New LED tail lights 69 Cuda

-
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sebastian,
Thank you for your comments. I first heard about the availability of these for the 69 Dart from Will Ellis (SwissWill). From what I can see they greatly increase the light output at the rear of the vehicle. I have read all of your previous posts on this thread and I can not wait to see these lights in action. The last time I looked they were not yet listed on your website. Do you have pricing for these yet. Thanks again for all your responses.
~Michael
 
I do not see anything for the Barracuda on the spagetti website. Is the stuff available to be ordered? Front lights (markers) would also be nice.
 
NektarQuince said:
If your telling me that the standard 1157 bulb is better then this LED panel then you must be blind. Have any of you ever purchased a set of Digi-Tails? A lot of people on the internet like to talk about products as if they actually used them before. Well I have and a blind man could see that these lights are legit.
Click to expand...

Have you actually READ this thread? Apparently, you're just ignoring what you don't want to hear.

For the purpose of certification and legality, neither your subjective opinion nor mine are relevant.

ONE MORE TIME, certification is not a simple measurement of brightness. It's light measured at numerous angles and conditions using special equipment, not determined by some guy in a lab coat with a clipboard just watching it flash. Just because you don't understand why it's so important doesn't mean that it isn't important.

If you and I are standing on the street and a car drives by, I might guess the car was traveling 30 mph, and you might guess 80 mph. Neither estimate matters, only a mechanical speed detector could make the correct determination. Otherwise, why would cops use speed guns? They could just "guesstimate" who's speeding and who's not.

That's exactly what it's like living in several less-developed countries. Laws like this are what separates us from them, and I'm THANKFUL for these laws, even when they "inconvenience" me or my hobby.
 
vynn3 said:
Have you actually READ this thread? Apparently, you're just ignoring what you don't want to hear.

For the purpose of certification and legality, neither your subjective opinion nor mine are relevant.

ONE MORE TIME, certification is not a simple measurement of brightness. It's light measured at numerous angles and conditions using special equipment, not determined by some guy in a lab coat with a clipboard just watching it flash. Just because you don't understand why it's so important doesn't mean that it isn't important.

If you and I are standing on the street and a car drives by, I might guess the car was traveling 30 mph, and you might guess 80 mph. Neither estimate matters, only a mechanical speed detector could make the correct determination. Otherwise, why would cops use speed guns? They could just "guesstimate" who's speeding and who's not.

That's exactly what it's like living in several less-developed countries. Laws like this are what separates us from them, and I'm THANKFUL for these laws, even when they "inconvenience" me or my hobby.
Click to expand...

Who the hell said it wasn't important. What I find important is actually knowing what I'm talking about. I think it's funny how a lot of you just keep using the words "certification" and "regulations" like you actually know what your talking about. You just keep parroting what Slantsixdan mentioned in earlier posts even though he doesn't actually mention what the specific laws are. He mentions FMVSS 108 which is a 60+ page document about the standards of "replacement lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment," multiple times but never actually points out specifically which standards relate to LED taillights. Then you completely ignore the information Sebastian gave which explains how the entire process of certification works. Read the part under Certifying Lighting Equipment.

Here's the link he gave:
http://www.sema.org/files/attachments/Government-Affairs-2009-09-SN-Oct06-Lighting-Equipment.pdf

I may not be able to "guestimate" if a car is going 30 or 40 mph but I can damn well tell you that its not standing still.
 
I'm sure all you safety freaks get out and clean your taillights every 10 minutes in the slush or dirt right? These are brighter then stock from any angle. The taillights of the 60s would never pass current regulations. If the current regulations are really necessary to secure the safety of poor, orphan, 6 toed, toddlers then how can you live with yourself if you ever take your 60s technology out on the road. No impact absorbing bumper, no ABS, etc. I'm mean you are also polluting sacred air w/o all the modern emission devices as well. It's not just your lungs, it's Tipper's too. Remember WWAGD? (what would Al Gore do?)

