Side view mirrors

Aptera Community Aptera Discussions Side view mirrors

Aptera Community Aptera Discussions Side view mirrors

  • Side view mirrors

  • Joshua Rosen

    Member
    October 21, 2021 at 7:26 am

    They have been counting on using camera’s instead of side mirrors but those still haven’t been legalized in the US. The rule making for side camera’s started two years ago but apparently there has been no progress on the issue. Elon tweeted that Tesla is going to make the mirrors removable on the Cybertruck so that customers can take them off themselves. I doubt if he ran that tweet by his lawyers before he made it but assuming that it would be legal to do that does Aptera have any plans to do the same. Have the side camera’s plus some removable mirrors for regulatory purposes. Side camera’s are legal in the EU and frankly they should work much better than mirrors which tend to have a very limited field of view plus the drag from mirrors is pretty bad.

  • G Johns

    Member
    October 21, 2021 at 7:33 am

    I like it.

    Why are govment so slow(years) agreeing to good change. It’s a power thing?. I gots the power so i’ll do it when i feel like it?. and make you wait cuz i can?. SAD!.

  • Len Nowak Nowak

    Moderator
    October 21, 2021 at 7:34 am

    In one of the recent Aptera interviews ( Maybe K. Dirksen’s?) Chris mentioned a reflective mirror/ camera lens might be a possibility on this motorcycle registered vehicle???

    ????

    • Joshua Rosen

      Member
      October 21, 2021 at 7:49 am

      In the Jay Leno piece he said he was hoping for a rule change so it doesn’t sound like they are convinced that they can get away with cameras because they are classed as a motorcycle. Maybe they can add some fold down mirrors that will fold flat against the car. I have no doubt that camera’s will be safer than mirrors. We also don’t allow matrix headlights in the US, supposedly those are much better than our current headlights but the US government operates at the speed of molasses in January so while the EU has had them for a while it could be years before we get them in the US.

      • Lou Verner

        Member
        October 21, 2021 at 9:29 am

        Does anyone know how this issue applies to rear view camera? Certainly would need to be approved in case of using hatch solar.

        • Peter Jorgensen

          Member
          October 21, 2021 at 9:52 am

          Not relevant for the rear solar hatch. Only two mirrors are required worst case for motorcycles and cars – Usually left and either center or right. Case in point is delivery vans, motorhomes, pickup trucks with toppers, etc. Many of those have no visibility from the center mirror, and many have been replaced with camera mirrors. They don’t count towards the “rearview mirror” requirement but it doesn’t matter as long as you have left and right outside mirrors.

          Now for customers preferences, it may be more important… But it should be pretty easy to put in a cheap glass mirror for those who don’t have a solar hatch.

          • Lou Verner

            Member
            October 21, 2021 at 10:10 am

            Thanks Peter…hadn’t thought that through. You’re right that many other vehicles lack rear view center mirror, but having driven such vehicles, they’ve always compensated with use of extra large side view mirrors. Definitely not a good option for Aptera from either aesthetic or Cd point of view!

          • Paul Evans

            Member
            October 22, 2021 at 12:50 pm

            I used to have a 39′ RV with a rear view camera with a 170 degree wide angle lens. It had an intermittent short circuit that stopped it from working. It freaked me out when it went offline. I discovered it would work after I rebooted the RV (pull off road, turn ignition off, then restart).

            It was one of those “don’t leave home without it” kind of things.

      • Hans Roes

        Member
        October 21, 2021 at 10:15 am

        Personally, I’m not convinced yet that cameras are safer than mirrors. They certainly are different and offer different opportunities but with a mirror I can easily move my head to get a different view of what is behind me. Can’t do that with a mirror.

        • Curtis Cibinel

          Member
          October 21, 2021 at 1:51 pm

          This video presents the pros / cons pretty clearly. They really do give a lot of advantages and the rule change is well overdue. The alternative for the aptera is a drag inducing mirror which is as small as legally allowed (far less safe)

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n018ZI2xvc

        • kerbe2705

          Member
          October 21, 2021 at 10:19 pm

          Cameras make a big difference for night driving as there’s no headlight glare from vehicles behind you.

  • kerbe2705

    Member
    October 21, 2021 at 8:22 am

    Note, too, that the rulings don’t disallow the use of wing cameras – they just require the use of wing mirrors. I’m not certain if they specify size and shape of those mirrors, but I believe they specify that they must be door-mounted (as opposed to the Japanese practice of fender-mounted wing mirrors).

  • Patrick Liebknecht

    Member
    October 21, 2021 at 4:58 pm

    The rules are different in each state , if it’s a “car” in Maryland it only needs 1 drivers side mirror , if it’s a motorcycle , I needs 2 mirrors , one on each handlebar.

