Reversing camera - with you on this one
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Maverick
:troll:
I'm sorry but it has to be said that your argument is flawed and ridiculous.
The Golf was less rear visibility than all of those cars. The size of the car has absolutely nothing to do with visibility when reversing.
I guess your xray eyes enable you to see children/pets/objects behind your car when reversing because the rest of us mere mortals either have to get out and check and rely on luck or use a camera/sensors to check for us.
When I started driving seat belts were not compulsory, a windscreen demister was an extra. Enthusiasts installed windscreen washers. More recently in 1990 to get ABS brakes with my Cressida, they could only be purchased as part of the luxury pack combined with a sun roof.
All the above are now compulsory as far as I know and my betting is that you probably won't buy a vehicle without a reversing camera is say 5 years or so. These "luxuries" have a way of filtering into the market and then becoming compulsory.
For the sceptics, try this for an experiment. Stand a two year old child behind your car while you sit in the driver's seat. Have someone walk the child away from your car and be amazed how far away they are before you actually see them. It's scary.
Enough to say that if you are reversing you will feel them before you see them. Not a very desirable outcome. Can ruin a lot of lives for a very small saving by not ticking the reversing camera box.
I have both but if it is a matter of cash I would tick RVC every day. I quickly check the RVC every time I reverse park, even into my garage. My CC is now 4 months old and I have used the park assist 5 times. Once on delivery, once around the corner from the showroom to see that I could do it and three more times to show off the WOW factor.
"My judgement is so bad I don't trust the park assist"