after these tragic incidents occur,” said NHTSA Acting Administrator David Friedman. “We’re already recommending this kind of life-saving technology through our NCAP program and encouraging consumers to consider it when buying cars today.”
>On average, there are 210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries per year caused by backover crashes. NHTSA has found that children under 5 years old account for 31 percent of backover fatalities each year, and adults 70 years of age and older account for 26 percent.
>NHTSA took time on this regulation to ensure that the policy was right and make the rule flexible and achievable. In fact, at this point, many companies are installing rear visibility systems on their own, due to consumer demand. Including vehicles that already have systems installed, 58 to 69 lives are expected to be saved each year once the entire on-road vehicle fleet is equipped with rear visibility systems meeting the requirements of today’s final rule.
>The final rule complements action taken by the agency last year to incorporate rear visibility technology into the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). NHTSA’s NCAP program – widely known for its 5-Star Safety Ratings – highlights for consumers the vehicle makes and models that are equipped with the agency’s Recommended Advanced Technology Features that can help drivers avoid crashes and reduce other safety risks. Forward collision warning (FCW) and lane departure warning (LDW) systems are also highlighted under NCAP on www.safercar.gov.
<p>I agree with the NHTSA. This is not about “US drivers apparently can’t back up” it’s more about overall safety. Children, pets, etc can be small and not seen by drivers backing up, no matter how much the driver looks and tries to be alert. Today’s cars and SUV’s, SAV’s, etc have huge blind spots due to big pillars, small rear views, etc.</p>
<p>Yes, 1940’s and 1950’s cars had the same issues (blind spots) but the US population (US born and immigration) has increased immensely and people are so preoccupied with Tech (i.e. smart phones, etc) and other distractions that engineering methods need to be put in place due to changing people’s attitudes and behaviors are not going to change.</p>
<p>I feel, blind spot tech (next to and rear) plus some other safety tech should all be standard.</p>
<p>On a side note, I feel US laws need to change regarding drivers training. For me gone are the days where, dad, mom, uncle, friend can teach someone to driver via a learners permit. US should use the requirement from Germany or England, everyone person wanting to learn to drive has to go to a licensed and certified driving school.</p>
<p>I agree re most all aspect of that decision. Some of the MINI’s such as my coupe (also the roadster & convertible), have large blind spots at the rear quarters as well as the small rear window, which can make backing up while turning at the same time, especially in crowded areas, a bit dicey!</p>
<p>And most all vehicles have blind areas that are within several ft directly behind them that can’t been seen from the side mirrors nor the inside mirror via the rear window.</p>
<p>Knowing I would have limited rear visibility via the rear window & blind rear quarter panel gaps on my Coupe, I opted for the Rear Park Distance Control, which has been VERY useful at times, but the camera would be even better.</p>
<p>In NJ (and I assume other states) require 6 hours of training from a certified instructor. That being said, seeing how many crappy drivers there are driver’s ed and the 6 hours is not doing its job. So yes I agree, NHTSA is trying to fix one issue but also neglecting an overall picture.</p>
<p>I’m all for back-up cameras especially for it helping with seeing small ‘things’ behind a vehicle. To be honest, even though my MINI is small, I wouldn’t mind having a backup camera for those really tight spots just to be safe.</p>
<p>Definitely. The cameras also give you a MUCH better view from behind than physically turning around. The cameras have such a wide angle that you can easily see oncoming cars while backing out of a parking space that would otherwise be blocked by the parked cars to either side of you. This is a good move for the government.</p>
<p>and I just ordered it for my mini cooper so I’m way ahead of them.</p>
<p>Love it in my R53, happy that it will be coming back to MINI. I am still surprised they didn’t keep it as an option in Nav-screen-equipped 2nd Gens! Yes, the car is small, but only with a camera (or a spotter), can you back up with confidence to an inch or less of the car behind you when parallel parking. It is definitely a really great feature to have. :D</p>
<p>I wonder if that means we can expect to see the msrp on the F56 to rise by about three grand come 2018.</p>
<p>I don’t think so. MSRP will go up a bit. The current problem with MINI (and other Car Mfg) is that to get the backup camera, the person also has to purchase the GPS (in MINI’s case, Mini Connect too). That’s why it costs so much and why some people don’t buy the option. I would get backup camera if Mini Connect wasn’t part of the package.</p>
<p>When the NHTSA mandated all vehicles made from 2012 on must have Electronic Stability Control, I haven’t seen the MSRP’s go up.</p>
<p>A decent backup camera costs between $100 to $150 currently. On top of that, a number of car makers already have a screen for Audio systems as standard (vs LED 2-4 line display).</p>
<p>My neighbors have two small boys who routinely wander into my driveway. They’re both too small to see, if they’re close to my rear end. I back into my garage, so I can see them as I come out of the bat cave . My wife’s Prius has the camera, it’s a good idea.</p>
<p>I agree it is a good idea and the tech is cheap. I have a great friend, who’s a great driver, no accidents in 30 years, who could have really used one. She walked to hear car from the driveway, and while she was getting situated, her dog came and laid down in the path of the car to sleep in the sun. The dog was old and deaf and didn’t hear her start the car and didn’t move. My friend, saw all clear, didn’t see the dog in her blind spot, and backed out and killed her dog. So sad. Camera would have helped avoid that.</p>
<p>I support the cameras. They are cheap and simple. Like seatbelts.</p>
<p>US drivers cannot backup, one of the biggest reason is that car manafactures including BMW/MINI make cars that have shockingly low good view out of the back of the car. Backup cameras and parking sensors are directly related to questionable design in my book.</p>
<p>Even if a car had large rear vertical windows with little rear quarter blind spots, that still wouldn’t help with seeing that area directly behind the car within several feet. That’s also a blind spot that can’t be picked up by side or rear view mirrors. That’s precisely the area a camera can help! Car design itself can’t help you see 1-5 ft directly behind the rear bumper!</p>
<p>Would have to say that first every driver should be aware nativly what is around their car. A small child or animal dodging in behind the vehicle should be noticed by a decently aware driver. Of course this is normally in question since it seems a vast majority of drivers start driving long before they settle into driving. Technology wont help somebody that is already in motion trying to get their seatbelt on, adjust their mirrors, finish playing with their phones. Outside of our MINI Coupe that has very quetionable reaward visability I drive a Jeep Wrangler that is a greenhouse that I can see around my vehicle with great ease (not saying MINIs should look like Jeeps). Broadly backup cameras and sensors are just bandaids for iffy design work and distracted drivers. I guess my question would be how many injuries/acidents are caused by backing up cars every year and if this is the biggest bang for the buck to create a safer car to reduce injury/accidents.</p>
<p>The back-up camera requirement is good, and it need not add substantially to the cost of a vehicle.</p>
<p>I added such a camera to my 2011 MCSm for less than $150. It is reassuring, when backing out of my garage, to verify that no one and nothing is about to be broken, maimed, or killed. No amount of walk-around or mirror-checking can achieve the same security. My grandchildren and neighbor children are safer because of the camera.</p>
<p>I have no problem with back-up cameras, but why do they need to mandate them? I don’t like the Government telling me what I need on my own car.</p>
<p>Because it can increase safety, save lives, reduce injuries and property damage maybe? Car companies probably wouldn’t install seat belts to save a buck if they were allowed to in the past.</p>
<p>Yes, they would install seat belts, because the market demands it. Car companies made seat belts because they thought it would give their customers a reason to buy their cars. It’s called a free market, and it generally provides what consumers want and need without intervention. If you don’t think you need a complicated, expensive system that shows you what’s behind your car, you shouldn’t have to get it.</p>
<p>Banning running would also increase safety, save lives, reduce injury, but it would also infringe upon the rights of everyone who wants to run. That’s an extreme example, but I think car companies should be given more freedoms to make a car the way they want to make a car. What if you wanted a super lightweight, simple car without any unneeded tech? Is a backup camera necessary? Of course not. People have been driving cars for over a century without backup cameras. Of course they weren’t urban assault vehicles, but that’s a whole different issue :-)</p>
<p>If the gov’t didn’t get involved in the auto industry, we’d all still be driving cars that get a whopping 15 MPG average, using leaded gasoline, have no seat belts, no air bags, still using carburetors, bias ply tires, etc etc…..all features I remember being the ‘norm’ years ago when I was driving back in the 1950s-60s.</p>
<p>Just look at the great majority who responded to this rear camera article on MF. They overwhelmingly favor mandating that feature over those that don’t!!!!</p>
<p>Who in the government told you that load of baloney? It’s not true. Just look at the smartphone market. The FCC regulates them to a point, but doesn’t require luxury features, and yet there are amazing phones with insanely high quality screens that have great battery life, fast processors, plenty of storage, and they’re thin and light. How did that happen? A free market.</p>
<p>Car companies innovate all the time without the government requiring them to. There were fuel efficient cars 50 years ago too, and it was CAR COMPANIES, not government that invented airbags, seat belts, fuel injection, and back-up cameras. You don’t actually subscribe to the “you didn’t build that” philosophy, do you?</p>
<p>I custom installed a backup camera (Boyo Black Frame VTL375) and 4.3″ LCD for my R56 JCW hatch. Totally worth it. I now have a clear view below the hatch window and even the bumper where previously there was about 4 foot ground distance that I could not see (curbs, low snowbanks, dogs, etc.). Makes it so easy for close encounter parallel parking too… especially at night with the crappy backup lamp on the JCW. I usually check the camera before reversing for low objects (bonus – it has a very wide 180 degree view for backing out of parking spots), then look out the rear windows to reverse – only using the camera again if I need to reverse very close to an object.</p>
<p>I agree – mandate for all cars. Relatively simple and useful safety item that has nothing to do with an individuals ability to reverse their cars.</p>
<p>Is there any way to hook this up to the LCD screen in the MINI’s with navigation? Or do you need to buy the Boyo LCD? If so, where do you mount it? Thanks for the recommendation :)</p>
<p>Didn’t see this reply… Not sure about the factory GPS setup. I mounted my LCD display (Some South Korean no-name LCD) down low in the centre console cubby storage area. Pic here: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/walk0080/10432177256/" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.flickr.com/photos/walk0080/10432177256/</a></p>
<p>I figure sometime in the future if I went a carPC setup or touchscreen, I can easily connect it. For now the cheapo LCD is working great.</p>
<p>I definitely wish I had a back up camera, I would add one if I could easily show it on my mini connected screen, but so far they all require a dedicated additional display.</p>
<p>I have a camera on my Outback. Prior to having it I would have argued that they were just a “thing”. Now that I have it I do use it properly although my wife lets it fluster her. I actually wish I had one on my Mini Cabrio because THAT is a bear to back up. However, while I understand the safety standpoint, if the fools who typically drive cars in America, or at least the part of America that I experience, are any indication, the cameras won’t make one bit of difference. They are only as good as the user, and if they aren’t kept clean they won’t “see” anything. The drivers I see insist on texting at 70MPH, yacking on cell phones ad nauseam, and generally not paying attention to their driving. They won’t benefit one iota from a back up camera, sad to say, and they are probably the most likely to run junior over in their own driveway.</p>
<p>And I guess because European drivers cannot stop running over people, we have all of these safety regs that modify the front of cars in the name of pedestrian safety.</p>
<p>Perfect. I like the look of an screen more than the boring standard radio anyway. Now a screen will be standard.</p>
<p>I am not a fan of these being mandated. But beside that I think they are a good idea. I can’t bring myself to check the box for $1,000.00 (on top of having to have the Nav screen on an F56). If as others are saying, that they should cost no more than $150, then I’m all for it….today I’d have to fork over $2750 and I can’t justify what is nearly a 10% boost in price for that. I’d like to see Mini (and BMW) make the screen for the Nav standard which would bring the price down for everyone. I saw the F56 in person yesterday for the first time. The interior without the screen seems very low rent (despite the other material upgrades). Hopefully they use the 2018 mandate to create a standard interior with a good screen and improve the car in total.</p>