US legal tail lights
 

This is kind of pointed towards the TOM's tails and the "USDM Legal" Clear lens TOM's outsourced tails. I have been looking for laws on lighting in US vehicles and cannot seem to find a straight answer.

So maybe I missed it, but how does a clear lens make these USDM DOT legal? From pictures on here, they are identical to the already released TOM's tails but just have a clear lens. The current production ones have everything DOT in the US require. Side reflectors that are red, rear reflectors of both sides equaling 2 or more, red/amber turn signals clearly visible, running lamp, and brake lamp clearly visible. Plus they are not LED red bulbs in a clear housing, which require special DOT approval. I am just trying to figure out why these are USDM specific legal.

Just curious that is all.

IIRC

They aren't DOT approved. They are WIRED for USDM cars. (Couple wires switched so you don't have to re-pin yourself like the JDM ones.)

I think he is talking about these which are supposed to be dot approved.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41609

From what I understand the US requires the lights to have a reflector for when the car is off and other countries do not.

The current production run, however, has reflectors necessary to pass DOT regs. His question is what specifically about the clear case lights make them DOT approved that the red case lights don't have.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

they submitted for DOT approval where the others they did not...you cant just slap a DOT # on something it has to get approved which you would assume costs money...a light in japan may meet the requirements but if you do ask for approval you dont just get it. Like crash testing and such.

Agreed, so what is unique about the clear tails that it is going through the DOT approval process while the red tails aren't?

I think that's what the real question being asked is. The answer may be "they are both going through the process" but so far only the clears exclusively from one US vendor are claiming DOT approval.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

Exactly what I was wondering. And yes the stocks have the required reflectors and meet all US DOT criteria. This is exactly the feedback I was looking for. It just seems the clear lenses are there so they can pass DOT approval.

Thanks for the feedback yall. Any more is appreciated as I am sure I am not the only one wondering.

USA TOM's distributors such as Guerillaracing.com and another vendor get US Spec wired tails. I did not have to repin my tails because of this. The other tails have no warranty from TOM's and you have to repin. In my opinion, the year warranty and not having to repin is worth the extra 50 bucks.

I just dont think they tried to market the all red in the US and then saw the market and realized lets make a US Spec tail...Im sure the red ones would pass as well...VW tails are exactly like the red ones...or vice versa

For the record - I'm pretty sure my tom's have side reflectors that reflect light as I was worried and a police officer friend of mine said he would have some trouble trying to cite me unless he specifically looked up the lights and knew they weren't DOT approved.

At that point it wouldn't be worth his time unless you really pissed him off.

He does however go straight for people with tinted/clear/smoked tails as they actually have abilities to cause road confusion.

The TOM's definitely do have side and rear reflectors. They would pass the naked eye of being US DOT Legal. People that know their stuff though, know they are not.

Not sure what you mean by clear tail lights. My Mazda 3 had clear tails from the factory (and they were soooo nice!). Hell, the FRS/BRZ has clear tails.

I believe what you guys are looking for is this section of law (this pertains to CA, not sure if it is similar to other states, but considering how tough our state is on our inspection, it may even be more lenient in other states!):

26101. No person shall sell or offer for sale for use upon or as part of the equipment of a vehicle, nor shall any person use upon a vehicle, any device that is intended to modify the original design or performance of any lighting equipment, safety glazing material, or other device, unless the modifying device meets the provisions of Section 26104. This section does not apply to a taillamp or stop lamp in use on or prior to December 1, 1935, or to lamps installed on authorized emergency vehicles.

26104. (a) Every manufacturer who sells, offers for sale, or
manufactures for use upon a vehicle devices subject to requirements established by the department shall, before the device is offered for sale, have laboratory test data showing compliance with such requirements. Tests may be conducted by the manufacturer.
(b) The department may at any time request from the manufacturer a copy of the test data showing proof of compliance of any device with the requirements established by the department and additional evidence that due care was exercised in maintaining compliance during production. If the manufacturer fails to provide such proof of compliance within 30 days of notice from the department, the
department may prohibit the sale of the device in this state until acceptable proof of compliance is received by the department.

99% of all aftermarket taillights are not DOT approved.

Realistically though, in 7 years after selling parts for all these vehicles, I've never had a customer call and complain about getting a ticket for non-DOT approval, are you guys getting targeted or something? This is the second time I've heard this question about DOT approval on taillights for this forum.

Clear lenses have to have red LED's and not red bulbs. Red bulbs are illegal in tail lights. This is where the clear lenses have an issue. My buddy's '13 Speed3 has the clear tails with the LED's stock as well. The BRZ had the same setup essentially.