Jump to content

GMC Sierra rear trailer camera mounting questions. Any experience/ideas welcome

apw63
 Share

Recommended Posts

apw63 New Member

apw63

Posted
Posted

We just purchased a new 2021 GMC Sierra 1500 3.0l diesel. The truck is equipped with all or the trailering and camera options.
 

I’m looking for anyones  experience with the rear camera mount on a lance 2021 2185 or similar trailer. I’m a little worried about the mounting location and the location of the back ladder. It’s should be no problem mounting the camera. I’m just don’t know how the camera will deal with the ladder. The ladder should be in the field of view of the camera. Will the system still be able to display the transparent trailer camera view? The photo show the general location of the camera mount.

D30B9E2B-695B-4570-A04C-A78E20E16F65.jpeg

FCCD7175-00C3-4056-B52C-E2BF51809350.jpeg

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
Posted

I don't have the instructions handy, but, if iirc, that location will be too high for seamless looking transparent trailer. 

 

apw63 New Member

apw63

Posted
  • Author
Posted
12 hours ago, redwngr said:

I don't have the instructions handy, but, if iirc, that location will be too high for seamless looking transparent trailer. 

 

Thank you, but your response has nothing to do with my question, the spot on the picture was just for reference, to show general position relationship between ladder and camera. Does not matter how high or low the camera is, the ladder potion is the same. 

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
Posted (edited)

Sorry for misinterpreting.

 

I though from your post you were interested in making Transparent Trailer  work.

 

 

 

Edited by redwngr
bwoodsmn Enthusiast

bwoodsmn

Posted
Posted
On 9/5/2021 at 3:08 PM, apw63 said:

We just purchased a new 2021 GMC Sierra 1500 3.0l diesel. The truck is equipped with all or the trailering and camera options.

Will the system still be able to display the transparent trailer camera view? The photo show the general location of the camera mount.

 

 

The ladder will interfere - I'm not sure if it will "fail" the synchronization process, and give you the 3 cameras view, or if the sync will stich everything together and still show the vertical post of the ladder.  Could you mount the camera to the left side vertical ladder rail? An aluminum plate drilled into the ladder, long enough to center the camera, would work, as long as it was rigid enough to not vibrate.  Or you could offset the camera rearward until the ladder was out of the field of view.

apw63 New Member

apw63

Posted
  • Author
Posted
46 minutes ago, bwoodsmn said:

The ladder will interfere - I'm not sure if it will "fail" the synchronization process, and give you the 3 cameras view, or if the sync will stich everything together and still show the vertical post of the ladder.  Could you mount the camera to the left side vertical ladder rail? An aluminum plate drilled into the ladder, long enough to center the camera, would work, as long as it was rigid enough to not vibrate.  Or you could offset the camera rearward until the ladder was out of the field of view.


thank you for the reply. I think I could build something ridged up off the bumper or a block mount attached to the back of the trailer.  I’m going to go down to GMC dealership and see if one of the techs know anything. 

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • NDKoze
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By NDKoze · Posted

      If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...