When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Double False. The light EMITTED has to be red. The device, nor the light itself, cannot be blue. I look forward to reading the article that specifies that the outside visible surface must be a reflex reflector in the color red. Please note that many OEM taillights are no longer reflex, but rather clear housings with LEDs.
Please get your facts straight before spreading non-sense.
The requirement isn't complicated at all:
Reflex reflectors: On the rear—1 red on each side of the vertical centerline, at the same height, and as far apart as practicable.
Not less than 15 inches, nor more than 60 inches.
Please note that many OEM taillights are no longer reflex, but rather clear housings with LEDs.
Please note, I never said a vehicle's tail light housing had to be red
I said DOT requires that "vehicles have at least 2 RED reflex reflectors on the rear of the vehicle."
Go ahead and check those cars with the clear tail lights, they will have a red reflector incorporated somewhere in the bumper
Double False. The light EMITTED has to be red. The device, nor the light itself, cannot be blue. I look forward to reading the article that specifies that the outside visible surface must be a reflex reflector in the color red. Please note that many OEM taillights are no longer reflex, but rather clear housings with LEDs.
(1) Every motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, and pole trailer, and any other vehicle which is being drawn at the end of a combination of vehicles, shall be equipped with at least two taillamps mounted on the rear, which, when lighted as required in s. 316.217, shall emit a red light plainly visible from a distance of 1,000 feet to the rear, except that passenger cars and pickup trucks manufactured or assembled prior to January 1, 1972, which were originally equipped with only one taillamp shall have at least one taillamp. On a combination of vehicles, only the taillamps on the rearmost vehicle need actually be seen from the distance specified. On vehicles equipped with more than one taillamp, the lamps shall be mounted on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable. An object, material, or covering that alters the taillamp's visibility from 1,000 feet may not be placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied over a taillamp.
I quote the above as the only state I care about and is just one example of how you're incorrect. Please get your facts straight before spreading non-sense.
Got to love the state of Florida. We have fog and rain here dense enough that a 1000 watt spotlight couldn't be seen from 1000 feet. So the first question, then is, under what weather conditions. They are defined in the law as ANY weather condition, in section 316.217. They try to contradict themselves by saying it should be measured under normal atmospheric conditions....again, what is the legal definition?
Further, the federal requirements are not based on maximum viewing distance, but on standardized photometric data, therefore, the Florida law appears to be unenforceable as they have defined no real basis for choosing the 1000 foot requirement. It appears arbitrary.
I also wonder if officers carry a calibrated distance wheel to measure off 1000 feet after pulling you over to make sure. And is it going to be on an unlit, level, straight highway? What if the vehicle has some sort of cargo (i.e - carrying a load)? What defines a load? The driver, a passenger? A full tank of fuel? So now if the driver gets out of the vehicle to walk the 1000 feet with the cop, that then changes the parameters that you were originally pulled over for.
Well, I guess this is one way to keep busy on a very rainy day here in S. FL.
The requirement isn't complicated at all:
Reflex reflectors: On the rear—1 red on each side of the vertical centerline, at the same height, and as far apart as practicable.
Not less than 15 inches, nor more than 60 inches.
I don't know why you want to talk about reflex reflectors, they are not a light source and are only part of the requirement.
The discussion here is about visibility of TAIL LIGHTS - a light source.
Please note, I never said a vehicle's tail light housing had to be red
I said DOT requires that "vehicles have at least 2 RED reflex reflectors on the rear of the vehicle."
Go ahead and check those cars with the clear tail lights, they will have a red reflector incorporated somewhere in the bumper
NO... they don't. The current requirement is two "tail lamps", period. That emit a red light, period. Read my posts above.
Originally Posted by FLZapped
I don't know why you want to talk about reflex reflectors, they are not a light source and are only part of the requirement.
The discussion here is about visibility of TAIL LIGHTS - a light source.
-Bruce
I'll stick with my tinted tails (that look badass by the way) and take my chances... as I have without fault nor incident for 7 years and 9 vehicles with blackout tails.
Last edited by bambo2888; Sep 22, 2012 at 10:32 AM.
How about the entire CAR slowing down in front of you? Seems like a pretty lame excuse for following too close. The last indication I need to slow down is taillights... i usually pay attention to the lights, traffic, and vehicle ahead as signals.
Yes, you're right, let's do away with brake lights because obviously there is no reason for them to exist.
This is the first thread I've looked at on the C5 subforum, and it confirms the stereotype in my mind of drivers of these cars... guidos and ricers!
I don't know why you want to talk about reflex reflectors, they are not a light source and are only part of the requirement.
The discussion here is about visibility of TAIL LIGHTS - a light source.
-Bruce
The discussion is about the black out kit and all aspects of the kit. It is NOT DOT legal, regardless of whether the tail lights are visible at a given distance.
Originally Posted by bambo2888
NO... they don't. The current requirement is two "tail lamps", period. That emit a red light, period. Read my posts above.
Current FEDERAL standard regulations require at least 2 reflectors. I really don't know how to make it any more clear to you.
By all means, if I'm wrong, show me a car that doesn't have red reflectors from the factory
for a car show.....anything goes,they look nice.....but driving down the road....nah....too many distractions out there.......i dont want to hit or be hit. dont need the agravation.
