Red versus amber rear turn signals

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
On the Taurus there was a simple mod where you run a wire from an unused terminal on the turn signal switch to the brake light switch. It would then let the turn signal not in use also act as a brake light. If you just used brakes you had both amber and the red. It was bright as could be and really got peoples attention.


That's an illegal mod. Brake lights must be red. Any other color is illegal.
 
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
On the Taurus there was a simple mod where you run a wire from an unused terminal on the turn signal switch to the brake light switch. It would then let the turn signal not in use also act as a brake light. If you just used brakes you had both amber and the red. It was bright as could be and really got peoples attention.


That's an illegal mod. Brake lights must be red. Any other color is illegal.


No it's not illegal. Fed DOT rules allow any color from red to amber in the rear.
 
Much prefer amber, thought I read that technically they were safer with respect to visibility.
 
Originally Posted By: SHOZ

No it's not illegal. Fed DOT rules allow any color from red to amber in the rear.


For the BRAKE function? that's the issue. If it is legal, it shouldn't be. Many modern city and airport busses are equipped with god-awful flashing amber "deceleration" lights that flash amber as the bus is slowing, then go off when its stopped. The most confusing thing in the world is one of these busses approaching a passenger stop- red brake lights on (all 3), both amber "decel" lights flashing like hazard signals, AND the right amber turn signal hidden in all that mess somewhere.

Just because something "grabs attention" doesn't mean it conveys its intended message clearly.
 
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
On the Taurus there was a simple mod where you run a wire from an unused terminal on the turn signal switch to the brake light switch. It would then let the turn signal not in use also act as a brake light. If you just used brakes you had both amber and the red. It was bright as could be and really got peoples attention.


That's an illegal mod. Brake lights must be red. Any other color is illegal.


No it's not illegal. Fed DOT rules allow any color from red to amber in the rear.

No. Required to be ONLY red as per Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 108.

Quote:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2004-title49-vol5/xml/CFR-2004-title49-vol5-sec571-108.xml

§ 571.108 Standard No. 108; Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment.

Table III—Required Motor Vehicle Lighting Equipment
[All Passenger Cars and Motorcycles, and Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Trucks, Buses and Trailers of Less Than 80 (2032) Inches (mm) Overall Width]

Stoplamps - 2 red
Turn signal lamps - 2 red or amber; 2 amber
 
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
mGbqQK6AzsDjr9pnrxXmEMA.jpg


ebay

Dim! Very dim. The filament glows like a dim match.
I have the Sylvania 3457AKDA in the '04.
 
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
As long as there are red brake lights too, then it is legal.

No. All brake lights must be red only. Period. Rear turn signals can be red or amber.
 
You would need to find quite the jerk to write you a ticket for them I guess. I ran like that in Illinois for 5 years with never a problem. Even got pulled over in Connecticut for speeding and no mention of them.

And those silver colored bulbs aren't dim with clear covers.

Certainly no worse than the nightshade cripe.

5XkNeao.jpg


rVId0HG.jpg
 
Of the three pics posted Mazda, RR and the Corolla, there is nothing wrong with the setup of the Corolla. All the lamp enclosures are bright and distinct. The Mazda ones are a little smaller, but functional and separate. The RR ones are just small. The Regal ones are a mess, but every OEM lamp must pass DOT regs for lumen intensity so it must have passed.

Brake lights must be red. Amber lights are only allowed in the rear for signaling, they can't be lit for any other reason in the rear. For vehicle directional properties any running lights in the rear must be red, lights in the front must be white or amber, signal lights in the front must also be amber. Having any other color scheme is illegal and messes with vehicle direction perception which is simply unsafe.

So are we now debating how there should be a separate brake, parking and signal lamp in this thread and that they all must have full shapes to their individual enclosures...or just amber signals as the title indicates.
 
Here is the Illinois stop lamp color code.

(625 ILCS 5/) Illinois Vehicle Code.


Quote:
(625 ILCS 5/12-208) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 12-208)
Sec. 12-208. Signal lamps and signal devices.
(a) Every vehicle other than an antique vehicle displaying an antique plate or an expanded-use antique vehicle displaying expanded-use antique vehicle plates operated in this State shall be equipped with a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of the vehicle which shall display a red or amber light visible from a distance of not less than 500 feet to the rear in normal sunlight and which shall be actuated upon application of the service (foot) brake, and which may but need not be incorporated with other rear lamps. During times when lighted lamps are not required, an antique vehicle or an expanded-use antique vehicle may be equipped with a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of such vehicle of the same type originally installed by the manufacturer as original equipment and in working order. However, at all other times, except as provided in subsection (a-1), such antique vehicle or expanded-use antique vehicle must be equipped with stop lamps meeting the requirements of Section 12-208 of this Act.
 
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Here is the Illinois stop lamp color code.

(625 ILCS 5/) Illinois Vehicle Code.


