RED Turn Signals/Hazards : WHY ?!?

[Tabbysdaddy]

6 minutes ago, Jordan White said:

How old of vehicles? I could see that if there isnt a factory third brake light.

Every GM I have ever owned that didn't have rear facing amber lights, the newest being a 99 with a third brake light.

[1972coronet]

50 minutes ago, peteski said:

Sure, with LED taillights this can easily e accomplished.  But in that example I suspect the taillight lens itself is clear (not red or amber).

I'll see if I can find an image of the lamps I'd mentioned - they're definitely red, except for the back-up (reverse) portion. 

EDIT : No such luck other than aftermarket stuff. I'll attempt to shoot a video next time I see one ( I drive for a living, so it shouldn't be long).

[peteski]

3 minutes ago, 1972coronet said:

I'll see if I can find an image of the lamps I'd mentioned - they're definitely red, except for the back-up (reverse) portion. 

Shining amber color bulb or amber color LED through a red lens will result in red light. Maybe there are small clear or amber color portions in the red lens which allow the amber color to show through. I would be interested to see the lights in question, although in my experience bright lights do not show up well in photographs or videos.  Their bright light overloads the image sensor.  Human eye is much better in capturing the actual colors.  Might be more useful to take a closeup of the lens itself with the lights off.

[Bills72sj]

If I am following somebody, amber is safer. If the car is pleasant to look at and is not simply a transportation appliance. I like the cleaner look of NOT having amber lenses. Less colors on the palette is better.

[Jordan White]

8 hours ago, Tabbysdaddy said:

Every GM I have ever owned that didn't have rear facing amber lights, the newest being a 99 with a third brake light.

I had a ‘99 Tahoe (OBS) and i swear i remember the hazards overriding the main brake lights.

[Tabbysdaddy]

2 hours ago, Jordan White said:

I had a ‘99 Tahoe (OBS) and i swear i remember the hazards overriding the main brake lights.

Mine's a 99 C1500 OBS. I just checked again to make sure, the hazards don't flash when you step on the brake. 

[StevenGuthmiller]

11 hours ago, Bills72sj said:

If I am following somebody, amber is safer. If the car is pleasant to look at and is not simply a transportation appliance. I like the cleaner look of NOT having amber lenses. Less colors on the palette is better.

I don't know how, but we somehow got along with red tail lights and integrated red turn signals for decades in the US.

Thank God the Europeans came along and straightened us out on that.

 

 

 

 

Steve 

[peteski]

57 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

Thank God the Europeans came along and straightened us out on that.

Nor sure if Europeans "straightened" American out or not, but probably as long (or longer) as the all-red taillight in US, Europeans uses amber directional at the front and rear of their vehicles.  I think what happened was that as cars started getting imported from Europe/Japan to US, they all came with amber rear directionals.  Then as American cars started getting exported to other parts of the world, the manufacturers had to comply with their laws, so they started producing custom taillights with amber inserts for export. Then things started getting all mixed together. 

I suspect that if one was to dig up the specific information about laws defining US taillights, it will likely state that either amber or red directionals are allowed, unlike with other parts of the world where directionals have to be amber.

Lets face it, all-red taillights where the brake lights share the same circuit with directionals is cheaper than one with them separate.

[Fat Brian]

2 hours ago, peteski said:

Nor sure if Europeans "straightened" American out or not, but probably as long (or longer) as the all-red taillight in US, Europeans uses amber directional at the front and rear of their vehicles.  I think what happened was that as cars started getting imported from Europe/Japan to US, they all came with amber rear directionals.  Then as American cars started getting exported to other parts of the world, the manufacturers had to comply with their laws, so they started producing custom taillights with amber inserts for export. Then things started getting all mixed together. 

I suspect that if one was to dig up the specific information about laws defining US taillights, it will likely state that either amber or red directionals are allowed, unlike with other parts of the world where directionals have to be amber.

Lets face it, all-red taillights where the brake lights share the same circuit with directionals is cheaper than one with them separate.

You are correct, the video I posted explains it more thoroughly but the amber signals are compliant in the US so Japanese and European manufacturers don't have to change their lights. US all red lights aren't compliant in most foreign countries so export models have to have amber lenses installed.