The driver behind you doesn't have to be distracted by a cell phone or anything like that. They could just be doing what people normally do when they drive, looking at things other than the car ahead. That's why taillights and a 3rd brake light are required, to draw attention to the fact that the car in front of you is braking. Do you drive with your eyes fixed on the guy in front of you constantly thinking about whether he's braking or not? Probably not.
Why risk being rear ended, unless you just don't care about your car that much? And guess what happens when you try to get the rear ender's insurance to pay...
I think if I had blackout covers like this I'd also try to find much brighter bulbs. That doesn't take care of the reflector issue though.
Last edited by winkosmosis; Sep 22, 2012 at 11:44 AM.
Your car looks great! Vettes look awesome blacked out like that.
I'm staying out of the other discussions!! Got a ticket once in PA for headlight covers on a truck. The officer said that the lights cannot be covered or colored, period. That was in the 80's though.
Yes, you're right, let's do away with brake lights because obviously there is no reason for them to exist.
This is the first thread I've looked at on the C5 subforum, and it confirms the stereotype in my mind of drivers of these cars... guidos and ricers!
Classic straw-man approach. This is obviously not the point anyone was making... and thus not worth addressing.
Originally Posted by RMB97LS1
Your car looks great! Vettes look awesome blacked out like that.
I'm staying out of the other discussions!! Got a ticket once in PA for headlight covers on a truck. The officer said that the lights cannot be covered or colored, period. That was in the 80's though.
...for your headlights and 30 yrs ago.
Originally Posted by dblerman
Current FEDERAL standard regulations require at least 2 reflectors. I really don't know how to make it any more clear to you.
By all means, if I'm wrong, show me a car that doesn't have red reflectors from the factory
I sincerely don't mean to get personal, so please don't take this wrong. I have cited my source and quoted the current statute above... how are you logically proposing that a federal body has any governorship over individual state laws? i'm sorry, but your argument holds no water. PS: here you go:
unsubscribed.
Last edited by bambo2888; Sep 22, 2012 at 01:08 PM.
I wouldn't do them but I know the OP isn't looking for confirmation of his decision. Too much risk for me from both a safety and LEO standpoint. I don't want any additional attention to my car from our police friends.
So um.... Hi, I posted some pics of my darkened tail lights... they look great... You can see them really well in the day and in the night... when I put my breaks on, you see red light... come on... brighter, and people are like, breaks, I better slow down.
I believe you have my stapler... I ... I want it back... or I'll burn the place down.
Oh and seriously... the guy who posted that this was his first thread he was reading from the C5 area... wow I hope that made you feel bigger as a man. I'm old enough to know I wouldn't respect, admire or even give the time of day to an old fart foolish enough to let words like that plop from his mouth. I'm 32, and if you are older than me, what you said just confirms to me how completely sad it is to see someone older who has the mentality of a high school student. Your words, your comment and what they meant were as empty as your head. You've been put on my ignore list, because you are a worthless waste of oxygen.
I sincerely don't mean to get personal, so please don't take this wrong. I have cited my source and quoted the current statute above... how are you logically proposing that a federal body has any governorship over individual state laws? i'm sorry, but your argument holds no water.
So my argument "holds no water" just because you don't understand the concept of federal laws???
PS: here you go:
unsubscribed.
Range Rover...So tell me, what are those red reflector things built into the bumper on the rear
So my argument "holds no water" just because you don't understand the concept of federal laws???
you would be surprised how well of an understanding i have of them...
Originally Posted by dblerman
Range Rover...So tell me, what are those red reflector things built into the bumper on the rear
i actually did unsubscribe... but would you mind pointing out to everyone which part of the pictured taillight illuminates? please also ask an LEO which side of the vehicle those "red markers" are located.
man, i hope you do better at your day job.
NOW i am done with this.
Last edited by bambo2888; Sep 22, 2012 at 04:00 PM.
you would be surprised how well of an understanding i have of them...
i actually did unsubscribe... but would you mind pointing out to everyone which part of the pictured taillight illuminates? please also ask an LEO which side of the vehicle those "red markers" are located.
man, i hope you do better at your day job.
NOW i am done with this.
This picture pretty much explains it. I have a friend who is a cop and I asked him about blackout tail lights. He told me they are illegal when they cover the reflectors. The concern is when the car is parked on the side of the street at night no one can see the reflectors if they are integrated into the tail lamps and hidden by the covers.
The Range Rover above has two red reflector strips at the bottom rear bumper so they can utilize the clear rear lens covers that illuminate red tail lamps. The C5 original design has the reflectors built into the rear tail lights so they basically serve a dual purpose.
Not sure if you've ever seen a C5 Corvette prepped for the European market, however they require additional red reflectors installed on the rear bumper as their laws require a separate reflector from the light source. Pretty ugly if you ask me.
you would be surprised how well of an understanding i have of them...
i actually did unsubscribe... but would you mind pointing out to everyone which part of the pictured taillight illuminates? please also ask an LEO which side of the vehicle those "red markers" are located.
man, i hope you do better at your day job.
NOW i am done with this.
Uh, he was talking about the ones on the bumper, not on the side of the taillight...
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette
Slideshow: A Jaguar designer's personal project imagines what a modern front-engined Corvette might look like if Chevrolet revisited the golden age of the Stingray.