Jump to content

New 22 Silverado LT back up camera

steelerdude1
 Share

Recommended Posts

steelerdude1 Enthusiast

steelerdude1

Posted
Posted

Hi guys, I’m new here. I purchased a new 2022 Silverado LT 2.7 Turbo 4X4. My only complaint so far is the back up camera. It’s a pretty low quality image during the day, but at night it’s so grainy, it is pretty much useless. 
 

I have had new GM vehicles since 2014 to include an equinox, a Malibu, and a Terrain. Never had an issue like this. 
 

I am planning to schedule a service/warranty appointment on this, and was curious if anyone else has had this issue. 

Dunn Senior Enthusiast

Dunn

Posted
Posted

yeah its pretty crappy.......unless you get the conv 2 pkg the camera is a lil better

David Bodine Enthusiast

David Bodine

Posted
Posted

I purchased my 2022 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Custom in November. The quality of the backup camera is the poorest I have seen. The most concerning problem is that the camera shows objects to be much further away than they are.

bones30 Enthusiast

bones30

Posted
Posted

Agreed. I do not trust the camera on my truck. I think they went for a really wide angle camera but it makes everything out of perspective. 
I was looking forward to a nice factory camera. 

Leonardo Willi Enthusiast

Leonardo Willi

Posted
Posted (edited)

Interesting - I've got a Impala LTZ and the camera is pretty darn good. A friend just got a Denali HD2500, it doesn't have a rear view mirror, all cameras. Not sure I'm ready for that step. It took a while to to trust push button start :)   

 My on-order, I do have the LT with the up conv pkg to the pwr seat/keyless bundle. It's still got to be better than nothing. 

Edited by Leonardo Willi

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

    • Chuck FB
      Joke Thread

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      This video may not be the exact content for the joke thread but its a lot of laughs so here it is, I've only watched a portion of it so far but if anyone is looking for some light hearted good soap box driving action, its here. As a note in the upper left of the screen it shows the number out of 100 to refer back to any particular vehicle for comment !.    https://www.facebook.com/reel/1351928276956715
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...