2010 Camaro Backup sensors (rear park assist), confirmed *

[CmB]

A Camaro can run over a small child or dog just as easy as a minivan or a sedan. I think this is something that should be standard equipment on all cars. It is just a matter of time before it is I am sure.

Good idea GM. Just wish you would have done it from the start and found a better way than the bumper dots to make it happen.

[3BVert]

Originally Posted by thecamaroguy

Be nice if they could put them in the slits between the defuser and the body panel.

This I could live with and it looks to be at about the correct height. Not on the painted surface of the bumper.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by DDustiNN

...what? How exactly is ambient lighting useful?

And the HUD? You can see your speed by looking down at the speedometer...

I would like to see both of these as well, but your agument confuses me...

Don't be so "anti technology"! LOL!

Ambient lighting completely across the dash is useful in that it prevents people from constantly asking if the bulb in the dash is burnt out.

HUD is useful because it displays information not found on the DIC or "gages".

Any more questions?

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Verio

I'm sorry, but Camaro 5 members are not a great indication of the typical drivers of the Camaro.

Wanna bet?

Who wants to take a poll.

We have currently 15,427 members.

I bet this represents about half or more current owners of the car.

Camaro5 RULES! Don't sell it short as some kind of "niche" forum.

[2L8IWON]

I would assume it is like my 07 Suburban and my wife's Jeep Commander. "Both" audible and visual alerts should be included!!! This is a great feature which can only save one from either killing someone or something and hurting their poor Camaro at the same time! It can't weigh much more than filling your gut at your local Souper Salad, Denny's, or Shoney's so I wouldn't go there. It will be worth it. I too hope they don't ruin the back bumper with the sensors though, but at same time, will only show off the Camaro as having more amenities than many sports cars. That's not a bad thing.

[nova]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Wanna bet?

Who wants to take a poll.

We have currently 15,427 members.

I bet this represents about half or more current owners of the car.

Camaro5 RULES! Don't sell it short as some kind of "niche" forum.

You're probably right, the members here probably do own a big chunk of the currently produced cars. But GM is not concerned with currently produced cars, they're concerned with cars they want to sell outside the enthusiest segment for years to come.

The enthusiest segment can only support so many cars a year. In order for this car to stick around for years to come, GM and it has to appeal to more than just the enthusiast. It has to appeal to the public at large. Thats what features like this backup sensor are.

If people really wanna go down the path of no feature, stripper, rattle trap cars (ie 4th gens, and yes I did have one) from the factory thats fine but don't act surprised when the thing is dead in 5 years from lack of sales and we're right back where we were @ at the end of 2002...

[Seawolf]

Originally Posted by 3BVert

The manual indicates that there are lights. Perhaps this will illustrate what you're trying to say. The indention is definately there already.

Yes, thank you! That is exactly what I was talking about.

[X33]

Originally Posted by Dan3

It's called parenting! If you have no idea where your 4 year old is... dont back up until you do! Somehow no one ever ran over me or any of my siblings (I'm one of 6) and we have never owned a car with backup sensors.

I have no issues with the convenience of having backup sensors if you want them. I DO, however, have an issue with them being provided for people as a crutch to help them not know how to drive. If you cannot park your car without a bunch of idiot-proof gizmos, you shouldnt be allowed to own it.

Oh Snap!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ty

[X33]

Originally Posted by HeavyD

So if it's such a big safety concern, why is it not available on the 1SS? Why does the 1SS keep getting left out of these options? Not everyone wants leather seats!

Thank you HeavyD, I ordered the 1SS, now I'm glad I settled for no extra gizmo's

[JJSoCrazy]

Good to hear, they are very handy! I have them on my STS and it's great!

[Zeus]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

All the seatbelts and air bags and extra weight in the world didn't get this car a 5 star crash rating, so why foist yet another $300 onto the car for people who don't HAVE 4 year olds or for people who actually watch where their 4 year olds are playing?

Why not petition the government to make these mandatory on ALL cars, like air bags and seatbelts? That way we can burn more foreign oil to lug around thousands of pounds in extra safety crap for people who are too ignorant to drive carefully and pay thousands of dollars when all that crap fires off when you run over a gopher or deer?

If we didn't have these safety nanny devices mandated we could have a sub-$30K 2SS/RS!!!!!!!!!!

Hey btw...


What exactly was the official word on the Camaro going 4 stars? Wasnt the excuse for the car weighing in at almost 2 tons because it was 'safer'? Infact if I remember correctly, people were saying their insurance was lower because the camaro met this AND the next (2012) safety requirement.

Now the Mustang at 300~ lbs less has a better crash test rating?

[Baumer]

I wonder why all 2SS and 2LT orders that haven't been built are getting charged for the rear park assist anyway. I just went to chevy.com and built my car just as I ordered it and it is the same price, even with the rear park assist. So anyone who orders there car now essentially gets the rear park assist for free. I don't want them in the first place, but seriously another $295 that we don't have a choice on!

[BulletSS]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Why did they focus on something useless when people are waiting for HUD and ABL?

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Zeus

Hey btw...


What exactly was the official word on the Camaro going 4 stars? Wasnt the excuse for the car weighing in at almost 2 tons because it was 'safer'? Infact if I remember correctly, people were saying their insurance was lower because the camaro met this AND the next (2012) safety requirement.

Now the Mustang at 300~ lbs less has a better crash test rating?

I thought there would have been more of an uproar about this because that was the line they were using when people complained about the weight. Ironic that all the weight didn't help. In fact, I would be willing to wager that the car fared poorly in the crash tests BECAUSE it has too much mass to slow down safely with current crash protection systems.

Who wants to address THIS idea?