Its about time the US looks at new lighting rules! (long)

[mohrds]

These are the proposed changes to US regulations. They are finally going to discuss switching to ECE (E-Code) headlamp standards. Also interesting is the regulating of "fog" and "Driving" lights both OEM and aftermarket.

Doug


Raise the test voltage contained in MVSS 108 from 12.8V to 13.7V, or establish a dual-voltage testing regimen in which seeing-light regions are tested at 12.8V and glare-light
regions are tested at 14V, because the current test voltage is unrealistically low and substantially underestimates realworld glare intensities.

Lower the allowable glare intensities for low beam headlamps, particularly at (H, V) and (0.5U, 3.5L), because the currently allowable levels are too high.

Raise the allowable high beam intensity at (H, V) to match the European and Japanese maximum of 140,000 cd (nominal at 12.8V), because more intense high beams will increase visual performance in situations warranting high beam use, and will discourage misuse of high beams in situations warranting low beam use.

Require headlamps to be aimed lower if they are mounted high, because high-aimed high-mounted headlamps create severe glare to lower vehicles.

Permit low beam headlamps conforming to ECE photometric requirements, because
• such headlamps comply with the intent of US seeing and glare limits, in some cases better than their US counterparts,
• they do not appear to threaten any reduction in safety,
• they offer immediate and substantial relief from excessive low beam glare while offering equivalent or improved seeing performance,
• and they are more resistant to the safety negative effects of overwattage bulbs.

Establish stringent requirements for colorimetric, projected-area, mounting and photometric performance of original-equipment and aftermarket auxiliary lamps, because
such lamps are currently a significant and uncontrolled source of glare.

Lower the degree to which “white” illumination may tend towards blue, because this will reduce the production of inherently-glaring blue light and will also reduce the motivation
for individuals to attempt to attain a “blue” appearance with halogen headlamps.

Require automatic aim compensators (dynamic headlamp leveling) with HID and high-flux halogen headlamps, because such headlamps create severe glare with vehicle
attitude changes.

Raise the stringency of MVSS 101 requirements for the high beam telltale so that the words “BRIGHT” or “HIGH BEAM” appear with (or instead of) the ISO symbol, because many drivers do not notice or recognize the ISO symbol.

Raise the stringency of headlamp lens marking requirements so that headlamp assemblies intended for gas discharge sources are clearly differentiated from those intended
for halogen sources, because current regulations allow misinstallations to go undetected.

Raise the stringency of fog taillamp installation requirements to allow only one fog taillamp on a vehicle, mounted on the driver’s side of the rear of the vehicle, because dual
fog taillamp arrangements are difficult to distinguish from brake lamps and force following drivers to focus on glaring high intensity lights.

Raise the stringency of fog taillamp wiring requirements so that the fog taillamp deactivates and must be deliberately reactivated by the driver after low beam headlamps, fog lamps, or vehicle ignition are switched off.

What he said............

It's about time.

-Mark

[mohrds]

I particularly like the one where the fog lamps will be wired like the rear defroster, where they reset to "off" every time the car is turned off.

[Seraph]

FINALLY!!!! I hate those morons with rear fog lights running on 85 degree bright sunny days.

[Chiketkd]

Looks like we will finally be able to catch up with the rest of the world!

[HighwayUFO]

Now if we could only convert to JDM spec lenses, corners, and markers. That alone would be sweet action.

Keith

[Nemesis Destiny]

That would be great, were it to come to pass, even for me in Canada. Usually we fall into line behind American policy a few months/years later, but often it works better because we got to learn from all the mistakes made with US legislations and guidelines.

If I had a nickel for every time my eyes have been burnt from some inconsiderate **** in an SUV or jacked up hillbilly pickup behind me, or from oncoming glare from some punk with a fake HID kit... well, I'd be rich enough to do something about it.

And don't even get me started about loud car stereos...

[Uncamitzi]

Originally posted by mohrds
These are the proposed changes to US regulations. They are finally going to discuss switching to ECE (E-Code) headlamp standards. Also interesting is the regulating of "fog" and "Driving" lights both OEM and aftermarket.

Doug


Raise the test voltage contained in MVSS 108 from 12.8V to 13.7V, or establish a dual-voltage testing regimen in which

/snip\

and must be deliberately reactivated by the driver after low beam headlamps, fog lamps, or vehicle ignition are switched off.

Proposed by who? Proposed when? Proposed where?



Maybe..if we all just quit driving at night.... what's there to see at night anyway?

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by mohrds
Lower the degree to which “white” illumination may tend towards blue, because this will reduce the production of inherently-glaring blue light and will also reduce the motivation
for individuals to attempt to attain a “blue” appearance with halogen headlamps.

So the idea is to change HID lights so they don't tend towards blue. The hoped-for side effect would be that the kiddies won't want to emulate a harmful effect of those lamps. Do I have that right?

I find that concept misguided. The kids are always going to be doing stupid crap to their cars that has nothing to do with actual performance, and actually hinders it. Lighting included.

I do agree that US lighting regulations need some overhauling, but I wouldn't try to do it in the name of staving off retarded modifications. Those are going to be marketed as long as people buy them. No more blue-looking HIDs? Then they'll emulate something else that they think makes their Hyundai look like a BMW.

Angel eyes, anybody?

[UberRoo]

Do we really need more laws? We can do lots of cool things to our cars here in the States, (as well as some really stupid things.) Other countries prohibit many of the freedoms we enjoy with our cars. Remember sealed beams? After giving people [manufacturers] freedom to do what they wanted with lighting, things have only improved. Our current lighting still leaves much to be desired, but things have been getting better without government intervention.

