26101 refers to "modifying device"...

26101. No person shall sell or offer for sale for use upon or as
part of the equipment of a vehicle, nor shall any person use upon a
vehicle, any device that is intended to modify the original design or
performance of any lighting equipment, safety glazing material, or
other device, unless the modifying device meets the provisions of
Section 26104. This section does not apply to a taillamp or stop lamp
in use on or prior to December 1, 1935, or to lamps installed on
authorized emergency vehicles.



I dont have time to look up the specifics vc (but I have in the past) that refers to luminance of specific lights... so long as you can prove that I think you have a case... I saved a bunch of legal info on my laptop regarding lighting, I try to dig it up tomorrow.

 

you're right... I even referenced the Challenger a few posts above... they are definitely not "Red"... I think the cop was just giving him a hard time - his citation should be defend-able...

 

^+1 If the part that the actual light shines through isn't tinted (like bluebatmobile) then it would have to meet 26104. Mike, can you post 26104?

 

its vague (which is why I didn't post with 26101) - and I have other more pertinent VC and definitions on my other computer that will be relevant and help establish more certainty... but here is 26104 anyway:

26104. (a) Every manufacturer who sells, offers for sale, or
manufactures for use upon a vehicle devices subject to requirements
established by the department shall, before the device is offered for
sale, have laboratory test data showing compliance with such
requirements. Tests may be conducted by the manufacturer.
(b) The department may at any time request from the manufacturer a
copy of the test data showing proof of compliance of any device with
the requirements established by the department and additional
evidence that due care was exercised in maintaining compliance during
production. If the manufacturer fails to provide such proof of
compliance within 30 days of notice from the department, the
department may prohibit the sale of the device in this state until
acceptable proof of compliance is received by the department.

 

Wow, you weren't kidding about 'vague'!!!
"...have laboratory test data showing compliance with such
requirements."

Lab Test:

"Hey Mike, can you see these lights?"

 

Good thing I'm still in Japan
Not sure when I'll return to the states, but yeah the car is coming with
Here you go. Started it a while ago
https://g35driver.com/forums/san-die...ight-mods.html

One thing I didn't do to my outer lights that I did to my inner was paint the inside edges of the cover black so that they would blend in better with the painted housings. I'll be doing that shortly, though


Edit:

Here is a better picture of them lit up
Again the driver side light is a JDM stock piece.

 

thanks for the info guys i really liked the feed back. the dark tints came in n they didnt look good i am not even gunna bother putting them on. im gunna go wit a lighter tint for my car color DG n prob get clear side makers instead of the balck but their mad cheap so maybe both n see wat they look like. i'll try n get a pic when im done. i am getting my window tints tomorrow thou!

 

plus that section doesn't even hint at what the "requirements" are...

This is why its important to read and understand the VC listed on citations - because often it inst really 100% relevant to what the officer is trying to cite you for... they know most ppl don't have the resources (or just don't bother) to defend - so it's normally not an issue for cop...

 

here's some additional relevant info (there's much more than this, but I'm not going to post it all):

24600. During darkness every motor vehicle which is not in combination with any other vehicle and every vehicle at the end of a combination of vehicles shall be equipped with lighted taillamps
mounted on the rear as follows:
(a) Every vehicle shall be equipped with one or more taillamps.
(b) Every vehicle, other than a motorcycle, manufactured and first registered on or after January 1, 1958, shall be equipped with not less than two taillamps, except that trailers and semitrailers manufactured after July 23, 1973, which are less than 30 inches wide, may be equipped with one taillamp which shall be mounted at or near
the vertical centerline of the vehicles. If a vehicle is equipped with two taillamps, they shall be mounted as specified in subdivision (d).
(c) Every vehicle or vehicle at the end of a combination of vehicles, subject to subdivision (a) of Section 22406 shall be equipped with not less than two taillamps.
(d) When two taillamps are required, at least one shall be mounted at the left and one at the right side respectively at the same level.
(e) Taillamps shall be red in color and shall be plainly visible from all distances within 500 feet to the rear except that taillamps on vehicles manufactured after January 1, 1969, shall be plainly visible from all distances within 1,000 feet to the rear.

*note it states "taillamps" not "lenses"... the most relevant is reference to visibility (all of this is what section 26104, mentioned earlier, refers to when it says "requirements")

24603. Every motor vehicle which is not in combination with any other vehicle and every vehicle at the end of a combination of vehicles shall at all times be equipped with stoplamps mounted on the rear as follows:
(a) Every such vehicle shall be equipped with one or more stoplamps.
(b) Every such vehicle, other than a motorcycle, manufactured and first registered on or after January 1, 1958, shall be equipped with two stoplamps, except that trailers and semitrailers manufactured after July 23, 1973,


(e) Stoplamps on vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1979, shall emit a red light. Stoplamps on vehicles manufactured before January 1, 1979, shall emit a red or yellow light. All stoplamps shall be plainly visible and understandable from a distance of 300 feet to the rear both during normal sunlight and at nighttime, except that stoplamps on a vehicle of a size required to be equipped with clearance lamps shall be visible from a distance of 500 feet during such times.

*again "stoplamps" - not lenses...

This is just some of the info I would use in court of law...

One thing everyone needs to remember - the laws are made to keep vehicles and drivers "Safe" (cops use these laws to generate revenue)... if you can prove in court that your situation is not unsafe, and meets the requirements listed in the vehicle code then you do not have a problem.

 

I actually spoke in depth about tinting taillights with a FL trooper once. This was back when I had my Trans Am and I was thinking about tinting the taillights and making the lights brighter with LEDs. He said if I were to tint them to make the lights brighter and that as long as they could be seen from a certian distance it was fine. The OEM lights on the TA are nowhere nearly as bright as the G though. He was really cool about everything, some cops are just out to wright a ticket for anything though.

 

TA lights are pretty dim. It's that OEM honeycomb mesh that makes them duller....plus every T/A i see on the street always seems to have a taillight bulb out! Why is that? Are they a PITA to change?


In MA there is actual wording that states that film or paint cannot be applied to the taillights. Not every state has this wording though, and i'm not gonna search through them.

A common theme of everything seems to be the distances though. I've seen it in several states laws. That makes me think it's part of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...vss/index.html


Quoted from above.


Funny how your taillights need to be visible from 1000 feet...but your stop lights only 300 feet?? You'd think it would be the other way around.

But anyway, anyone ever mark off 3.3 football fields of lenght turn your parking lights on and check out your lights? What about a football field lenght in full sunlight? I guess if they meet those standards, then they would pass the SAE standards.

Prob is if you get a ticket, how do you prove that they are visable at those distances? Any sort of challenge against a tinted taillight ticket seems like an uphill battle IMHO.

 

It's a wiring/ground problem. Very common. Both mine had it, I fixed the first one, never got around to the 2nd. If you notice, it's almost always the driver's side.

I wanted to take mine appart and put a high brightness led like the G35 in each honeycomb. Woulda been bad... unfortunately I wrecked both TAs before I got a chance to do it

Easy, park it by a stock TA

 

I removed the tint & am going to get it inspected tomorrow. Do you guys think they were really too dark? At night the light shines through about 90%.

 

Visibility/legality issues aside...i think the stock taillight just looks better IMHO. The one on the right just looks old and faded. The one on the left looks clear and new.

That lip spoiler looks pretty damn good too!

 

I didn't write the laws, I just study them... and as long as I can prove I'm within them, I'm okay...