Digital side mirrors

[YYB129]

https://blog.lexus.co.uk/lexus-digital-side-view-monitor/
 

Jury is out.....

[rich1068]

Saw this earlier on Twitter. The ones in that new little Honda thing look OK but these just look like someone's tacked on a cheap Android tablet.

 

I should add that in either case I see little point in them. It seems to be tech for the sake of tech.

[scudney]

Totally agree with you Rich and where does it end?some useful some not so useful,some needed some not needed,and when they do go wrong will probably cost an arm and a leg to fix.Years ago you could buy a headlight bulb for less than a tenner and fit it yourself(admittedly bulb technology has come a long way since),nowadays you are paying upwards of £30 to over a £100 for a bulb and another £50 to have it fitted because the headlights have got to come off the car or the bumper has got to come off in order to fit the bulbs 😒🤔

[Habu]

That would take some getting used to after years of driving looking outside the car for the rear view image.  Imagine the cost to replace if it’s damaged!   It might just be the photo but it appears to stick out a long way too.

[i-s]

Reason - aero. Door mirrors are now a very significant contributor to drag of modern cars.That said, the cars upon which they have so far been implemented (audi e-tron, honda e) are not particularly aerodynamic anyway, but many low-drag models (eg merc C-class, Tesla 3, Hyundai Ioniq, Toyota Prius) would have significant reductions to motorway by implementing camera mirrors. 

Cost? Cheaper than a door mirror to replace. Seriously, you can buy a smartphone with 3 cameras in it for £100. One camera on a stalk isn't terribly expensive, compared to a large multi-part plastic and metal housing containing 3 motors (fold, mirror x, mirror y), heating element, high-grade optical mirror (with additionally complex convex section in most european cars now), auto dimming stuff and the indicator lighting.... Oh, and lots of car door mirrors now have cameras in anyway (my Leaf had the side cameras for the 360 parking in them). A regular door mirror now is not a few quid from a motor factors, but £500+ to replace on anything like a Lexus. Camera mirrors will be lest costly to replace should they be damaged which is much less likely because they protrude far less and represent a much smaller "target". 

They also offer the possibility of not being dazzled at night no matter how bright the headlamps of the vehicle behind (you won't necessarily be able to see anything more in the mirror than you otherwise would, but the lumens projected at your eyeballs will be limited by the screen which will be dimmed to night levels). As such they will also be "auto dimming" by default. 

Camera mirrors can potentially take in a wider field of view, reducing the possibility of blindspots. 

I'm not for a moment suggesting they're perfect and won't have their annoyances, but they have many advantages too.

 

[royoftherovers]

4 minutes ago, i-s said:

Reason - aero. Door mirrors are now a very significant contributor to drag of modern cars.That said, the cars upon which they have so far been implemented (audi e-tron, honda e) are not particularly aerodynamic anyway, but many low-drag models (eg merc C-class, Tesla 3, Hyundai Ioniq, Toyota Prius) would have significant reductions to motorway by implementing camera mirrors. 

Cost? Cheaper than a door mirror to replace. Seriously, you can buy a smartphone with 3 cameras in it for £100. One camera on a stalk isn't terribly expensive, compared to a large multi-part plastic and metal housing containing 3 motors (fold, mirror x, mirror y), heating element, high-grade optical mirror (with additionally complex convex section in most european cars now), auto dimming stuff and the indicator lighting.... Oh, and lots of car door mirrors now have cameras in anyway (my Leaf had the side cameras for the 360 parking in them). A regular door mirror now is not a few quid from a motor factors, but £500+ to replace on anything like a Lexus. Camera mirrors will be lest costly to replace should they be damaged which is much less likely because they protrude far less and represent a much smaller "target". 

They also offer the possibility of not being dazzled at night no matter how bright the headlamps of the vehicle behind (you won't necessarily be able to see anything more in the mirror than you otherwise would, but the lumens projected at your eyeballs will be limited by the screen which will be dimmed to night levels). As such they will also be "auto dimming" by default. 

