• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

why don't we have cameras replacing side view mirrors yet?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
How about elimating the windshield and having a camera there too? Mirrors work, why mess with them? Cameras (at best) would replace the functionality and add (probably) nothing. There are a lot of other things that electronics could replace first that would have a bigger impact.
 
Pariah said:
On a 3000+lbs car, less than 10 lbs does not even remotely begin to be described as huge and heavy. Unless you daily drive an F350, your car does not have "Dumbo" side mirrors.
Click to expand...

i'm only arguing the people that are calling an LCD/camera heavy by pointing out a mirror is even heavier.

dumbo side mirrors on a car that's not a F350.

lexus-is250-is350-front.jpg
 
ExarKun333 said:
How about elimating the windshield and having a camera there too? Mirrors work, why mess with them? Cameras (at best) would replace the functionality and add (probably) nothing. There are a lot of other things that electronics could replace first that would have a bigger impact.
Click to expand...

read the thread.
 
I think they should and will.

They have added whole bunch of unnecessary electronics anyway so the point that it is expensive is not valid.

The regular sticking out mirrors are expensive. Especially those that are heated and adjustable. The cost difference, especially in mass production, should be nada in this age of technology.
 
I think the blind spot system and conventional mirrors would be way better than a camera.

With the blind spot system, why would you need a camera? You get an audible warning if you forget to look.
 
How about getting people used to looking in a different location?

When you look in your mirror you have the view in the mirror+Peripheral vision+turning your head. And all three methods are pretty much usable at the same time. If you're looking in a new location at a camera, now your Peripheral vision has no play in your view anymore. You're only view is what's on the screen and that's it.

In short, SAFETY would be my #1 argument here. Not to mention the image quality of a tiny camera isn't going to be as good as a reflection in a mirror.
 
speedy2 said:
How about getting people used to looking in a different location?

When you look in your mirror you have the view in the mirror+Peripheral vision+turning your head. And all three methods are pretty much usable at the same time. If you're looking in a new location at a camera, now your Peripheral vision has no play in your view anymore. You're only view is what's on the screen and that's it.

In short, SAFETY would be my #1 argument here. Not to mention the image quality of a tiny camera isn't going to be as good as a reflection in a mirror.
Click to expand...

put it inside on the dash opposite where the mirrors currently are.

mirrors used to be on the hood. people will adjust.
 
BlahBlahYouToo said:
put it inside on the dash opposite where the mirrors currently are.

mirrors used to be on the hood. people will adjust.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The side of the door is a better place for the reasons I just listed. Now, you're moving them away from that. And in some cars, that's a pretty small area.
 
OK.

Winter time - ice on mirror, scrape it off.

Ice on camera lens - yeah good luck scraping that off. Then you have potentially scratched the lens. Not good.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I think the blind spot system and conventional mirrors would be way better than a camera.

With the blind spot system, why would you need a camera? You get an audible warning if you forget to look.
Click to expand...

good point about the blind spot tech.
blind spot tech + camera is even better.

who needs a mirror then if you have blind spot tech?
eliminating the mirror reduces drag, and adds 2-3mpg on the highway.
 
Last edited:
Yet more complexity. And yes some sort of cover would be added, but even then that would collect drops of water or snow/ice and be useless. A mirror with drops is usable. Even a fogged up mirror is somewhat usable. A fogged camera lens/cover would render the camera USELESS period. There's going to be more design/money/etc into keeping it usable in the elements than the actual camera system itself. A mirror is just a mirror. Do you think auto makers are going to make something like that? Maybe in high end or concepts. But it has the same chance of being mainstream as heated seats or rain sense wipers. Which are way easier to implement.
 
speedy2 said:
Yet more complexity. And yes some sort of cover would be added, but even then that would collect drops of water or snow/ice and be useless. A mirror with drops is usable. Even a fogged up mirror is somewhat usable. A fogged camera lens/cover would render the camera USELESS period. There's going to be more design/money/etc into keeping it usable in the elements than the actual camera system itself. A mirror is just a mirror. Do you think auto makers are going to make something like that? Maybe in high end or concepts. But it has the same chance of being mainstream as heated seats or rain sense wipers. Which are way easier to implement.
Click to expand...

yeah, all those all around and rear backup cams are rendered useless on rainy days.
you don't think the engineers have this figured out?

it will be available within 10 years, and mainstream not too much longer after that. quote me on it.

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/10/01/greenlings-will-we-ever-replace-the-standard-rear-and-side-vie/
 
Back up cameras see nowhere near the use of side mirrors. And, if you back up using ONLY the back up camera you're a retard.
 
lol. More cost. Lets add sapphire coated glass while were at it. Or maybe diamond? Too much money into a feature that already works excellent as-is an with very little cost.

I can see it now on the windows sticker.

"Side view Camera system - "$4,500.00"

lol
 
ExarKun333 said:
I did, not much of interest there. Mirrors work really well. /thread

(OP, you forced me to threadcrap)
Click to expand...

ok, since you are illiterate or can't process logic, possibly both, i'll explain.

we have new CAFE standards coming very soon, and they are getting very strict. something like 35 mpg by 2015.
automakers are scrambling to meet this standard and to increase FE, they are going to have to build more efficient engines, reduce weight, reduce drag, etc. without making cars too expensive.

removing the side mirrors can boost highway mpg by 1-3mpg because it reduces drag. that's a pretty good for something so simple and obvious to do.

removing the windshield. what does that get you?
weight savings? what are you replacing the windshield with? aluminum? is it practical?
you gain a couple of percent for every 100# shaved. what's the net weight savings after replacing glass with another material?

do you see the fallacy in your example yet?


ExarKun333 said:
How about elimating the windshield and having a camera there too? Mirrors work, why mess with them? Cameras (at best) would replace the functionality and add (probably) nothing. There are a lot of other things that electronics could replace first that would have a bigger impact.
Click to expand...


name some. i'm all ears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top