    I was wondering if they could be mounted on the wheel pants ( provided the wheel covers bouncing about has been addressed )

    • kerbe2705

      Member
      October 21, 2021 at 10:18 pm

      Stop and think: The wheel pants turn with the wheels – so anything mounted to them would also turn.

      • Patrick Liebknecht

        Member
        October 22, 2021 at 9:57 am

        the wheel covers ( the painted bits that cover the wheel ) or in this case the wrapped bits that cover the wheels like fenders on a hotrod

        • kerbe2705

          Member
          October 22, 2021 at 11:43 am

          Nope – the wheel pants are ATTACHED to the wheels and steer with the vehicle: They are NOT attached to the body of the vehicle.

  • John Trotter

    Member
    October 21, 2021 at 6:46 pm

    Clean paper engineering would clearly favor cameras and screens. The video in Curtis’ comment is clear. Ultimately, curmudgeons and regulators will come around. Test drives will sell curmudgeons. Regulators may be harder, but finding the written basis of the regs would be an important part. Not just the regs themselves, but the accompanying explanation (“statement of consideration” or some such) that was provided when the regulations were made or modified. Lawyer stuff.

  • Steven G. Bueche

    Member
    October 22, 2021 at 2:40 am

    My Model 3 has both side mirrors and cameras. I still use the mirror I think more out of habit than anything else. I always use the back camera as the Tesla is not known for very good rear views out the back window. I will however strictly use the camera for backing up.

    As for my Aptera I don’t think it would be a deal breaker if they had to install cameras. Yes there will be drag but at the ranges it’s getting I don’t think it will effect overall range or performance.

    I’m sure the folks at Aperta can make a mirror that is low in drag and meet requirements to satisfy all states.

    • Joshua Rosen

      Member
      October 22, 2021 at 6:31 am

      The Model 3 doesn’t have mirror screens all it does is present a cartoon of the cars around you. That’s helpful but it doesn’t really replace mirrors, I use both. The Honda E, which we don’t get in the US because of it’s awful range, has screens at the corners of the dash that replace mirrors and are used like mirrors. Reviewers seem to love them an I can see where they would be able to do a much better job than mirrors which have a very restricted view. The pictures of the Aptera seem to show Honda E like screens.

  • Russell Fauver

    Member
    October 22, 2021 at 4:05 am

    I like the idea of removable exterior mirrors. In my home state of South Carolina exterior mirrors are not required if the driver has a clear view out of the back of the vehicle. So an Aptera with the solar hatch would need outside mirrors but one without the solar hatch could remove them. SC does require a mirror on motorcycles but that mirror could be mounted inside the Aptera and still meet the code.

  • Arlen Bell

    Member
    October 22, 2021 at 6:23 am

    It would seem simple enough to make a small (is there a regulatory minimum size?) mirror that would slip over the camera mount and not block the camera. If/when the mirror/camera issue is resolved it could be easily removed.

    • John Trotter

      Member
      October 22, 2021 at 9:16 am

      Imho gadgets added for regulation, not use, waste time and resources. Not the Aptera way. Work harder on regulators to get them to see the light.

      • Arlen Bell

        Member
        December 2, 2021 at 12:13 pm

        I agree in principle, BUT until regulators come around. . .

      • Curtis Cibinel

        Member
        December 2, 2021 at 1:29 pm

        Aptera is a very insignificant dog in this fight. Tesla and others have been lobbying for this for years. Even for ICE cars cameras make a ton of sense. A short term solution is important.

  • Patrick Liebknecht

    Member
    October 22, 2021 at 10:00 am

    There is also the regulation that you have to be able to see 200 feet behind the vehicle without obstruction from you or the car ( provided it’s a motorcycle ) it call comes to the MVA just how they feel that day LOL

  • Daniel Crotty

    Member
    November 7, 2021 at 6:48 pm

    Install the camera that a bunch of us want, but Push a button causing the Mirror to move out and function. Push again and it moves back to a flat position. Sort of sucks to have to do that, but if its required, maybe we can run with them closed.

    I’m still going to use the cameras, but it may meet the legal requirement.

    • Curtis Cibinel

      Member
      November 7, 2021 at 6:59 pm

      I think the intention is they give you the cameras and the compliance mirrors. They bolt on and if you decide to risk it before the draconian laws change thats your own choice. Moving/complex parts is not a good solution.

      • John Trotter

        Member
        November 7, 2021 at 8:22 pm

        Replace the lawyers, consultants, and lobbyists who are not doing their job of getting regulations to change. It happens, all the time. Don’t add gadgets. Do it right.

        • Russell Fauver

          Member
          February 2, 2022 at 3:32 pm

          Politicians like to create laws, or add to existing laws, but rarely will they repeal a law. It’s just not in them to do such a thing.

