metroplex

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/problems/comply/

Click EQUIPMENT, FMVSS, all years.
FMVSS 108 is for lighting. You can look through the test reports and what not.

mikes rx

The government has such BS stuff anyway.

I was behind a newer Escalade (~04 year) the other day, and couldn't tell when he had his brakes on, because the brake LED intensity was barely brighter than regular taillight intensitiy.

I'm not too worried about a Third brake light. Some people (ie-CDC ducktail owners) remove the third brake light altogether.

And let's not even get started with people that gave green and purple colored bulbs in them.

I doubt "the man" will be coming after me due to a *possibly* non SAE compliant third brake light. And, like I said, it has SAE and DOT on it, so the assumption is that it is compliant. If it wasn't, APC would be in a world of trouble.

metroplex

The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards are there not only for performance-based requirements, but also for safety reasons. I am not sure if those Escalade tail lamps were 108 compliant, but generally speaking the OEM equipped lighting has to meet FMVSS 108. There are some exceptions to this rule, but not many that apply to 12V systems. I've seen non-compliant lamp housings with the "SAE" and "DOT" markings. Just because the markings exist has not bearing on the lamp's actual compliance with those standards. If you disagree with this, then show me where the Eagle Eyes/APC 3rd brake lights are SAE compliant, and if so, please indicate the SAE specification used to test this compliance. The man won't come after you, but I'd prefer lights that were at least FMVSS 108 compliant due to safety reasons (vibration, waterproofness, lens strength, scratch resistance, chemical resistance, etc...) and not something made in China or Korea under an "American" label that caters to ricers.

I suppose you would feel safe using seatbelts made in China that have "DOT" stamped on them, but the company has a history of making seat belts that do not comply with FMVSS 209? There's a reason why new cars take about 2-3+ years to transition from concept to production.

FMVSS 108 also includes stuff about HID lighting and refers to the SAE spec for discharge forward lighting

mikes rx

I know it's for safety, but sometimes I think the gov't is a little too **** about safety. Some rules that they make are STUPID!! Now, I do agree with certain ones (ie-red lights for brake and taillights, orange for turn signal....vs. goofy green, blue, purple, etc).

Also, I understand that ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law. All I'm saying is that it's only the third brake light, so I am not as concerned as if it was the taillights themselves.

Honestly, I am more concerned about my sequentials causing someone to hit me (god forbid), eventhough they are legal and pass inspection. Also, I purposefully made it so that the sequentials did NOT work when the brake is depressed...only when the turn signal is on.

If someone said that my (questionable) non-SAE compliant third brake light caused them to rear end me, I would hope that the investigator would have enough sense to say: What about the regular brake lights

Finally, since I have the sequentials, all 3 of my bulbs light up when braking, instead of just 2, which also helps with people seeing me when braking.

I am not disagreeing with you at all, I am just saying that the third brake light is probably low on the totem pole with regard to issues, vs. a whole taillight assembly (I know, that was the point of this whole thread anyway, so I guess I need to go back on topic)

official_style

whats so great about us spec stuff?? it sucks big time compared to euro spec stuff! i bought a pair of euro spec headlights for my yukon, they were for the grand blazer (tahoe/yukon in other countries) and the beam pattern is 10 times better. the bmw/audi/vw guys always upgrade to euro spec lights as they are much better at lighting up the road. the us specs are like from the 60s lol. and if apc cant even meet us spec, then they REALLY suck lol. that 3rd brake light looks ok, but its not my cup of tea.

Hollywood_North GT

I hear the forthcoming Camaro (the "phantom" car that won't likely get built ) will probably use LED taillights.

metroplex

I agree with you. The E-code/ECE spec lamps generally have a superior beam pattern (or higher output HIDs) and many other goodies, like self-adjusting lamps, etc... However, since we are driving on US roads, vehicle lighting and equipment here in the US must meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. As to why they don't upgrade the FMVSS spec to mimic or exceed E-code is beyond me

06Maverick

Here you go guys! Saw these images online in JayGuy's photobucket, I cant wait for these to be on the market!!! It looks like the 'bloom' from the center outward!

metroplex

Yep! Those are the ones featured in the SAE magazine. These pics are even better than the tiny one in the article.

official_style

those look decent, not sure if i would want them over stock though.

Hollywood_North GT

Gotta agree - not sure those really work on the Mustang.

official_style

i think stock tails, with one of the trims is perfect. the car is retro, so it wouldnt really look right with the high tech lighting IMO. except for the saleen headlights lol. gotta have those.

DynamicmustangGT

LEDS are great in red...they will however never replace hids...they don't have a long enough range in any color other then blue or red. So therefore they won't make good head lights. My stang has blue leds for responding to the firehouse and they work great at night but the blue sucks in the day, it mixes in with the sky, but leds are awful from a long distance.

mikes rx

Please, oh please, tell me how those are LEGAL with that type of pattern.

steevr

Here's my .02 worth. I think our Mustangs have the nicest non-LED taillights on the market. The multi-facet look in the reflector makes the lights totally unique. You can recognize a Mustang taillight at night from really far away.

The 3rd brake light on the other hand is a total joke. If you look at it from any angle slightly to the side, it looks as if a bulb is burned out. I took mine apart to see what the story was and you'll never believe what it looks on the inside. It consists of a SINGLE bulb that looks like a license plate bulb. Then there's a little piece of mult-faceted plastic that takes the light coming from the bulb and tries to spread it out over the whole width of the red lens. I honestly think a candle jammed in there would do a better job.

If I could find a decent LED 3 brake light setup, I would do it. I'd never touch the taillights....I love my factory ones.

Hollywood_North GT

I believe you can.

That was such a great line. I'd completely forgotten about that.

Great film, too.

It should be interesting to see what De Palma does with the prequel, and who he casts >>

mikes rx

This is EXACTLY why I went with the APC third brake light

nole_trainer

Here's the one I found, I've yet to pull the trigger. http://www.partsngo.com/detail_1.asp?sku=20061228101529

It's a bit cheaper on ebay...

06Maverick

Here are the APC products...

mrkabc

I agree 100%!! I honestly thought I had burned out a bulb with the stock housing. That's why I allowed mikes rx to talk me in to getting the APC third brake light.

I think the LED tail lights from Valeo/Sylvania (pictured above) are the s**t!!!! I will get a set when they become available.

To others that say it isn't retro: neither is the car!!! If you want retro then put a carburetor, bias ply tires, metal steering wheel, drum brakes, leaf springs, etc on the car. This is a modern interpretation of an old design, therefore if it's high tech but yet carries a retro styling theme, so what?

I'm all over a set of those LED tail lights! Where can I get a set?