Quote:
(625 ILCS 5/12-208) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 12-208)
Sec. 12-208. Signal lamps and signal devices.
(a) Every vehicle other than an antique vehicle displaying an antique plate or an expanded-use antique vehicle displaying expanded-use antique vehicle plates operated in this State shall be equipped with a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of the vehicle which shall display a red or amber light visible from a distance of not less than 500 feet to the rear in normal sunlight and which shall be actuated upon application of the service (foot) brake, and which may but need not be incorporated with other rear lamps. During times when lighted lamps are not required, an antique vehicle or an expanded-use antique vehicle may be equipped with a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of such vehicle of the same type originally installed by the manufacturer as original equipment and in working order. However, at all other times, except as provided in subsection (a-1), such antique vehicle or expanded-use antique vehicle must be equipped with stop lamps meeting the requirements of Section 12-208 of this Act.

However, it doesn't override that federal standards are different and doesn't address what happens if you take your vehicle out of state where there isn't a similar standard. In California the requirement is that only vehicles built before 1979 are allowed to have a "yellow" stoplamp.

Quote:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc24603.htm

24603. Every motor vehicle that is not in combination with any other vehicle and every vehicle at the end of a combination of vehicles shall at all times be equipped with stoplamps mounted on the rear as follows:

(e) Stoplamps on vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1979, shall emit a red light. Stoplamps on vehicles manufactured before January 1, 1979, shall emit a red or yellow light. All stoplamps shall be plainly visible and understandable from a distance of 300 feet to the rear both during normal sunlight and at nighttime, except that stoplamps on a vehicle of a size required to be equipped with clearance lamps shall be visible from a distance of 500 feet during those times.
 
Hmm, howevers...... Same as most tint laws. Carry your states regs around and you really got to come across a jerk who would try to ticket you.

That's a Canadian reg?
 
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Hmm, howevers...... Same as most tint laws. Carry your states regs around and you really got to come across a jerk who would try to ticket you.

That's a Canadian reg?

What benefit would it be to violate the US federal requirement for exactly two red stop lamps? Two red lamps is perfectly legal in every state.

And in California there's a requirement that you must have two license plates and the state and license number can't be covered even in clear plastic. That's always fun when someone comes from out of state.
 
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Hmm, howevers...... Same as most tint laws. Carry your states regs around and you really got to come across a jerk who would try to ticket you.

That's a Canadian reg?

What benefit would it be to violate the US federal requirement for exactly two red stop lamps? Two red lamps is perfectly legal in every state.

And in California there's a requirement that you must have two license plates and the state and license number can't be covered even in clear plastic. That's always fun when someone comes from out of state.


I did have two red stop lamps. And I drove the same car in California too.
 
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Hmm, howevers...... Same as most tint laws. Carry your states regs around and you really got to come across a jerk who would try to ticket you.

That's a Canadian reg?

What benefit would it be to violate the US federal requirement for exactly two red stop lamps? Two red lamps is perfectly legal in every state.

And in California there's a requirement that you must have two license plates and the state and license number can't be covered even in clear plastic. That's always fun when someone comes from out of state.


I did have two red stop lamps. And I drove the same car in California too.

The federal requirement is for exactly two red lamps to indicate stopping.
 
How many federal traffic enforcement patrols do you see? It really grinds my gears you nit picking goosestepping federales.

Oh and those are 50W ambers too.

amber_lights_at_night..jpg


grinds-my-gears11.jpg
 
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
Of the three pics posted Mazda, RR and the Corolla, there is nothing wrong with the setup of the Corolla. All the lamp enclosures are bright and distinct. The Mazda ones are a little smaller, but functional and separate. The RR ones are just small.


They all are "legal" and meet minimal functionality, no question. But my comments come from me noticing these models in the real world (particularly the Range Rover). The fact that they overlap is a real problem... They just DO NOT work nearly as well as the widely separated lamps in, say, your average Accord, that old '75 Fury in Dan's article, most Benz vehicles (which have pretty much continued to require that style not override function) or earlier Corollas and Mazdas for that matter. The "intersecting circles" taillamp is a style-driven design, and it suffers in function. "Meets the minimum" isn't a particularly good thing- the bar is set pretty low or that Range Rover would never pass! The godawful headlamps on the 93 Vision(less) TSi my wife and I owned "met the requirements," but I think there were Pierce Arrows in the 20s with acetylene headlamps that worked better (and being the geek I am, I procured a set of European-spec lamps for ours ;-) ).
 
I definitely agree that all turn signals should be amber. To me it is silly to have them part of the brake light. I also feel though that all cars should ahve turn signal lamps on either the side of the car, or on the side mirrors. That is one of my favorite things that have been added to most new cars..
 
Originally Posted By: y_p_w

The federal requirement is for exactly two red lamps to indicate stopping.


Well, three on new-production vehicles, counting the CHMSL. But the law doesn't require retrofitting older vehicles.

And there's also a *maximum* intensity that combining the ambers with the reds probably violates. Its just a sucky idea all-around, both in terms of common sense and the letter of the law.

No, you'll never get pulled over for it, and if you did most officers would just tell you that they think you have a problem with your lights (as they wrote you up for whatever they REALLY pulled you over for...)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top