[Rob Hall]

My '86 Mustang had amber rear turn signals, my '87 does not.   My '00 Jeep Grand Cherokee also had them.  None of my newer cars or SUVs have had them.

[stitchdup]

in the uk its only the colour the lights shine that matters. most cars have had all clear front lights for 25 years now and all clear rears are starting to be common now too. just look at the nissan leaf (you can scrub your eyes later, lol) which is as colourless as it is tasteless

[peteski]

On 8/7/2024 at 11:52 AM, Fat Brian said:

Here's a video that goes into more detail about America's bad turn signals.

https://youtu.be/O1lZ9n2bxWA?si=ixQowczL00LlUzbs

Man, that guy loves to rant about all sorts of things.  I couldn't watch all of the video.  Geez!

Nowadays with many cars using LEDs in the taillights the non-functioning lamp is very rare.  I grew up in Poland with amber directionals in taillights, but it doesn't really bother me *THAT* much that in America they are red and shared with brake light.  Especially since 1986, with the CHMSL being required in all passenger cars (and most larger vehicles have them too).   The extra bright LED headlights bother me much more than this.

[peteski]

4 minutes ago, stitchdup said:

in the uk its only the colour the lights shine that matters.

Same is true in America.  There are cars here with clear front and taillight lenses but the bulbs (usually LEDs) light up the appropriate color (red or amber).

The only exception are the reflectors. In the rear of the car, reflectors have to be red. Then the side-marker reflectors have to be amber on the front side and red on the rear side.  That's because reflectors are illuminated by external light source, so they have to have appropriate color lenses to reflect the correct color light.

[RW033]

Not colour that irks me but the location of the brake/signal on some of these new cars (Kia) too are so low I can barely see them in a passenger car never mind a truck or big rig 

[martinfan5]

26 minutes ago, RW033 said:

Not colour that irks me but the location of the brake/signal on some of these new cars (Kia) too are so low I can barely see them in a passenger car never mind a truck or big rig

Not fan of them in that location either, it does make them a bit harder to notice, but , because of federal regulations and they way they design the vehicle, they have no choice but to put them in the bumper,  no sole part of the brake/tail/turn can be placed in a part of the body that opens( trunk/liftgate)

Edited August 8 by martinfan5

[Jordan White]

9 hours ago, Tabbysdaddy said:

Mine's a 99 C1500 OBS. I just checked again to make sure, the hazards don't flash when you step on the brake. 

Ok you were correct! Though reading this thread, you can see why i was skeptical! 😆

https://www.gmt400.com/threads/hazard-flashers-stop-flashing-when-brake-is-applied-flaw-or-feature.53186/

[Tabbysdaddy]

Since we're talking about taillights, this is a modification I did on my 93. Probably nobody would ever even notice, but I wanted to do it. In these pictures they're on my 99, but I redid them and put them on my 93 instead. First picture, left is modified right is stock. Second picture both modified. 

[Rob Hall]

1 hour ago, martinfan5 said:

Not fan of them in that location either, it does make them a bit harder to notice, but , because of federal regulations and they way they design the vehicle, they have no choice but to put them in the bumper,  no sole part of the brake/tail/turn can be placed in a part of the body that opens( trunk/liftgate)

They could have used vertical lights in the rear quarters like most SUVs used to have.  

[martinfan5]

13 minutes ago, Rob Hall said:

They could have used vertical lights in the rear quarters like most SUVs used to have.  

Oh yeah for sure, there is plenty of room.

[Jordan White]

33 minutes ago, Tabbysdaddy said:

Since we're talking about taillights, this is a modification I did on my 93. Probably nobody would ever even notice, but I wanted to do it. In these pictures they're on my 99, but I redid them and put them on my 93 instead. First picture, left is modified right is stock. Second picture both modified. 

Oh yeah, i think i was going to try to do that at some point, and convert the reverse lights to the turn signals, but i never got around to it.

Edited August 9 by Jordan White

[Brian Austin]

Who knew there are people on YouTube who don't like things?  😛

People also like to complain that Americans use the English language wrong, spell "aluminum" wrong, and harp on our supposed non-use of the Metric System, even though we have been using it for a long while.  So next in line is complaining about tail lights on US cars.  In the end, does it really matter?