Comparing LED taillights to jacked up monster trucks is a stretch. If you think these outside agencies are really independant then you are mistaken. It's all just a ploy for government to control and outsiders to make money on the work of other people. Even the BBB has been shown to give good reviews to those who pay membership and bad reviews to thsoe who don't. Then theres the government testing the cars the government is making and coming out smelling like roses. It's no different then the mob, you pay for our peice of paper and everyhting will be alright.
 
What is does say is that the manufacturer must ensure that the product meets the specifications fully. It also says that certification is required to put the DOT on the light. It also says that compliance is automatically implied once the item is offered for sale. Most importantly it also says that the manufacturer "should establish responsible action should a civil action arise". What is comes down to, is that the manufacturer is accepting all responsibility for any actions/lawsuits that may arise from an accident where their product is called into question as to legality/conformity.

Don't get me wrong. I love the product. I believe that they are better. I would be willing to purchase them. However, here, vehicles are failing inspections simply because the products used DO NOT have official DOT certification. If I was involved in a crash, and for some reason the other party brought up the lighting as being a problem, and I could not prove their compliance, would the manufacturer be able to prove it for me? If not, I COULD be liable. Not a chance I am willing to take on myself.

Grant
 
A lot of people seem to be confused about the DOT mark. An official DOT mark is only needed on products that completely change the taillights (i.e. housing, lenses, reflectors). Since Digi-tails are customized to fit the original housing of each model it does NOT need to be marked DOT.
 
NektarQuince said:
A lot of people seem to be confused about the DOT mark. An official DOT mark is only needed on products that completely change the taillights (i.e. housing, lenses, reflectors). Since Digi-tails are customized to fit the original housing of each model it does NOT need to be marked DOT.
Click to expand...

NO!

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:
 
Here's a clearer explanation:
USDOT does not certify anyone or anything. The manufacturer or importer of a vehicle or regulated piece of equipment is the party who certifies that the vehicle or equipment meets all applicable provisions of all applicable requirements. There is no requirement for any particular testing or other procedure before such certification is made, but the certification comes with full legal liability. It is entirely up to the manufacturer or importer to do whatever testing will satisfy himself that the device or vehicle actually meets the requirements. It is a self-certification regulatory regime in North America, and always has been.

If reason arises to believe a particular vehicle or piece of regulated vehicle equipment is not in compliance -- usually "reason" means injuries, deaths, newsworthy crashes, or consumer complaints -- USDOT may purchase and test samples of the vehicle or equipment in question. If noncompliance is found, they can order the manufacturer or importer to recall and repair or replace the noncompliant equipment, or in the case of aftermarket parts, repair or replace or refund it. They can also levy substantial civil penalties in the form of fines.
 
And to those of you who say that you need to run tests with special equipment to see if these LED panels are safer, you are just being ridiculous. Compare them side-by-side with the standard bulb and anyone can see that they out perform. It's like seeing a Pro Mod drag race a stock Honda Civic. You may not know that how fast they were going or what their times were but it's clear who won the race. And just for reference, the Spaghetti's Digi-Tails are the Pro Mod in that analogy.

Sorry, but Dan is wrong here. I know that's hard for a lot of you to believe but it happens.
 
NektarQuince, who the hell do you think you are, you just jump on the site, take over the thread and start throwing around insults to members, go F yourself and take your product with you.
 
Nektar.. obviously you think you are far above some of us with your ability to read information off a web site, and post it here. In your insulated world, you can do what the hell you want, and deal with the consequences. Where I live, we are having major issues with both local law enforcement and insurers with regards to changing out factory safety equipment for aftermarket —regardless of whether it is better, or perceived as better. I am not interested in your "perception", I am interested in whether or whether not this product is approved for my use. I like them, I'd buy them.

If you like, you can send me your personal info, and if I get ticketed for using them, or involved in a lawsuit where their validity is called into question, I'll forward it to you.

Grant
 
efriedrich said:
NektarQuince, who the hell do you think you are, you just jump on the site, take over the thread and start throwing around insults to members, go F yourself and take your product with you.
Click to expand...

Your absolutely right. I may have gone about this the wrong way but when I see a bunch of people ganging up on someone, you bet your arse I'm coming in throwing punches. It's frustrating when people start talking crap about something they know nothing about.

Regardless of my methods, the information I gave is the truth. Do with it what you will.
 
If you read the whole thread, you would realize that there ARE concerns. The largest one being the potential liability of the intended user. When you are sued by a texting soccer mom in her SUV, and somehow a statement of not seeing your brake lights being on (regardless of the truth) leads to an investigation of them, and they are deemed non-compliant, who is responsible for the legal costs and potential settlement cost? At least if it were partially true because the dim old 1157 was just that, at least my insurer would cover me, my car, and the other driver.

Grant
 
NektarQuince said:
It's frustrating when people start talking crap about something they know nothing about.

Click to expand...

Mr. NQ, time to take your own advice!

Just to recap, FMVSS 108 sets a standard, traceable to the NHTSA. Compliance is required for vehicles to be allowed to operate on public roads. Compliance is granted by inspection by accredited facilities. Exceptional performance is not a substitute for compliance.

If you care to disagree, please take it up with the NHTSA, I'm sure they will gladly hand you your buttocks.
 
OneOfMany said:
If you read the whole thread, you would realize that there ARE concerns. The largest one being the potential liability of the intended user. When you are sued by a texting soccer mom in her SUV, and somehow a statement of not seeing your brake lights being on (regardless of the truth) leads to an investigation of them, and they are deemed non-compliant, who is responsible for the legal costs and potential settlement cost? At least if it were partially true because the dim old 1157 was just that, at least my insurer would cover me, my car, and the other driver.

Grant
Click to expand...

The explanation I posted earlier states that the manufacturer take full legal liability for the products they self-certify.

Vehicle owners and registered vehicles are regulated at the state level, not by the Federal standards. Some states' vehicle codes contain requirements that include the Federal regulatory text, usually by reference. And states are NOT permitted to have codes more stringent than the Federal code -- a vehicle or item of regulated equipment manufacturer-certified as compliant with all applicable Federal standards is street-legal in all 50 states, period. For example, the Federal code permits rear turn signals to emit red or amber light. A state, therefore, cannot require that rear turn signals emit only amber light (or only red light, or only green light...). However, states are free to regulate the use of vehicles, so a state would be entirely free to prohibit the use of fog lamps under any circumstances, for example.
 
OneOfMany said:
If you read the whole thread, you would realize that there ARE concerns. The largest one being the potential liability of the intended user. When you are sued by a texting soccer mom in her SUV, and somehow a statement of not seeing your brake lights being on (regardless of the truth) leads to an investigation of them, and they are deemed non-compliant, who is responsible for the legal costs and potential settlement cost? At least if it were partially true because the dim old 1157 was just that, at least my insurer would cover me, my car, and the other driver.

Grant
Click to expand...

The explanation I posted earlier states that the manufacturer take full legal liability for the products they self-certify.

Vehicle owners and registered vehicles are regulated at the state level, not by the Federal standards. Some states' vehicle codes contain requirements that include the Federal regulatory text, usually by reference. And states are NOT permitted to have codes more stringent than the Federal code -- a vehicle or item of regulated equipment manufacturer-certified as compliant with all applicable Federal standards is street-legal in all 50 states, period. For example, the Federal code permits rear turn signals to emit red or amber light. A state, therefore, cannot require that rear turn signals emit only amber light (or only red light, or only green light...). However, states are free to regulate the use of vehicles, so a state would be entirely free to prohibit the use of fog lamps under any circumstances, for example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
-

Back
Top