Frankjaiv

The company I work for just supplied me with a 2019 Chevy Equinox. As soon as I put it in reverse I noticed how much better the picture quiality was than my wife’s new GX. I mean it’s like a tube tv vs 4KUHD! I do understand that Chevy takes a very cheaply made vehicle and stuff it full of shiny electronics and that the GX is a better vehicle 1000x over but come on. They could have at least sprung for a better backup camera!!

Has as anyone else noticed made this comparison and had their stomach turn?

bd5400

The Equinox is a much newer vehicle than the GX, which is part of the reason. Most automakers, especially Lexus, won't upgrade little items like backup cameras on a year-by-year basis just because their quality is frequently improving. It isn't cost effective so things like that get upgraded with major refreshes and redesigns.

With that said, the camera in my 2011 GX is much better than the camera I recently experienced in a 2018 RX-L.

coolsaber

Although I acknowledge that car tech progresses SUPER SLOWLY, my first take on better resolution was on the XC90s on SPA platform. Then mercedes came out with HD on the E-series. I dont recall the cameras on the new LS or ES, but will test and update.

The GX is old, in every way possible, I dont think one can hope for better camera quality as these were speced from 2014 5+ years old. Back then a rear camera was not even standard like it is now. It sucks that the GX is outclassed in almost every way on vehicles a fraction of the price, but there really isnt anything much there to do?

Toyota Corollas are coming with Toyota Safety Sense for free, while the GX, doesnt even offer it unless you pay for the Lux package and Driver Assist, which even then is out of date due to LSS v1/2.

the GX at this point is more of emotional decision rather then a logical decision if your in the market.

bambam2

I recently had a similar experience with a Honda Accord's backup camera. The video quality was great and I was surprised, granted it was an '18 Accord. Toyota has a reputation for being behind on the technology curve. Part of the reason for their reliability is because they use old tech that's been tried and tested and it saves on costs, but I do wish they would stay a little more up-to-date when it comes to technology.

UZ214

the backup camera sucks on pretty much every single new lexus car. My brand new LX camera is horrible. same with the new RX.i test drove and even the LS500. The birds eye is much better. but yea I see your point

bbqsoup

I also drive a 2006 Honda Odyssey so from that to the GX, the GX's camera is like HD LOL.
However, my 2014 Camry camera is a bit better.

caesosa

bd5400

I don't think body on frame (BoF) vehicles are inherently safer than unibody vehicles. Plus, newer cars provide more than just electronic safety systems. There are structural advances that are made with newer vehicles that make them much safer than older ones. A clear example is the small overlap crash test that was introduced a few years ago. At the time, many cars performed very poorly on the test. Newer cars perform much better because there have been structural changes to help deflect some of the impact away from the passenger compartment.

The Volvo XC90, as a potential counter-example, pretty much aced the test with a decade old design because...Volvo. The XC90, however, isn't a BoF vehicle. Many of the BoF vehicles left on the market are quite large, which can be advantageous in an accident (especially with a much smaller vehicle) but I wouldn't say that means they're safer because they're BoF.

Frankjaiv

bd5400

I think you're oversimplifying the process. No automaker is just going to throw in some new parts simply because they exist. The physical act of picking up a part and installing it in the vehicle isn't the complicated part. Even changing something like a backup camera or an interior screen requires testing (such as compatibility, durability, and comparison testing with other available parts from competing suppliers), supply chain research, potential negotiations with current suppliers, etc. It may be different if the part supplier takes it upon themselves to revise the part while making it a fully compatible replacement for the previous part but even then it would not be surprising if a certain amount of testing was necessary.

It's not like all of the cameras are failing prematurely and they need to find a replacement. A new camera would just be an incremental improvement unlikely to drive additional sales.

Frankjaiv

coolsaber

Lexus/Toyota are really into max profit/$ investment company. If they can keep things the same, not only does alleviate costs, but it also makes them dam durable. Even if there is something better, its comes online only after everyone else. So far I dont recall any Lexus product with HD cameras. The only HD equipped camera I know of on a Lexus are the JDM only ES and LS with their exterior side mirrors which have been replaced by HD cameras (no side mirrors just cameras).

The GX would be interesting if they had the level of equipment made available but, I think Lexus is only exploring those avenues on all of their upcoming transition frames. (Lexus and Toyota Generation Next Vehicles).
GX being on the old 150 series platform is highly questionable.

Frankjaiv

konc3pt

agree that the camera is horrible, wonder if it can be upgraded with aftermarket and if it would make any difference

tecman

@7:00