  • GREG MIRICH

    Member
    December 1, 2021 at 4:18 pm

    Here is a thought on the side mirrors. Let Aptera install side view cameras but make a mirror that slides over the cameras and is removable by the owner. Once you register your car you have the option of removing the side view mirrors and use the cameras. Might be a way to get around the antiquated law.

    • GLENN ZAJIC

      Member
      December 1, 2021 at 4:27 pm

      Gets my upvote! Becomes our responsibility not theirs.

    • Oz (It’s Oz, just Oz)

      Member
      December 1, 2021 at 4:37 pm

      I believe the legal term for that, in the indictments that would likely follow is “Accesory before the fact. “

      • Ron Ledohowski

        Member
        December 1, 2021 at 4:47 pm

        LMAO

      • GLENN ZAJIC

        Member
        December 1, 2021 at 4:54 pm

        Next you will say that it doesn’t reflect well on the company????.

        • Ron Ledohowski

          Member
          December 1, 2021 at 5:18 pm

          Hindsight is 20/20

          • Lou Verner

            Member
            December 2, 2021 at 7:49 am

            Not always…passenger RVMs always carry warning that “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear” ????

          • Ray Holan

            Moderator
            December 2, 2021 at 1:43 pm

            Well, it’s clearly not a case of foresight! LOL

        • Ron Ledohowski

          Member
          December 2, 2021 at 1:58 pm

          “To see or not to see….that is the question” – Shakespeare

  • Ron Ledohowski

    Member
    December 1, 2021 at 4:31 pm

    My vote too, “absolutely”.

    If the laws aren’t ready upon release, the change will still be forthcoming. Get ahead of the curve. Reminds me of autopilot hardware in preparation thereof. There’s no difference in my mind. Just do it!

    Let’s hope that is their plan. Elon has suggested something “similar-ish” would happen with the Cybertruck regarding mirrors.

  • Curtis Cibinel

    Member
    December 1, 2021 at 8:43 pm

    Lol I was thinking the same thing about a mirror wrapped on the camera post; when I noticed this thread was active I was planning to say that but you beat me to it.

    Legally you can have cameras as long as you have mirrors. So make a bolt on mirrors cover that is the minimum legal size for a autocycle. When the law gets fixed or for anyone that wants to roll the dice you just unbolt it and glue in a plastic plug. Depending how cheap they want to make it you might need a wrench to adjust the mirrors since the camera stocks wounding be made to move.

    Think about the amount of energy and fuel wasted in every vehicle on the road. Every vehicle could be 3% better range. That would save insane amounts of emissions. Once changed on a fairly global scope basically all evs and most gas vehicles will lose the mirrors.

    • my_discord_number_is_0328 bloody stupid

      Member
      December 2, 2021 at 7:51 pm

      somone said just make a plastic adapter for the mirror so it clamps onto the rectangular part of the camrea mirror and sits preferably at near driver behind camera holder, so it causes minimum drag. i guess blindspot can be included in camera with a fish eye lens covering a corner of the cameras field of view.

  • Guy SKEER

    Member
    December 7, 2021 at 7:10 am

    Make the Rear View Devices Like Cellphones – have the camera Peering out of a Small Port on a Small Reflective Surface – Dual Use/Purpose. They would naturally Aim the Same View, but the Camera View (Due to the Magic of Refractive Lenses) could have Zoom, and Wide Angle Views.

    When Parked, Have the Views be Wide Angle, so Security System could catch Keying/Bashing by Malefactors and accidents

    • Guy SKEER

      Member
      December 12, 2021 at 7:39 am

      Sadly, in Last Ambassador’s Virtual Event, it was mentioned that the Federal laws, Lagging by Twenty Years as usual, require a Rear View Mirror of TEN SQUARE INCHES to be hanging out in the Windstream. (How many Years was it that Automobile Aficionados were asking to Dump the Round Sealed Beam Headlights Mandated by the Feds?) There goes some Hundredths of the Good CD!!!! Just What We Need, More *&#@%!! Government! Thank Heaven We aren’t getting all the Gummint We are paying For!!! (Tip O the Hat to Mark Twain…or was it Will Rogers?)

      It were Me, I would “Comply” by a Two by Five Mirror, mounted end-on Driverside, the Video from near center on the Tail, and No Mirror or VidCam on Passenger side. I’ll be quick with Hammer, Hacksaw, or Prybar on the Driverside Mirror, if there is a Video Camera behind it, peering through a Hole in same.

      • Curtis Cibinel

        Member
        December 12, 2021 at 9:50 am

        It’s really unforgivable. Even with ice cars the slowing of adoption of cameras has resulted in an absolute ton of wasted oil. I’ve heard mirrors cost about 3% fuel efficiency on average but can’t find the source. 2×5 on one side if made removable eventually (or if you want to risk it) is still far smaller than most cars.