In fact, those 'Angel Eyes' headlights are pretty neat looking and totally harmless, but they'd probably be disallowed with new regulation. In fact, new laws would probably just prohibit modification of the factory lights. I like LED taillights - also harmless - but they'd probably become a no-no. Those rapidly-flashing blinkers, while I do think they're silly looking, they are functional and also harmless. Chasing signals are kinda cool, but they'd also be on the chopping block. (Too distracting - or something like that.) Experimentation into the ideal light color would be retarded by new regulation, as well as alternative light sources such as HID, fluorescent, LEDs, etc.. Need I go on?

We have a few morons out there with poorly adjusted lights, but we already have laws prohibiting that stuff. The law does specify maximum wattage. It specifies where the lights must be aimed and where they can be placed on the vehicle. They restrict the color of the light depending on it's application. They also very specifically prohibit "unreasonable glare," which is up to the interpretation of an officer. I think our current laws pretty much have all the bases covered.

If anyone really feels this is a serious problem, wouldn't the logical place to start be with the people who aren't enforcing our current laws? I really wish people would stop chipping away at out freedoms. If ya give 'em an inch...

[mohrds]

Originally posted by Uncamitzi


Proposed by who? Proposed when? Proposed where?



Maybe..if we all just quit driving at night.... what's there to see at night anyway?

Submitter:
U.S. DOT/NHTSA
Richard L. Van Iderstine
Office of Rulemaking

F. R. Pub. Date:
02/12/2003

Category: Rulemaking Docket
Status: Pending
Subcat.: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

[mohrds]

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets


So the idea is to change HID lights so they don't tend towards blue. The hoped-for side effect would be that the kiddies won't want to emulate a harmful effect of those lamps. Do I have that right?

I find that concept misguided. The kids are always going to be doing stupid crap to their cars that has nothing to do with actual performance, and actually hinders it. Lighting included.

I do agree that US lighting regulations need some overhauling, but I wouldn't try to do it in the name of staving off retarded modifications. Those are going to be marketed as long as people buy them. No more blue-looking HIDs? Then they'll emulate something else that they think makes their Hyundai look like a BMW.

Angel eyes, anybody?

Not exactly right.

The issue is that there are inconclusive studies about the color of light produced and effect on the human eye.

The higher the color, the more light will scatter on the beam fringe causing glare to other drivers. Dirt, dust, and rain will increase the scatter effect thus increasing the glare.

If it turns out after studies that a lower temp light is better for the eyes and visibility, then an allowed color range will be proposed.

Doug

[mohrds]

Originally posted by UberRoo
Do we really need more laws? We can do lots of cool things to our cars here in the States, (as well as some really stupid things.) Other countries prohibit many of the freedoms we enjoy with our cars. Remember sealed beams?

These are not new laws, they are updating existing laws to be more on par with the rest of the world.

Originally posted by UberRoo
After giving people [manufacturers] freedom to do what they wanted with lighting, things have only improved. Our current lighting still leaves much to be desired, but things have been getting better without government intervention.

There did not receive freedom, the freedom was there, it was just not cost effective to pursue. The general public doesn't accept radical change.

Originally posted by UberRoo
In fact, those 'Angel Eyes' headlights are pretty neat looking and totally harmless, but they'd probably be disallowed with new regulation.

Not true. Lights under a certain candlepower are considered marker lights and are only restricted in color (white or yellow in front, red or yellow in rear).

Originally posted by UberRoo
In fact, new laws would probably just prohibit modification of the factory lights. I like LED taillights - also harmless - but they'd probably become a no-no. Those rapidly-flashing blinkers, while I do think they're silly looking, they are functional and also harmless. Chasing signals are kinda cool, but they'd also be on the chopping block. (Too distracting - or something like that.)

That's a stretch. Modification will not be illegal if you conform to the regulations. You can do what I did and re-title you car as a custom (modified) vehicle and be allowed to do whatever you want if it matches the regulations.

Originally posted by UberRoo
Experimentation into the ideal light color would be retarded by new regulation, as well as alternative light sources such as HID, fluorescent, LEDs, etc.. Need I go on?

Not true. Experimentation will always be done. But, perhaps with better worded regulations, experimentation will be done in the labs, not on the roads as a lot are now.
From the RFC:
Question 14: While we are aware of many studies to demonstrate and promote the efficacy of AFS, we are not aware of a single study that has been done on the effects on other drivers facing AFS-equipped vehicles or on drivers using AFS-equipped vehicles. Please identify any such studies.

Originally posted by UberRoo
We have a few morons out there with poorly adjusted lights, but we already have laws prohibiting that stuff. The law does specify maximum wattage.

not wattage, intensity.

Originally posted by UberRoo
It specifies where the lights must be aimed and where they can be placed on the vehicle. They restrict the color of the light depending on it's application. They also very specifically prohibit "unreasonable glare," which is up to the interpretation of an officer. I think our current laws pretty much have all the bases covered.

The laws are archaic and contribute to the problem.

Originally posted by UberRoo
If anyone really feels this is a serious problem, wouldn't the logical place to start be with the people who aren't enforcing our current laws? I really wish people would stop chipping away at out freedoms. If ya give 'em an inch...

The freedom to glare oncoming drivers? You are blowing this way out of proportion.

Doug

[Mr. Pockets]

DIZZAAAAM! D0UG PWND J00!!1!1!!

Doug, you clearly know way more about this than I care to right now, so...uh...way to go.

[mohrds]

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets
DIZZAAAAM! D0UG PWND J00!!1!1!!

Doug, you clearly know way more about this than I care to right now, so...uh...way to go.

I find it a very enlightening topic!!!