Park Assist or Reversing Camera? Or both?

[G-rig]

bigger trucks such as garbage trucks aren't allow to reverse over a certain distance and not without another person standing behind the truck guiding them.

[Maverick]

bigger trucks such as garbage trucks aren't allow to reverse over a certain distance and not without another person standing behind the truck guiding them.

I like that, we could get all the unemployed to stand around on the streets waiting for cars to reverse so they could guide them

[Corey_R]

If you can't park a Golf maverick im REALLY worried. Its like reverse sensors on a swift, seriously lol

As much as I agree with your sentiment that it should be easy to park a Golf because it is relatively small - you are missing the point of the RVC as Maverick is pointing out. One of the car organisations rates 'rear visibility' of cars by doing witches hat tests and reporting which ones they can see out the rear. Unfortunately the Golf would shock many as being very bad in this area. Maverick isn't exaggerating when he says that all those cars you have mentioned have better rear visibility than the Golf.

So whilst I do agree that yes, REGARDLESS of rear visibility you should be able to park the Golf using your spatial awareness, your spatial awareness will not let you know that a child is just about to walk under your rear tyre etc... THAT is the purpose of the RVC.

[Pauly]

I do agree with coreying regarding the Reversing Camera, and the cost of it is so minimal ($500) it will pay for itself in the event that a child/animal/anything comes behind the car and you cant see it.

However the Park Assist is something different all together.

[elisiX]

I went with the Park Assist .. and I can park perfectly fine.

It's a safety, convenience feature for me. For $1500.. it wasn't a big stretch for me.

[Highlander]

Reversing camera - with you on this one

I'm sorry but it has to be said that your argument is flawed and ridiculous.

The Golf was less rear visibility than all of those cars. The size of the car has absolutely nothing to do with visibility when reversing.

I guess your xray eyes enable you to see children/pets/objects behind your car when reversing because the rest of us mere mortals either have to get out and check and rely on luck or use a camera/sensors to check for us.

When I started driving seat belts were not compulsory, a windscreen demister was an extra. Enthusiasts installed windscreen washers. More recently in 1990 to get ABS brakes with my Cressida, they could only be purchased as part of the luxury pack combined with a sun roof.

All the above are now compulsory as far as I know and my betting is that you probably won't buy a vehicle without a reversing camera is say 5 years or so. These "luxuries" have a way of filtering into the market and then becoming compulsory.

For the sceptics, try this for an experiment. Stand a two year old child behind your car while you sit in the driver's seat. Have someone walk the child away from your car and be amazed how far away they are before you actually see them. It's scary.

Enough to say that if you are reversing you will feel them before you see them. Not a very desirable outcome. Can ruin a lot of lives for a very small saving by not ticking the reversing camera box.

I have both but if it is a matter of cash I would tick RVC every day. I quickly check the RVC every time I reverse park, even into my garage. My CC is now 4 months old and I have used the park assist 5 times. Once on delivery, once around the corner from the showroom to see that I could do it and three more times to show off the WOW factor.

"My judgement is so bad I don't trust the park assist"

[G-rig]

I think it's fairly obvious if you have young kids then the RVC &/or sensors are a no brainer.

Also It would pay for itself as it's easy to back into a low bollard you don't see etc and the repair bill/excess would be $500 straight away.

I test drove a 135i and that had far better visability out the back.

[Corey_R]

Enough to say that if you are reversing you will feel them before you see them.

This line made me laugh.....


... now I feel bad because its a very serious topic! hehe

[G-rig]

As far as resale, something like a sunroof would help sell the car more than all these gizmos like ACC & park assist..

[Maverick]

As far as resale, something like a sunroof would help sell the car more than all these gizmos like ACC & park assist..

I disagree, I would see an aging sunroof as a liability with potentially expensive maintenance and repairs whereas ACC and park assist would be good selling points. Everyone is different so it's pointless picking mods based on what you might get for them down the track. A sunroof is about the most pointless option for the Golf.

Far better to buy the car that suits your requirements and who cares what happens in 5+ years time when you trade it.

[G-rig]

That's true, had a sunroof in my Audi and although it was nice to have there are Many other options and mods I get first.

It's just that all these new things add up a bit and a lot of the gizmos are things you can't really see like ACC which may not mean anything once the car gets older/2nd hand.

[Sharkie]

I test drove a 135i and that had far better visability out the back.

And how was that Greg?

I think it is awesome .....

If it had 5 seats, I wouldn't even bother looking at the R ....

[G-rig]

And how was that Greg?

I think it is awesome .....

If it had 5 seats, I wouldn't even bother looking at the R ....

Hi mate, that was a while ago and I'd like to get one down the track but probably not for a while. I think the body/shape could be a bit better yet but would be a good car if you didn't need something too big.

Hard to give a decent review as i wasn't able to fang it too much with the salesman in the car, and as you know they have runflats which probably affects the ride.

[Dubya]

I think it's fairly obvious if you have young kids then the RVC &/or sensors are a no brainer.

Also It would pay for itself as it's easy to back into a low bollard you don't see etc and the repair bill/excess would be $500 straight away.

I test drove a 135i and that had far better visability out the back.

The RVC is an exceptional and exceptionally valuable extra facility for the GTI and almost any other car.

At $500 it should be a no-brainer on the GTI (which has the requisite screen standard).

You know it makes sense - even if the kids you save are not your own!

I just wish VGA would come up with some "luxury" or "value" packs that added, say, roof, leather, RVC and bi-xenons for an extra $5k or so. It would probably not result in any lower profits (as more people would get more options and they could cut a deal with the factory on a shipment with the extra options).

As for the 135i, I have not driven one, but would get one in a flash in the right circumstances.

[G-rig]

I just wish VGA would come up with some "luxury" or "value" packs that added, say, roof, leather, RVC and bi-xenons for an extra $5k or so. It would probably not result in any lower profits (as more people would get more options and they could cut a deal with the factory on a shipment with the extra options).

Good idea, i think Subaru do something like that and you geat leather & sunroof and maybe something else..

All the options add up too much and before you know it you've spent $55k instead of $40k. At $40-45k the GTI is great value, but not once you add too many options.

As for the 135i, I have not driven one, but would get one in a flash in the right circumstances.

I only drove the auto but that would be the perfect car to get manual (the box would be better than the Golf too). I'd definitely get one over an S3, and the AudiCentre sales people are here are quite snobby and don't deserve the sale nor gave me a call back regarding stock, whereas i was offered a test drive in a new BMW demo. They mustn't want to knock BMW off their perch that much LOL.