I’m not asking you to defend the statement, but if it varies situationally, I find the statement “research shows it is safer” could use some explanation.
With backup camera, I probably COULD back into parking lot spaces. But it would take considerably more effort on my part than simply pulling in.
Yeah, backing out from between two land yachts requires care. But in terms of space, you are backing into a larger area than if you had backed into the slot. Spatially, more room for error. Fortunately, I pretty much never am parking in a lot where I would be backing into a really steady/heavy/fast-moving stream of traffic. For the lots I frequent, the rear “cross-traffic alert” makes backing out of spaces no big deal at all.
To be fair, I think many of the studies pre-date safety features like backup cameras and auto-breaking. There may be less benefit now. From my perspective, I back in where I think it makes sense to do so and don’t sweat it when it doesn’t.
The abstract however seems intentionally misleading and fails to acknowledge selection bias.
X% pull in/back out park and allegedly pull in/back out parkers make up some unnamed number more than X% of accidents. Unclear if that number was even a statistically significant number more.
Is it that 89% pull in park and they are involved in 90% of the accidents? Maybe it is on the other side of a paywall but not there.
Are the smaller group that choose to back up park matched in other characteristics to the majority, or does their being of a minority choice group making a choice sold as “safer” identify them as a group more concerned about safety and more likely to pay attention while parking?
Weird about that study - it actually was a great experiment if they reported the right numbers. In North Carolina, major university campuses had transitioned to License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology, and therefore prohibited back in or pull through parking unless someone also bought an optional front plate. Back in and pull through parking rates likely decreased in the period after that change. (The only people still back in or pull through parking really wanted to, made extra effort to be able to, strong selection bias but fewer doing it than before). If back in parking was significantly safer then accidents in their lots should have increased in frequency afterwards. The lack of that being reported is … weird. Wonder why?
Reversing is inherently more difficult and carries potential risks that driving forward (at low speed) does not - due to limited visibility and the likelihood that it’s a thing less familiar and practiced for the driver (we spend most of the time making the car go forward and developing the muscle memory for that).
So you have a choice of reversing into a space where there probably are not cars and people, or reversing out of that space into a space where there are cars and people (and in this latter case, with additionally compromised view of that space due to being flanked by adjacent vehicles).
I’ve witnessed many collision incidents in car parks (including two where I was the stationary party that the other car hit). It’s always cars reversing out either uncautiously and hastily, or just reversing out and not looking in the right place to notice that they are going to hit another vehicle that is in the way. I have fortunately never witnessed a case where a reversing vehicle hit a person, but if they can fail to see a whole car, it seems possible that they might fail to see a person, as most people are smaller than cars.
My friend’s pickup truck had a backup camera giving a wide view, which was cool, except for the fact that she had a bicycle hitch attached and that the backup camera warning system would throw a beeping fit well before she was too close to hitting anything.
I’ve been thinking about this more, prompted by the recent Pit thread. And I’ve concluded that waiting for people to back out of a parking space is asymmetric with waiting for them to back in because when people are backing out, they will generally let people in the traffic aisle pass before pulling out, so my in my estimation, somewhat fewer people are inconvenienced by people backing out of parking spots than are inconvenienced by people backing into them. @Dseid made the same point. Of course, when people backing out don’t wait, they just crash into other cars.
Good psychological insight here.
I drive straight in every once in a while to ease loading, like when I’m buying lumber at Lowe’s. Most people in my situation just park in the fire lane.
Me too, most commonly at the crowded Costco parking garage. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve backed into a spot, gotten out of the car, and walked by the person still trying to drive straight into the space I gave up.
Yes, and if you are relying on the cameras to back into traffic, you are negligent. Many carmakers understood this soon after introducing rear view cameras and added cross traffic alerts.
I’m not sure how reliable these systems are at detecting pedestrians. These systems aren’t required, and in America, carmakers can just say to “hell with pedestrians.”
My pickup (Honda Ridgeline) actually has a dashed line on the backup camera that indicates where the edge of the tailgate is when you put it down. It’s remarkably handy.
It’s also got a sort of fisheye lens mode that gives me about 180 degrees of vision, albeit distorted. Between that and the proximity sensors and the cross-traffic sensors, I can see FAR better with the camera than with the mirrors and craning my head around. It just takes a bit of getting used to in order to see the cars coming a hundred yards and 90 degrees away.
