mdocod
Flashaholic
I find myself back at CPF once and awhile to do product research. I'm in the process of trying to add auxiliary lighting to my old SUV and not having much luck finding what I am looking for. What I have found is an interesting and perhaps humbling look into my own past...
Out of one corner of CPF's mouth, we have a good argument for safety issues related to non-DOT approved lighting systems on vehicles. (yes, many of them are unsafe due to bad light distribution, performance, or glare).
Out of the other corner of CPF's mouth, we have exhaustive explanations for why MANY current production sealed beam forward lighting systems are absolute trash, and arguably unsafe due to poor performance. FYI: these are DOT approved forward lighting systems.
I'm seeing a lot of effort to convince readers, that DOT approved OE lighting systems are extraordinarily special and could only be the result of exhaustive engineering that could never be replicated. Or perhaps more accurately, these posts are trying to imply that it's unlikely for someone to stumble into a modification that would pass DOT requirements. The implication here is that these OE systems are meeting "tight" standards, and any deviation could be massively dangerous. In reality, if you've driven an assortment of vehicles with DOT approved forward lighting, then you know from first hand experience that OE lighting isn't a bulls-eye sort of deal. In a room with 4 walls, a ceiling and a floor, if the dart hits the same wall that the dart board is mounted to.... that's DOT certified. Certainly that leaves plenty of opportunity (3 walls, a ceiling, and a floor) to come up with something that would not pass, but the "range" of potential characteristics that could pass DOT approval is a lot looser than is being implied.
As one example of the real "range" here.... there are some OE systems, that are HID/halogen interchangeable with absolutely no change in optics, DOT approved either way as both are factory options and the ONLY difference is the light source. Another great example would be to contrast a sealed beam incandescent light that is still DOT approved, to one of the several DOT approved conversion systems for these sealed beam fixtures (both LED and HID systems that replace the entire optics, light source, etc, as an example, "Speaker" brand systems). Here, we have obvious, vast changes in illumination performance all falling under the same "certification." Then when we subjectively compare brand X's DOT approved fixture to brand Y's DOT approved fixture, we see differences in the beam shapes, smoothness, intensity, artifacts, etc etc, yet they all still fall within the umbrella of the same certification.
I'm reading CPF posts indicating that lighting systems need to meet objective measurable standards and have DOT or SAE certifications to be street legal. I believe there's a difference between producing vehicles and lighting systems for sale or operating a commercial fleet, and driving or modifying a personal vehicle. The former, may well fall under federal law, but the later? I'm pretty sure that depends on local law, as it is the state that has granted the licence to operate the vehicle and the state that will ultimately enforce law. I can't find a shred of language in my local state law concerning a requirement for federal DOT approved lighting fixtures (or ANY certifications). In fact, while CPF members tout that the "law" requires certified, objective performance traits, that may not always be true...
Local law for me, describes some objective requirements (minimum number of fixtures, maximum number of fixtures, maximum number of fixtures simultaneously used as part of a distribution of light, etc).
Flying in the face of what some stickied CPF posts would have you believe, the law concerning performance, distribution, glare, etc, are largely SUBJECTIVELY described and enforced here in Colorado.
------------
In Summery I would like to say the following to those interested in modifying their vehicles lighting systems:
1. Read your State DOT regulation for lighting and only make legal modifications. If in doubt, don't do it.
2. If you have time, read federal DOT regulations for educational purposes (if you have the stomach for it, bleh...)
3. Don't trust your intuition on the matter. Stick with cerebral problem solving. Research research research.
4. Transportation Illumination regulation can be summarized as having the right amount of illumination in the right places. Learn from this. Never assume that more light is automatically better.
5. There's a mountain of awesome information on CPF regarding transportation lighting.
Out of one corner of CPF's mouth, we have a good argument for safety issues related to non-DOT approved lighting systems on vehicles. (yes, many of them are unsafe due to bad light distribution, performance, or glare).
Out of the other corner of CPF's mouth, we have exhaustive explanations for why MANY current production sealed beam forward lighting systems are absolute trash, and arguably unsafe due to poor performance. FYI: these are DOT approved forward lighting systems.
I'm seeing a lot of effort to convince readers, that DOT approved OE lighting systems are extraordinarily special and could only be the result of exhaustive engineering that could never be replicated. Or perhaps more accurately, these posts are trying to imply that it's unlikely for someone to stumble into a modification that would pass DOT requirements. The implication here is that these OE systems are meeting "tight" standards, and any deviation could be massively dangerous. In reality, if you've driven an assortment of vehicles with DOT approved forward lighting, then you know from first hand experience that OE lighting isn't a bulls-eye sort of deal. In a room with 4 walls, a ceiling and a floor, if the dart hits the same wall that the dart board is mounted to.... that's DOT certified. Certainly that leaves plenty of opportunity (3 walls, a ceiling, and a floor) to come up with something that would not pass, but the "range" of potential characteristics that could pass DOT approval is a lot looser than is being implied.
As one example of the real "range" here.... there are some OE systems, that are HID/halogen interchangeable with absolutely no change in optics, DOT approved either way as both are factory options and the ONLY difference is the light source. Another great example would be to contrast a sealed beam incandescent light that is still DOT approved, to one of the several DOT approved conversion systems for these sealed beam fixtures (both LED and HID systems that replace the entire optics, light source, etc, as an example, "Speaker" brand systems). Here, we have obvious, vast changes in illumination performance all falling under the same "certification." Then when we subjectively compare brand X's DOT approved fixture to brand Y's DOT approved fixture, we see differences in the beam shapes, smoothness, intensity, artifacts, etc etc, yet they all still fall within the umbrella of the same certification.
I'm reading CPF posts indicating that lighting systems need to meet objective measurable standards and have DOT or SAE certifications to be street legal. I believe there's a difference between producing vehicles and lighting systems for sale or operating a commercial fleet, and driving or modifying a personal vehicle. The former, may well fall under federal law, but the later? I'm pretty sure that depends on local law, as it is the state that has granted the licence to operate the vehicle and the state that will ultimately enforce law. I can't find a shred of language in my local state law concerning a requirement for federal DOT approved lighting fixtures (or ANY certifications). In fact, while CPF members tout that the "law" requires certified, objective performance traits, that may not always be true...
Local law for me, describes some objective requirements (minimum number of fixtures, maximum number of fixtures, maximum number of fixtures simultaneously used as part of a distribution of light, etc).
Flying in the face of what some stickied CPF posts would have you believe, the law concerning performance, distribution, glare, etc, are largely SUBJECTIVELY described and enforced here in Colorado.
------------
In Summery I would like to say the following to those interested in modifying their vehicles lighting systems:
1. Read your State DOT regulation for lighting and only make legal modifications. If in doubt, don't do it.
2. If you have time, read federal DOT regulations for educational purposes (if you have the stomach for it, bleh...)
3. Don't trust your intuition on the matter. Stick with cerebral problem solving. Research research research.
4. Transportation Illumination regulation can be summarized as having the right amount of illumination in the right places. Learn from this. Never assume that more light is automatically better.
5. There's a mountain of awesome information on CPF regarding transportation lighting.
Last edited by a moderator: