"DCCARGEEK" (dccargeek)
09/26/2013 at 13:19 • Filed to: None
1
25|
"DCCARGEEK" (dccargeek)
09/26/2013 at 13:19 • Filed to: None | 1
| 25 |
Remember that kid in school that knew every answer, was first to finish a test and did their best to impress the teacher? Well that kid, while likely to do well in the future, was hated by most of their peers.
Honda is being that kid.
Earlier this week NHTSA announced it would make changes to its New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). Electronic Stability Control, which is now a mandatory safety requirement, would be removed from the list of Recommended Advanced Technologies and replaced with Backup Cameras.
This means that when one of the 51 car buyers that will research their vehicles via Safecar.gov (see image below) will see a small backup camera icon (highlighted by red arrow) listed under Advanced Technologies of the vehicles they are comparing. This is designed to help buyers compare important safety features. This change will not impact the overall star rating of a vehicle, but NHTSA is considering adding crash avoidance systems into NCAP and looking at ways to incorporate various safety technology into the vehicle Monroney label (window sticker).
NHTSA responded to automakers that questioned this move by reminding them that “participation in NCAP is voluntary.” Ouch.
The main concern of automakers is that this change to NCAP, particularly the guidelines NHTSA is providing for “eligible” backup cameras, might not jive with the ongoing rulemaking (FMVSS No. 111) regarding backup cameras.
In other words, Automaker X could design a camera system that meets NCAP standards, yet fails to comply with FMVSS No 111.
NHTSA says that even if that were the case automakers would have time to adjust their design during the phase-in period.
In a letter to Congress, dated June 20, 2013, NHTSA said they planned to have the final rulemaking finished no later than January 2, 2015 and that backup camera information would be added to NCAP by June 2014.
Why incorporate the change to NCAP ahead of the final rulemaking after you state that you need more information and additional data to ensure the rulemaking is addresses “real world safety risk[s]?”
NHTSA says the decision to incorporate into NCAP was done to:
“…increase consumer interest in the important safety benefits of this system” – Wait. Didn’t the agency just say they weren’t certain of “real world” benefits in their justification to extend the rulemaking? How then can they pronounce safety benefits?
NHTSA also said NCAP would “give recognition to manufacturers who are already making their vehicles safer by installing such systems on their vehicles.”- They can already do this using by using this thing called advertising (see Honda ad).
You still with me?
Now that I’ve bored the crap out of you with all that regulatory background, let’s get back to Honda being that kid you want to trip in the hallway.
Note: I do not condone bullying. As a nerd in school I can say with 100% certainty it sucked.
In light of the all debates around backup cameras and the NCAP decision Honda runs the ad above touting that most (?) of its vehicles comes standard with backup cameras and that it didn’t need to wait on a law to make that happen.
Well Honda, good on you. Although, did you just piss off all of your auto-policy colleagues?
Nahhhh. In all likelihood the other government affairs folks in DC saw thsi ad and laughed (for your sake). Most of the auto lobbyists I’ve met are good people with a sense of humor and do share a fun competitive relationship with one another.
Conclusion
For all intents and purposes the backup camera is standard. This action is just the beginning of upcoming debates as to how technologies should factor into NCAP ratings and how or if they should be displayed on government mandated window stickers.
A personal observation: Now that I own a car with a backup camera and cross path detection (2014 Jeep SRT) I must admit at times I feel visually assaulted with all the various image sources. My maneuver speed is considerably slower as I feel compelled to check three mirrors, listen for sensors and watch a screen.
Question: What do you think? Has the visual limitations of current vehicle design made backup cameras a necessity rather than an amenity?
Appropriate Links:
NHTSA NCAP: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
NHTSA NCAP Decision: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
Original Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
HammerheadFistpunch
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:37 |
|
I guess Honda should have put them in 100% (instead of nearly 100%) of their vehicles if they wanted to do some scathing. Instead they just admit they are out of compliance.... and don't think 100% adoption is "the right thing to do"
|
DCCARGEEK
> HammerheadFistpunch
09/26/2013 at 13:39 |
|
I think it's more of a timing issue. It's likely they product cycle didn't line up with NHTSA's advanced move on NCAP.
But I agree, saying almost takes a little away from it, but kudos for taking a policy-related issue public.
|
HammerheadFistpunch
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:41 |
|
does it matter why? Rocks and glass houses and all that.
bourgeoisie
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:41 |
|
The problem with backup cameras is that they take $100 worth of equipment and charge $1500 for it. The value simply isn't there.
And to add insult to injury, it's nearly always tied in to some kind of navigation system which is sure to be outdated within a few years.
DailyTurismo
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:42 |
|
BMW released their vision of park assist a few days later.
Bird
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:43 |
|
I think we should stop wasting money on regulation to try to 'save' a tiny, tiny, tiny, percentage of people.
How about we spend that money on driver education. I'd feel safer if we taught everyone that it's a bad idea to make a right from the center lane of traffic in a multi-lane street. I've been hit twice by idiots pulling that maneuver, never been hit by someone without backing up without a backup camera...
|
DCCARGEEK
> DailyTurismo
09/26/2013 at 13:45 |
|
Muhahaha. Parking Mode set to: asshat.
|
DCCARGEEK
> Bird
09/26/2013 at 13:47 |
|
I did a very long and boring post on the cost and risk associated with backup cameras. You are correct. It is an utter waste of money, especially when automakers are allowed to build cars like Camaro & LR Evoque that have almost zero rear visibility. Then again, structural integrity demands bigger pillars.
deekster_caddy
> Bird
09/26/2013 at 13:48 |
|
Stronger drivers' ed laws will benefit far more than mandatory backup cameras, dollar for dollar. I'm with you.
Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:48 |
|
Unlike most people my head can pivot around on my neck, and my eyes can look from mirror to mirror with little to no effort. How can the NHTSA account for me being a freak of nature? Can I sue based on discrimination?
|
DCCARGEEK
> bourgeoisie
09/26/2013 at 13:48 |
|
I think we're going to see less and less of that. Ford started in 2012 I believe offering a rear view camera for $238 if I recall.
|
DCCARGEEK
> Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire
09/26/2013 at 13:50 |
|
Children is why this entire 6 year long endeavor is happening. Not sure cameras are going to solve the problem and could very well be NHTSA's finding.
|
bourgeoisie
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:52 |
|
That's not terrible, but am I wrong in assuming it's tied into the sync/touch infotainment interface? I like GM's method of putting it in the rear view mirror, so that it's essentially a separate system from the navigation/stereo.
|
Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:53 |
|
FJ80WaitinForaLSV8
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 13:56 |
|
They are not a necessity of modern car design unless you are over 70 years old and physically can't turn your head around. Juan, I believe you have written in the past about how appalling the cost benefit numbers are for this rule. The numbers are so bad ( at least $11.8 million per life saved ) that they can't even pass the most basic laugh test at OIRA- and that's saying something given some of the other recent rules to have passed through OIRA.
|
DCCARGEEK
> bourgeoisie
09/26/2013 at 13:58 |
|
That's exactly what Ford did too. I'll bet biggest take rate was likely on trucks (backing up hitch).
feather-throttle-not-hair
> DailyTurismo
09/26/2013 at 14:11 |
|
lol. that took me a second.
-Amateur
> DCCARGEEK
09/26/2013 at 14:16 |
|
Government should stay out of business unless it's helping them to do business has always been my philosophy in life. The only agency I care for is the EPA. They are big, fat and bureaucratic but I love my somewhat clean regulated air.
|
DCCARGEEK
> FJ80WaitinForaLSV8
09/26/2013 at 15:40 |
|
Sigh. Some of the stuff that goes through OMB makes my head spin, but if I put all of it here or on my blog people's eyes would water over and they'd think I was some kind of anti-gov lunatic.
|
FJ80WaitinForaLSV8
> DCCARGEEK
09/27/2013 at 09:30 |
|
Couldn't agree with you more, although I do like your focus on the regulatory side of the industry as the DC auto geek. I don't think car enthusiasts truly understand how must of an impact regulations have on vehicle design, performance, and diversity. And I think if they knew more they would be more outraged and upset than they are. Anyway, keep up the good work.
Also, take a look at this Detroit News article on Anthony Foxx meeting with big 3 execs and chuckle a little bit when it gets to big DOT issues affecting the auto industry.
xen0blade
> -Amateur
09/28/2013 at 08:19 |
|
I might (read: probably) be wrong, but isn't it the EPA that governs vehicle emissions? Meaning I couldn't technically drive around an E36 M3 with an S52B32 swap? Not that I am. I mean, I wouldn't do that. Me? Nah. Nope. Now, if you don't mind, I'm going for a spirited....fuck it's raining. THANKS OBAMA!
Texican
> Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire
09/28/2013 at 12:22 |
|
In fairness, I used to own a Miata that was backed into twice in parking lots. I caught the offender the second time, who tried to blame my parked car for being so short. He shut up when I asked him how tall a kid was. Bottom line, I get it even if I don't 'get it.'
I think it's overblown to require every car to have a camera. Crazy to insist on it with so little development time. And why on earth wouldn't rear proximity sensors serve the same purpose with zero screen intrusion into the cabin?
CalMark123
> bourgeoisie
11/02/2013 at 16:34 |
|
Honda doesn't.
|
CalMark123
> DCCARGEEK
11/02/2013 at 16:36 |
|
What's more important than the camera itself is to have an audible warning beep when you're about to back into something or someone. Automatic braking is even better in this situation. It'll happen eventually.
|
bourgeoisie
> CalMark123
11/03/2013 at 10:14 |
|
And that's a fairly recent change. They were one of the worst offenders for a very long time.
Also, Honda's website seems to have been built on the Kinja platform.