OE Vehicle Lighting That Makes You Go "Ugh"

[-Virgil-]

The rear fog lamp should be about 10cm (just about 4") away from any lit edge of a stop blamp, so if it wasn't that far from the stop lamp, it wasn't a real rear fog lamp.

That's a European (UN) rule. We don't have that rule in North America, and given that Mercedes (+ Audi, +BMW, etc) already puts US-specific rear lamps on their cars, it's entirely possible for the rear fog to be anywhere they feel like putting it.

That depends on viewing angle and which specification the rear fog lamp(s) was(were) made to. UNECE R38, or in accordance with SAE J1319.

SAE J1319 and UN R38 are practically identical.

 

[alpg88]

i've seen those fogs on mb, it seems to be brighter the farther away you are. also seen some subarus with rear fog right in the middle of the bumper, on the bottom.

 

[jaycee88]

Funnily enough, I Googled 'Mercedes rear fog light' and the first image hit that appeared was of the car I saw:

 

[DIΩDΣ]

It's called the "string of beads" effect, and it's present on a lot of pulsewidth-modulated vehicle lights, not just Cadillacs. The PWM frequency was around 100Hz through about 2008; more recent vehicles have moved to around 200Hz, which helps, but the effect still is visible under some conditions until you get to around 350-400Hz. Unfortunately, as PWM frequency increases, so do problems with EMI/RFI. That can be handled (shielding, etc.) but it costs money, and the automakers don't like spending money.

This is really annoying to me, and yeah it seemed to be the Caddys I notice - so many other LED lights out there that appear fine. And it's very distracting, that is the main issue. And not distracting in a good way, like the strobe on a snow plow (although lately the new ones in Ohio are getting distracting in more of the bad way). Can they not use current regulation?

While I may be the exception, I have jailed drivers for HID kits (uncommon, but it has happened) and written several hundred tickets for illegal lights, be it HID, LED, tinted lights, etc.

I wish this were more common practice. I know early on I heard of folks getting tickets for tinted lights, but now that HID and LED are fairly common and the colors tend to really push the limits, I haven't heard of anyone getting ticketed. And the actual problem is getting worse. It's almost a daily occurrence for me to notice and extremely bright bluish/purpleish tinted light (presumably a retrofit) and on some of the narrow country roads that don't even have lines painted on it can be very hazardous. In fact I had a bit of an accident a year ago when blinded by bright lights and my tire caught the edge of the pavement and swerved into the ditch. And I am starting to see ridiculously bright HID lights on semi trucks now. Even while driving my tall F350 I'm getting blinded from the rear after passing some trucks, which would never happen before unless they accidentally had high beams on. Someone really needs to put their foot down on automotive lighting now-a-days!

 

[jaycee88]

Porsche Macan. Instead of the reverse lamps being in or near the tail lamp where everyone expects them to be and are more easily seen, they're located at the corners of the lower edge of the rear bumper. :duh2:

Lots of Porsches where I live. Thankfully it seems the Macan is the only model afflicted this way.

 

[nocte-diem]

My brother's 1995 Audi A4 came with horrible Bosch DOT code lights. Triple reflector lights with the least efficient, most uneven and least defined beam pattern ("crooked root shape") I have ever seen. Outright dangerous. He ended up installing Bosch e-codes, which by th way had still glass lenses at the time, and those lights were excellent. The fog lights, which were integrated into the headlight assembly were mounted too high to be really useful, but they made good curve lights and did not blind oncoming traffic.

 

[durallymax]

My "ugh" is the US lighting regulations. They're are so many lighting technologies/designs that are available across the pond but not legal in the US simply due to some sort of law that only looks at one dimension.

One example is Audis "swipe" amber rear turn signals. The swipe is legal(Mustang is one example) but one dimension of the Audi light is not large enough, even though it's much easier to see and distinguish than many "legal" signals. Instead we get a simple red signal for the US.

Some of the Euro headlights also come to mind, the adaptive technologies they have are often not allowed and their brightest lights that utilize these features are also not allowed simply because they shine too far.

I wish headlight leveling was a requirement for every new car in the US. IIRC it's currently only required for Bi-Xenon or Bi-LED. Hell we have farm tractors with leveling now.

The current trend of putting rope lighting everywhere for DRLs is a bit tacky, but maybe I'm just a bitter Audi person. I do like how mine changes the DRL to amber for the signal versus the "wink" many cars have (shutting off DRL to make separate signal visible). I also like the rear DRL option it has, while not enabled from the factory, you can alter the code to enable the feature. I think it's a great idea both for those who drive with auto headlights, or for the ones who don't turn on their headlights when needed.

I haven't had the car long, but I am interested in seeing how the "all weather" lights work, Audi's replacement for fog lights which are now located within the headlight itself.


On the topic of taping over bright lights, add any post 06.5 Kenworth truck to that list. The green LED indicators in the cruise control and engine brake switches will blind you.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

My "ugh" is the US lighting regulations.

There are some "ughs" with UNECE regulations. Rear sidemarkers must be yellow? Ugh. Front sidemarkers not required? Ugh.

But this thread isn't about US vs UNECE regulations, it's about how vehicle designers, in designing vehicles that comply with the applicable regulations, do some annoying things.

 

[-Virgil-]

There are at least as many "ugh!" points in the European lighting regs as in the US regs. It is popular but incorrect to say that US lighting regs are inferior overall, they are not. There are some ways the European regs are better, and some ways the US regs are better. As for the US regs not yet allowing the adaptive driving beam/glare-free permanent high beams they have in Europe: that's true, but they'll be allowed before long, and by the time they are, the Europeans will have dealt with most of the early glitches and problems so we won't have to.

