You will love the RVM.
I had fun playing with it on the test drive.

With the superimposed lane marker it's easy to get nice & square as you reverse.
I'm sure your wife will love it.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/au...=1&oref=slogin

- SR

And in case you don't want to bother with the link:

Installing a Rear Camera to Illuminate Blind Spots
By JOHN R. QUAIN
GUILT’S a big motivator,” said Bruce Cirillo, president of Movin’ On, an auto-electronics installer in Franklin Square, N.Y., referring to the rearview cameras and displays his company installs for local dealers and customers.

As a parent and an owner of a sport utility vehicle, I admit that horrifying stories about cars backing over children or pedestrians, not worries about dings or dents, prompted my interest in rearview video cameras. While the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not keep records of such accidents, because most occur in private driveways, a nonprofit safety advocacy group called Kids and Cars estimates that every week two children are killed in the United States when a car backs over them.

The culprit, said Janette E. Fennell, founder of Kids and Cars, is the “blind zone” behind today’s vehicles. “When it’s 8 feet wide and 30 feet behind,” she said, “you’re hard pressed to call that a ‘spot.’ ”

Indeed, tests by Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports magazine, confirm that the blind zone behind minivans and S.U.V.’s ranges from 12 feet to a whopping 69 feet — enough to conceal my daughter’s entire nursery school class.

To reduce the abrasions of urban parking — and parental angst — high-tech solutions are available from companies including Audiovox, Delphi and HitchCam. Ultrasonic warning systems that beep at you with increasing urgency as you back toward an object have been available for years. But installing such a system is awkward. Holes have to be drilled into the bumper for the sensors, which can be ineffective in rain or snow. And, honestly, the persistent beeping can be annoying.

Better are rearview video cameras, which can provide an image of the entire blind zone behind a car. Many vehicles now offer cameras as an addendum to their navigation systems. When the car is in reverse, the rearview image pops up on the liquid-crystal navigation screen in the dashboard. In tests by Consumers Union, the blind spot behind a 2007 Chevrolet Avalanche shrank from 50 feet to zero once the optional $250 factory camera was installed.

Such cameras may be a relatively inexpensive option on models like the Chevrolet Suburban, but they usually require that buyers opt for the navigation system, too — and that can cost up to $2,000. Fortunately, some recent products offer another solution to those unwilling to pony up $45,000 for a new car: add-on camera systems.

I tested one such wireless system and also a rearview mirror replacement option. The Roadmaster VR3 Wireless Backup Camera is just $140 and can be installed without professional assistance, according to the manufacturer. The package includes a camera that screws onto a rear license plate frame and a 2.5-inch-square L.C.D. screen that plugs into the cigarette lighter up front. The screen can be mounted in a variety of positions using a supplied stand. The display wirelessly receives the image from the camera’s transmitter, so you don’t have to run cables through the car.

The catch? You still have to connect the camera in back to the car’s electrical system, meaning you have to find the car’s reverse light circuit and ground wire.

I dutifully followed the VR3’s installation instructions, which involved taking apart a taillight, using an ohm meter and fiddling with Scotchloks. To the uninitiated, Scotchloks are finicky little clamps that you squeeze closed to splice cables.

Initially, only static appeared on the VR3’s screen. After some investigation, it turned out that in my eagerness to form a secure connection with the Scotchloks, I had inadvertently sliced through the negative ground, shorting out the camera.

Once repaired with a drop of solder, the VR3 camera worked as advertised, with some caveats. The image is relatively clear, but it takes a couple of seconds to appear after the car is put in reverse. So some patience is necessary. Competing wireless signals, like those from Wi-Fi or Bluetooth devices, can distort the image as well.

Furthermore, the VR3’s inexpensive digital camera yields an 80-degree horizontal viewing angle behind a car, wide enough to eliminate the blind spots of most, but not all, vehicles. I could see anyone, even a toddler, behind my Dodge Durango, but had to be careful to check my side mirrors as well.

There was also the issue of where to put the display. It was too obtrusive on my dash, but I tended to forget to look at it when I moved it elsewhere.

So finding a natural viewing position for a backup camera’s display is an important consideration, and it is one reason Audiovox introduced a replacement rearview mirror this summer with a built-in 4.5-inch diagonal screen. Available for about $440 from retailers, the company’s LCMR6CT is not cheap, but many drivers will find it a natural fit that is cosmetically compatible with most American cars. When driving, the LCMR6CT looks like a conventional mirror, but when the car is put in reverse, an L.C.D. screen concealed behind the mirror glass illuminates to reveal the rearview image.