I do concur that the back-in method gives you better visibility on the way out, and it also gives an advantage on the way in- nothing’s moving but you. So with the cameras, it’s safer than trying to back into traffic would be.
And to note, just because you have cameras there is nothing stopping you from continuing to use your mirrors or turning your head. The camera is just another tool.
But once you learn how to understand and use it effectively the difference in time required to park vs head in is minimal.
Oddly enough…I have a 2017 Ford Escape that has a backup camera that alerts with a beep to things passing by on the sides. It is often triggered by my mailbox next to my driveway. My mom has the exact same car but a 2018 and it doesn’t have this alert system. I actually asked the dealership to look at it when she had some recall work done. They said it was not malfunctioning - it is not a feature in her car.
I reckon either it was causing problems because it wasn’t reliable, and/or people were relying on it too much and that was somehow a problem.
Or it cost money, more money than it was worth and they cost reduced it out in 2018. Happens all the time in the automotive world. If customers don’t notice when a feature is removed it gets removed (but the price you pay remains the same).
Standard Features
The 2018 Escape is available in four trims: S, SE, SEL and Titanium. The least expensive Ford Escape is a pretty basic small SUV with cruise control, rearview camera, 6-way-adjustable driver’s seat and automatic headlights.
From reading online, the 2018 Escape backup camera seems to have been very problematic.
I was referring to the alert system. All cars on all trim levels were required to have rear view cameras in 2018 but not the alert system. The software for cameras can be a problem for all manufacturers, not just Ford.
My 2019 Toyota 4Runner backup camera simply does not work. It’s blank. It worked on and off for a while. I haven’t bothered to get it fixed yet. It would be kinda nice to have, but no big deal. I’m waiting for something else to break, but so far so good.
The GPS is worthless and if it finds the address, takes you in the wrong direction, and the GUI is even worse. I just keep a Samsung tablet in the car for directions. That works fine.
Right, no evidence that any meaningful “waiting for traffic to pass” is happening since ultimately you cannot defeat the fact that 1) the physical lines of sight mean you actually have no idea what traffic might be “waiting to pass” 2) there are 12 million collisions in parking lots every year and nearly all of them involve someone backing out of a space. All of the “this is why it makes sense to do it this way…” stuff regarding front-in parking has to contend with the fact that the “this way” in which we do it results in one parking lot collision every three seconds and one injury every ten minutes.
The system is not working for anyone except people whose irrational opposition to back-in parking is the overriding priority. Even if you actually could reliably avoid traffic that is close enough to cause a collision - which, obviously, is catastrophically failing to happen on the collective level - the idea that you are never even inconveniencing someone who is 200 feet down the road and has to wait for you is of course impossible. Unless your car is surrounded by a swarm of drones at all times, you have no way of detecting that.
In addition, this argument only applies to situations such as grocery stores where arrival and departure are randomly staggered. Consider cases such as:
-arenas holding sporting events or entertainment performances
-workplaces on shift schedules
-high schools
-movie theaters where 300+ people may be seeing a particular film in one auditorium
In all of those cases, you have people arriving over a window of 15 minutes to an hour based on how early they prefer to get to something that starts at a particular time, but then all of them - up to 16,000 cars at the high end, to use the Dodger Stadium parking lot as an example - leave at exactly the same time as the event finishes, the workday reaches 5:00, or the last bell rings at school.
Spreading out the alleged “delays” as people enter the lot when you have a longer period to work with and less traffic at any one time, so that everyone can go front-out when hundreds or thousands of cars are trying to leave at once, is of course exactly what you want to do.
It depends on how busy the parking lot is. At the supermarket, everyone parks head-in so as to be able to load groceries into the trunk. (And the idea that there might be enough space between cars to fit a cart between the cars at all makes me laugh.) I wait for people to back out all the time. And if no one waits for me, i may never get out.
At the commuter rail parking lot, everyone backs into parking spots. People drift in one at a time, but leave in big batches. There’s plenty of time to park your car, because you won’t be doing anything else until the train arrives anyway. Everyone gets out faster not only if they can pull straight out, but if they don’t need to wait for some ignorant newbie to slowly pull out, either.
All things being equal, back in parking is safer, and it’s often possible with less “jiggling” to align the car, due to the turning wheels being on the front. But all things are never equal. There are always other considerations.