SG9663DR update

No why would you do that, the stuff already there in my car are also just wires.
 
No why would you do that, the stuff already there in my car are also just wires.
In mine they are mostly wrapped. Plus having seen several car factories, cable looms were mostly wrapped. To reduce friction and possible rattle.
 
There are some kind of tape on some of the original wires in my car, but not the kind you refer to, which i also know and have seen used in generous amounts on older vehicles.
But the flat electrical tape like looking stuff in my car are just very loosely wrapped around my wires to keep them together, it it was to cover them completely they made a bad job cuz you can see more un- covered wire than covered wire.
Of course my car is also just about bottom of the range, though i paid for a mid range car due to our insane taxes on cars.
 
Yeah new CPL won’t have any vignetting like that
Is the new CPL 'backward compatible' fitment wise with older cameras (X2, DC, etc.) so that going forward there will only be a single version? Just curious but I've been known to move cameras around and generally just keep various components in a 'parts box' for convenience.
 
I see little benefit to wrapping a cable. Looms are wrapped to keep wires together for manufacturing convenience more than anything else. Doing this ensures that each wire will enter and exit the loom exactly where needed. No wires or cables should ever be subject to abrasion- that is poor engineering, and the correct solution to that problem is securing the wire/loom so that it doesn't move around.

In almost 45 years of me working on cars to at least some degree, I have only seen wires fail from overheating, strain from being pulled on, overflexing where movement is required, being melted by contact with a hot surface, and from very old wire insulation degrading. I've never seen an abrasion problem when the wire/cable was mounted and routed correctly and I've seen plenty of 25+ year old vehicles.

If there was any need or real benefit to wrapping your cam wires or cables, you could be pretty certain that SG would have that done for you already, straight out of the box. Just run them carefully looking for and addressing potential problems through better mounting or routing, and you'll be fine with them just as they are.

Phil
 
I think it is DT MI, the old ones at least snap right on these new cameras, so the new CPL filters should also snap right on older cameras.
So i assume SG will carry on with these, instead of having 2 almost similar products on the shelves.
 
Does anyone wrap cables in felt tape (e.g. tesa Adhesive Cloth Fabric Tape), before routing them under the panels?
yeah we do that, I don't wrap entire cables but do use tesa tape in places where cables might rattle or where there are cables running with other cables, looped cables etc
 
even on the best of surfaces my little car sound like a tin can full of pennies tumbling down a hill, though my driver side door have developed a really loud and annoying rattle, clearly something inside it is loose and you really hear it when the window are down.

Its like someone have dropped coins down into the door aside for the rattle is up high on the door.
 
Any issues with tucking cables under the headliner?

As it happens, the only part that went under the headliner is the part from the mirror to the top of the A-pillar. I removed the pillar cover and was able to easily secure the cable above the side curtain airbag so it can't interfere if the airbag ever goes off. Tucking the wire into the headliner across the top of the windshield was a piece of cake.

96713.jpg

I ran the rear camera cable down the side of the back hatch opening, then along the door sill openings along the factory wiring. So I didn't have to get anywhere near the airbags. If I had run the rear camera cable straight forward I would have used a fish tape to push the cable along the center of the headliner, away from airbags. The cable wouldn't have been long enough that way though.
 
These photos from another thread show how compact you can get the install when planned out just right.

ba01985617155d60baf74a20e570ad9e.jpg

c5a9cc2f9a35c3a0ce971e023b900151.jpg
 
It's wider, but half as tall, the top entry of the USB cable on the old model also requires it to be mounted lower in most cases
 
For instance, let's take Tony's car from the pic. Where and how would he mount the DC rear cam?
 
It's wider, but half as tall, the top entry of the USB cable on the old model also requires it to be mounted lower in most cases
The housing feels light and cheap, not saying it is, but that's the feeling, wondering about plastic quality under the sun, despite being behind UV safety glass.
Also housing feels hollow, what's inside the camera body, a single PCB with the sensor. What's driving the length of the housing, the PCB? It seems it could be shorter but need to understand what the limitations are inside.
 
Staying with car in question, we all know where his other dual channel was mounted, opposed to below the sensor housing. If you can see what I'm trying to get at...
 
Pretty sure a lot of people (me included) would like to see a smaller version of the current DC rear cam as an option.
 
For instance, let's take Tony's car from the pic. Where and how would he mount the DC rear cam?
typical install the old rear cam would be about 4~5cm lower down on the window, you might be able to come up with some scenario where the old design can be more discrete on some particular vehicle, there will always be one design that works better for one application than another, that's why we have more than one design ;)
 
typical install the old rear cam would be about 4~5cm lower down on the window, you might be able to come up with some scenario where the old design can be more discrete on some particular vehicle, there will always be one design that works better for one application than another, that's why we have more than one design ;)

Not if you stick the mount to the plastic trim or use the right angled connector for the rear cam.

I hope the other design is what some of us expected.
 
What's driving the length of the housing, the PCB? It seems it could be shorter but need to understand what the limitations are inside.
if it was shorter it would limit how much rotation we could have as the mount would end up in the field of view, we trimmed every last millimeter out of it that we could while still being able to rotate it and support a CPL
 
Back
Top