I saw the video in question some time ago, and I thought the YouTuber liked to gripe for the sake of kvetching.  Different nations are going to have different standards.  I've had no problem understanding red turn signals.  Just pay close attention to your driving and you'll be fine.  Note that also headlight standards and usage are different between the US and abroad.  I've always thought the '60s custom cars (Barris, etc.) sporting those classic CIBIE rectangular (oval?) headlights looked cool.

When white tail light lenses came into fashion I thought they looked odd.  I thought tail light lenses in the US were supposed to reflect red.

I recall in the 1980s GM cars got amber directional lenses, part of the Euro influence of the time I think, along with blacked-out window trim (which used to be bright).

In my school days I used to sketch concept vehicles.  I was influenced by those nifty "Euro look" tail lights.  Below is a mini-van study from 1985 with standard lights in the usual place, and a second set of red/amber lights at the top, along with the license plate placed way up there for good measure. I used the upper light theme in other sketches of the period.  This is the best of the bunch.  I don't know how well the bump would have worked aerodynamically so I added spoilers.  Plus, spoilers look cool.  As an aside, I think I was better at drawing than I was at coming up with good car names.

[Brian Austin]

While we're at it,  now that with LEDs more cars have sequential turn signals, are they still cool?  🙂

Also, LEDs were supposed to be better than incandescent lights, but I've seen so many broken LED tail lights over the years.  They don't seem to hold up.

[RW033]

3 hours ago, martinfan5 said:

Not fan of them in that location either, it does make them a bit harder to notice, but , because of federal regulations and they way they design the vehicle, they have no choice but to put them in the bumper,  no sole part of the brake/tail/turn can be placed in a part of the body that opens( trunk/liftgate)

I’m well aware of the regulations and there’s no reason they couldn’t have incorporated them into the existing lights in the quarters - to me it looks more like they were being different for the sake of it - or thinking outside the quarters 😂

1 hour ago, Jordan White said:

Ok you were correct! Though reading this thread, you can see why i was skeptical! 😆

https://www.gmt400.com/threads/hazard-flashers-stop-flashing-when-brake-is-applied-flaw-or-feature.53186/

My squarebody is the same - not that I use them ever 😂 

8 minutes ago, Brian Austin said:

While we're at it,  now that with LEDs more cars have sequential turn signals, are they still cool?  🙂

Also, LEDs were supposed to be better than incandescent lights, but I've seen so many broken LED tail lights over the years.  They don't seem to hold up.

The other problem I don’t think most people realize is there is no longer a 12v on-off signal sent from a flasher anymore, there’s a 12v feed and ground and a CAN signal to tell the internal circuit board to flash (or whatever fancy sequence they do) so it’s almost impossible to add trailer lighting or any other lighting accessories (at least with the vehicles I regularly work on)

[1972coronet]

There's a psychological component to flashing red lights, too. That notwithstanding , my main complaint about red-illuminating directional / hazards stems from my almost failing the written exam for my driver's licence (back in the 1980s) ; to wit : one of the questions - multiple choice - pertained to school buses. To paraphrase the question :

If a school bus is stopped by the side of the road and its lights are flashing red , what should you do ? 
1.) Come to a complete stop and wait for the lights to stop flashing
2.) Keep driving while watching for pedestrians 
3.) Come to a complete stop then drive slowly while watching for pedestrians 

To my mind , option 3 made the most sense , so I chose that one. 

I was of course wrong - correct answer was option 1.

I challenged this, as I'd argued that turn signals flash red and no one has to come to a stop for someone to make a lane change. 
The DMV 'person' actually gave it to me ! She didn't nick me on that one ! 

So, as a result, I've long wondered as to why flashing red directional signals were okay for a lane change vs. the proper amber to fulfill that task ? 

[1972coronet]

4 hours ago, RW033 said:

Not colour that irks me but the location of the brake/signal on some of these new cars (Kia) too are so low I can barely see them in a passenger car never mind a truck or big rig 

I agree that those are truly obnoxious. WTH do those main / centre lamps do then ?? Just along for the ride ? Not exclusive to that KIA ; I've seen those asinine lights on the Chevy Bolt as well. 

What's even worse than driving behind one of those Logan's Run junks ? The Oldsmobiles with that STUPID bright RED "fog" light on the rear bumper ! 

Edited August 9 by 1972coronet