        Id be fine with corners being cut like adjustment requiring an allen key to keep the added cost down (hopefully it will only be on for a year or two at most). Perhaps the right side mirror can be an option for those that want to sacrifice efficiency for astedics. I’m hoping we still get the cameras along with the compliance mirror. It seems inevitable the rule will get changed soon(tm) but the delay and lack of transparency is bloody frustrating.

  • Kevin Drever

    Member
    January 28, 2022 at 10:11 pm

    I believe the VW group are also wanting this r/view camera for their future vehicles. And yes I agree the camera could have a sleeved mirror that attaches to camera stalk with grub screws…mirror could be made of plastic…though I expect aptera would do something more environmentally friendly.

  • Ronald Clarkson

    Member
    January 30, 2022 at 1:57 pm

    Might be political? Would it help ICE manufacturers slow Elon down by slow walking camera approval? Just a thought.

    • Vernon Michael Gardner

      Member
      January 30, 2022 at 11:58 pm

      Ronald, actually if Tesla could put cameras on the sides instead of mirrors, it would reduce their cd factor and increase their miles per charge.

  • Jon Arryn

    Member
    February 1, 2022 at 4:49 am

    I’m also looking forward to seeing the revised CD ratings with whatever production side-view mirrors they go forward with. Actually, I’m more interested in how those mirrors affect (if any) mileage per battery configuration. I recall, with Munro’s YouTube interview with Chris, them mentioning that the F-150 mirrors had more drag than all of Aptera. I’m not suggesting it’s going to be that bad, but obviously there’s some impact. Hopefully they can tune/engineer around the mirror requirements without sacrificing established performance/efficiency goals. Doesn’t sound like the regulations surrounding side view mirrors are going to change anytime soon.

  • Jon_J

    Member
    February 1, 2022 at 10:30 pm

    I believe I found the applicable standard 571.111 related to rear view mirrors here:

    https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2011-title49-vol6/pdf/CFR-2011-title49-vol6-sec571-111.pdf

    I was trying to piece together what the requirements were for the Aptera and whether there might be a reasonable fit to the law that wouldn’t meaningfully impair the coefficient of drag. I wasn’t sure if the Aptera would be considered a passenger car, multipurpose passenger vehicle or a motorcycle since, of course, there is no reference to an autocycle in this old standard. The requirements are different depending upon the type of vehicle.

    I was speculating on whether the drivers side-view mirror might be an interior mirror up against the surface of the glass window of the Aptera (cut to fit the curvature of the window). I took a mirror and sat in my own vehicle with the mirror inside and had a reasonable field of view behind me outside of the driver’s side window. Certainly the view in the outside mirror was better and captured the outside door handles, but that’s not to say an interior mirror might not be sufficient. If the Aptera fits in the definition of a motorcycle, then there is not within the standard the statement that the mirror be “outside”, rather it just needs to be at least 279mm outside the longitudinal centerline of the motorcycle. With the Aptera’s curved window and overall vehicle shape, an interior mirror might function even better than it does on my own vehicle which is boxy. Of course, the window needs to be able to roll down, so maybe the attachment could be on the upper fixed portion of the window.

    There are many subsequent filings in the federal register related to FMVSS No.111 on rearview mirrors that add more context and I have been leafing through them. Perhaps it is one of these later documents that clears things up as far as what the requirements are for an autocycle, I don’t know.

    • Jon Arryn

      Member
      February 2, 2022 at 4:01 am

      Nice research Jon_J. Not sure why I didn’t do more sleuthing myself. I guess I’ve gotten soft with early retirement. 🙂

      I hope Aptera soon provides practical results and revised body optics for their production solution.

  • Nathan Hubbard

    Member
    February 2, 2022 at 11:15 am

    Didn’t they say you can see the wheel pants from the driver’s position?

    Just mount mirrors flush on the back of the wheel pants.

    Yes, I realize this probably wouldn’t work very well, but maybe it would meet the requirement.

    • John Malcom

      Member
      February 2, 2022 at 11:43 am

      The mirrors, whether mounted in the traditional place or on the wheel pants will have close to the same drag so no real benefit mounting them there. And of course the mirrors would be out of drivers site in turns as the wheel pants move in the direction of the turn with the wheels

    • Markus Schmid

      Member
      February 2, 2022 at 4:07 pm

      The wheel pants ar nonsuspended. Not a good idea to place a mirror there if you want a stable image.

  • Vernon Michael Gardner

    Member
    March 13, 2022 at 11:28 am

    According to the federal government that they are going to start a 3-year test program to decide whether side mirrors or cameras should be used in the future. If you want to get in on the testing I posted the link down below.

    https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/14/2022-05237/agency-information-collection-activities-submission-to-the-office-of-management-and-budget-for

Viewing 1 - 21 of 21 replies

or to reply.

Original Post
0 of 0 posts June 2018
Now