Camera mirrors can potentially take in a wider field of view, reducing the possibility of blindspots. 

I'm not for a moment suggesting they're perfect and won't have their annoyances, but they have many advantages too.

 

My rear view parking camera gets very dirty, might these?

[OldTrout]

You can add Aston Martin Valkyrie to the list of cars.

J

[Habu]

14 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

My rear view parking camera gets very dirty, might these?

I wouldn’t think any more than your current door mirrors as the surface area of the camera mirror body is very small.  Your rear view camera, however is in an area under significant turbulent air.

[rich1068]

I fear change.

[Habu]

37 minutes ago, i-s said:

Reason - aero. Door mirrors are now a very significant contributor to drag of modern cars.That said, the cars upon which they have so far been implemented (audi e-tron, honda e) are not particularly aerodynamic anyway, but many low-drag models (eg merc C-class, Tesla 3, Hyundai Ioniq, Toyota Prius) would have significant reductions to motorway by implementing camera mirrors. 

Cost? Cheaper than a door mirror to replace. Seriously, you can buy a smartphone with 3 cameras in it for £100. One camera on a stalk isn't terribly expensive, compared to a large multi-part plastic and metal housing containing 3 motors (fold, mirror x, mirror y), heating element, high-grade optical mirror (with additionally complex convex section in most european cars now), auto dimming stuff and the indicator lighting.... Oh, and lots of car door mirrors now have cameras in anyway (my Leaf had the side cameras for the 360 parking in them). A regular door mirror now is not a few quid from a motor factors, but £500+ to replace on anything like a Lexus. Camera mirrors will be lest costly to replace should they be damaged which is much less likely because they protrude far less and represent a much smaller "target". 

They also offer the possibility of not being dazzled at night no matter how bright the headlamps of the vehicle behind (you won't necessarily be able to see anything more in the mirror than you otherwise would, but the lumens projected at your eyeballs will be limited by the screen which will be dimmed to night levels). As such they will also be "auto dimming" by default. 

Camera mirrors can potentially take in a wider field of view, reducing the possibility of blindspots. 

I'm not for a moment suggesting they're perfect and won't have their annoyances, but they have many advantages too.

 

Do the specs suggest the camera body protrudes less than a regular body or is that a guess?  
As for aero you’d need to do many miles to recoup £1600 besides a modern big door mirror body can aide aero by moving turbulent air generated by the frontal aspect away from the car and passing laminar flow down the sides.  
I’m still to be convinced that this rear view camera body will be less to replace than a standard lens body because “you can get 3 lens in a camera for £100 and a camera on a stalk won’t be expensive”.  

 

[Habu]

9 minutes ago, rich1068 said:

I fear change.

😅

[scudney]

In answer to one of the contributions above,oh really lol 😁 and the driver becomes more redundant and brain dead(we seem to be having our thought process gradually eroded and replaced by technology),and as for cost you only have look at mobile phones,are they getting cheaper? nah,definitely not.l agree some technology is for the better but some isn't.How long before humans begin to lose the ability to think?how long before we are all controlled in one way or another?how long before we have chip implants?ideas and suggestions welcomed😁🙃🤪🤔

[royoftherovers]

22 minutes ago, scudney said:

In answer to one of the contributions above,oh really lol 😁 and the driver becomes more redundant and brain dead(we seem to be having our thought process gradually eroded and replaced by technology),and as for cost you only have look at mobile phones,are they getting cheaper? nah,definitely not.l agree some technology is for the better but some isn't.How long before humans begin to lose the ability to think?how long before we are all controlled in one way or another?how long before we have chip implants?ideas and suggestions welcomed😁🙃🤪🤔

Oh, ye of little faith, John.

Isaac Asimov told us this would happen 60 plus years ago !

[scudney]

Apparently you can now have the digital side mirrors fitted to the latest ES 300h for £1600 as an optional extra lol,cheap indeed 😁🙃🤪🤔