Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Has anyone tried or researched upgrading the factory backup camera? My camera is very blurry in my 2014 Sierra SLT and am looking to improve the quality. I’ve seen cleaning the lens on the current camera so I’ll try that but I’m not ruling out a replacement camera if there is a higher resolution option on the market. Before anyone asks, yes I cleaned the dust and dirt off.

image.jpg

Posted
1 hour ago, TheGreatOne said:

Is the quality that much better?

I personally don't see that much difference in the two screen shots, at least not a couple hundred bucks worth.

Posted
1 hour ago, Horacio said:

It couldn’t be any worse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let me know how it is if you get it.

  • Like 2
Posted
On 11/2/2020 at 8:21 PM, Horacio said:

Hot damn! Just what I needed, thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please keep us updated on how you like it. My camera is just as blurry as yours, cleaning made no difference.

Posted
On 11/2/2020 at 11:42 PM, Booger T said:

I personally don't see that much difference in the two screen shots, at least not a couple hundred bucks worth.

Are you kidding?  Look at the water droplets on the bumper vs the stock camera where you can't even tell it's wet. 

  • Like 1
Posted
I personally don't see that much difference in the two screen shots, at least not a couple hundred bucks worth.
If you download the the two pics the details other then the bumper are: the brown rocks below the bumper, clarity of the road and the rear wheel of the Tahoe. I got the idea from members on this site. It'll for sure be an upgrade I do. Surprised anyone who got this hasn't spoken up.

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

  • 3 months later...
Posted

I installed this a couple weeks ago. Here are my results. I feel they’re better than what the website shows. My OEM camera had a lot of scratching. The field of view is slightly better with the new camera which I like a lot. Also the low light picture is great.

Before
d9efc7add7562607647029160111f8a0.jpg
After
f6d009793ebb51b65ffef0122549206e.jpg
Before
5f3f5b3835b87f790da1e51a9d0678f2.jpg
After
0f9022dfcd632969c8488cb85c1b9a80.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Posted

I did this also, and the results are more than worth it. I did not take pictures, but the new camera has a much clearer picture. Great upgrade.

  • Like 1
  • 2 years later...
Posted
On 2/27/2021 at 2:00 PM, Justin14Sierra said:

I installed this a couple weeks ago. Here are my results. I feel they’re better than what the website shows. My OEM camera had a lot of scratching. The field of view is slightly better with the new camera which I like a lot. Also the low light picture is great.

Before
d9efc7add7562607647029160111f8a0.jpg
After
f6d009793ebb51b65ffef0122549206e.jpg
Before
5f3f5b3835b87f790da1e51a9d0678f2.jpg
After
0f9022dfcd632969c8488cb85c1b9a80.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which camera did you get? I want to keep the oem park assist lines like you did.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...