It’s a nifty trick, and one that many will find idiot-proof. The minute you glance in the mirror you see the rearview camera image. But I was taught to turn around while backing up — not to rely on the mirror. So keeping my eye fixed on the Audiovox mirror display took some practice.

Audiovox has several cameras to support the mirror, including the CCDLF model that I also tested. The camera, which costs about $230, is cleverly concealed in a metal license plate frame, so no holes need to be drilled in your car. The camera is also based on a CCD image sensor with a 120-degree view, offering an image superior to that of the Roadmaster model. But unlike the Roadmaster camera, wires have to be snaked through the car by a professional installer to connect the Audiovox camera to the mirror.

Eventually, I got used to the slightly skewed fish-eye view and learned that some objects behind the car were closer than they seemed. (I recommend experimenting with old tires before taking on a Manhattan parking garage.)

In bright light, I needed to shift my sitting position slightly to avoid reflections in the L.C.D., but a brightness control made the image easy to see even on the sunniest days. The display and camera also worked well at night and in bad weather. In pouring rain, I easily spotted a pedestrian walking behind my S.U.V. as I backed out of a parking spot.

For all its benefits, the Audiovox mirror display isn’t perfect. Its image is darker than conventional mirrors, partly to conceal the L.C.D. display when not in use and partly because it cannot automatically dim to reduce headlight glare. So if you love your auto-dimming mirror, you may find the Audiovox compromise irritating, particularly in vehicles with tinted rear windows.

In addition, Audiovox doesn’t have an option for OnStar subscribers whose push-button controls are in the factory-issue mirror. HitchCam will have an OnStar-compatible mirror available in November, according to its chief executive, Stephanie Mendoza.

My experience yielded one more piece of advice: don’t install a camera yourself. Leave the job of ferreting out the correct wires to a professional who will also make sure the camera is correctly aimed. Nevertheless, in spite of the imperfections I found with the rearview systems, both models made me more comfortable when backing up in tight spots — and at home where my daughter plays.

 

if it's like the M I know she will. Only 51 more hours...

 

Damn you!!

 

Last week at this time it didn't look good! Things will wok out for you too.

 

$1000 is a bit too much. Like inTgr8r said: out of the whole package, the camera is the only thing that is useful. $1000 for a rear view camera is too much. I'd rather invest the money into a remote starter and even then, still have some money to pocket in...

 

He's talking about $1000 for the entire Tech package, so that includes the AFS and the ICC. $1000 isn't so bad for all three. I would think the parts involved to make your headlights move should make it more costly. The camera, however, probably shouldn't cost more than $150.

 

+1 Agree....
Not bad if you want AFS & ICC.

 

I think the Adaptive Front Lighting System (AFS) should have been a part of the Premium Package and the RearView Monitor should have been a part of the Navigation Package. I could care less about the Intelligent Cruise Control (ICC) with preview braking because I'll never use it. Lexus charges $875 for Bi-xenon High-Intensity Discharge (HID) headlamps and the Adaptive Front Lighting System (AFS). So ~ $1,000 for the Technology Package isn't so bad.

 

He is just saying that out of the 3 things that make up the tech package, the backup camera is the only thing he would find useful.....which would be a fair amount of $$ for one feature.

 

Thanks for clarifying my point...

I know that $1000 will buy me the whole package. But personally, I find the whole package pretty useless (except for the camera). Hence, $1000 for a camera is too much.

 

Of course it's not bad. I don't think anyone here denies the fact that if you look at the package as a whole - $1000 isn't bad at all. The problem is however, that the package contains pretty useless features. The ICC will be totally useless as I don't use the cruise control at all. I can definitely live without the adaptive front lighting - nice feature, but definitely not a necessity. That leaves the rear view camera - again, nice, and in this case: useful. But there is no way in hell I will technically (no pun intended ) shell $1000 for a camera.

 

Ah, gotcha. My bad. I agree with you. I personally want the AFS out of the three things in the tech package, and to quote you, "$1000 for [AFS] is too much." The ICC is useless because if you stay alert on the road -- which you should anyway with or without CC on -- you wouldn't need it. I feel ike ICC is for the laziest of the lazy.

 

I always thought rain sensing wipers was the laziest of lazy. I mean how hard is it to turn on your wipers when they are right there on the steering column?

 

I'm with you...
Those things never work properly anyway... you see complaints on the BMW boards all the time.