 

[jaycee88]

One example is Audis "swipe" amber rear turn signals. The swipe is legal(Mustang is one example) but one dimension of the Audi light is not large enough, even though it's much easier to see and distinguish than many "legal" signals. Instead we get a simple red signal for the US.

Amber rear turn signals are allowed in the U.S., so the choice to use red rear turn signals for the U.S. market is one made by the automaker and not mandated by the DOT regulations.

Not sure which Audi you have, but I've seen a lot of late model Audis that have huge tail lamps/turn signals that are very visible.

I think sequential ('swiping') turn signals are the solution to a non-existent problem. I've never been behind a vehicle equipped with clearly visible signals signalling a turn where I thought to myself 'Is the blinking red/amber light on the right side of the vehicle signifying a left turn or a right turn?' or 'I would have recognized the intent of the turn signal much quicker if it had a neat sliding effect instead of just blinking on and off'.

Maybe sequential signals are just more to be stylish and blingy (like DRL rope lighting) than anything else.

 

[irongate]

While I may be the exception, I have jailed drivers for HID kits (uncommon, but it has happened) and written several hundred tickets for illegal lights, be it HID, LED, tinted lights, etc.

What state are you in Sir?

 

[-Virgil-]

Amber rear turn signals are allowed in the U.S., so the choice to use red rear turn signals for the U.S. market is one made by the automaker and not mandated by the DOT regulations.

Wellll...except it sort of arguably is, because the US regs also specify a minimum lit area for brake lights and for turn signals. No other regs in the world have that provision. Many Europe/Asia/rest-of-the-world rear turn signals aren't big enough to meet the US requirement even if their output is US-legal, so the automakers just flash the brake light or otherwise take the lazy/cheap way out on the US model. Of course, it could also be argued that everyone knows about the US size requirement and they could have chosen to comply with that requirement even on their Europe/rest of world taillight design.

I think sequential ('swiping') turn signals are the solution to a non-existent problem

I don't think anyone has proposed that they're a "solution" to a "problem".

Maybe sequential signals are just more to be stylish and blingy (like DRL rope lighting) than anything else.

That's more like it. However, I must say that subjectively, the Europe/world version of the Audi swiping turn signal really does shout the message "CAR'S MOVING ---> THAT WAY!" louder than if the lamp was just blinking on and off. Does it improve traffic safety/reduce crashes? No idea; that's going to take several years of data to know for sure, that is if anyone ever looks. But the US regulators really should have accepted Audi's argument: the whole sequential LED signal area, compliant with the size requirement, is lit up within the 250 milliseconds it takes an incandescent signal to fully light up, so it should be considered compliant even though there's that ~200 millisecond timeframe during which the signal doesn't meet the lit-area requirement (just like there's that ~200 millisecond timeframe during which an incandescent signal doesn't meet the intensity requirement). The regulators at NHTSA rejected that argument, though.

 

[durallymax]

There are some "ughs" with UNECE regulations. Rear sidemarkers must be yellow? Ugh. Front sidemarkers not required? Ugh.

But this thread isn't about US vs UNECE regulations, it's about how vehicle designers, in designing vehicles that comply with the applicable regulations, do some annoying things.

That is true, there's some annoying regs over there and in general it seems, a lot more regulations overall that influence design.

Amber rear turn signals are allowed in the U.S., so the choice to use red rear turn signals for the U.S. market is one made by the automaker and not mandated by the DOT regulations.

Not sure which Audi you have, but I've seen a lot of late model Audis that have huge tail lamps/turn signals that are very visible.

I think sequential ('swiping') turn signals are the solution to a non-existent problem. I've never been behind a vehicle equipped with clearly visible signals signalling a turn where I thought to myself 'Is the blinking red/amber light on the right side of the vehicle signifying a left turn or a right turn?' or 'I would have recognized the intent of the turn signal much quicker if it had a neat sliding effect instead of just blinking on and off'.

Maybe sequential signals are just more to be stylish and blingy (like DRL rope lighting) than anything else.

Virgil's explanation of the Audi swipe is excellent. The issue is not the color, intensity, position or the swiping motion. The issue is the dimension as he explained.

I wouldn't say the swipe is necessarily a safety breakthrough, it's certainly more of a design feature that adds a "cool" factor. Just being amber versus red makes it stand out as a turn signal more than anything. Audi certainly has a slight obsession with their lighting, I think they sometimes release a "facelift" model just to have new lights.

 

[jaycee88]

Virgil's explanation of the Audi swipe is excellent. The issue is not the color, intensity, position or the swiping motion. The issue is the dimension as he explained.

Ah, I see what you and Virgil are saying now.

But it does look like the Prestige trim level of the Q3 has made it to the U.S. with sequential turn signals (Audi's calling them 'dynamic turn signals' on their Web site):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh5PHB49xDo

(turn signals start at around 3:00)

I guess Audi increased the minimum lit area of the signals?

 

[eggsalad]

All OE headlights with plastic/poly-whatever lights make me go "ugh". I live in the desert - lots of UV here. It's exceptional to see a 10-year-old car with good headlights.

Meanwhile, the headlight lenses on my 26-year-old Acura are perfectly clear. Because glass.

 

[-Virgil-]

But it does look like the Prestige trim level of the Q3 has made it to the U.S. with sequential turn signals (Audi's calling them 'dynamic turn signals' on their Web site): I guess Audi increased the minimum lit area of the signals?

No, they jiggered the US-spec brake lamps so a central horizontal line comes on, then the larger "background" brake lights sequentially light up inboard to outboard. Still red.