Ouch...Void Insurance!

[bluebeastsrt]

If my mother couldn't determine the difference between a lightly smoked EXTREMELY BRIGHT LED lamp, and non smoked, and rear ended someone, it would be her fault. A) Following too closely (should have been farther back while she made it up in her mind what she was seeing) B) Too fast for conditions (if she was going slower she could have thought about what she was looking at more)

So yeah....I would consider it her fault. We're talking about LED lamps on 2015s, not the ricer VHT spray tint bullshit on 99-04 cars.

Not to mention the fact that the REST of the vehicle is stopped, idk about you guys, but when I look at another vehicle within a half a second or so I can determine if a vehicle is moving or stopped :shrug:

You pro tail light tint guys can make all the excuses you want. I told my then 19 year old daughter not to put that crap on her Mustang. She didn't listen and got rear ended! The very first thing the guy that hit her said was I could see the brake lights. She received a ticket for the tint. Got less than owed from the insurance company on the payoff when the car was totaled and was lucky she wasn't hurt! But she sure did look cool right up until then. I'm done here.

Sponsored

 

[Zemedici]

You pro tail light tint guys can make all the excuses you want. I told my then 19 year old daughter not to put that crap on her Mustang. She didn't listen and got rear ended! The very first thing the guy that hit her said was I could see the brake lights. She received a ticket for the tint. Got less than owed from the insurance company on the payoff when the car was totaled and was lucky she wasn't hurt! But she sure did look cool right up until then. I'm done here.

this was on a 2015?

If not, then your point is invalid. Because I don't give a fat fuck what John Smith does to his 98 escort. I care about MY car and my girls, that's it. As long as they can see me, I'm good. That's the entire point of this thread/half assed non supported 'debate'....

 

[Rickycardo]

I'm sorry that happened to your daughter and I understand the aggravation it causes but I have proven that my brake lights are legal per Illinois law. If I am rear ended and the other driver claim my brake lights are too dim both he, the police and the insurance company must prove this. I have proven they are not too dim. I can repeat this demonstration as often as necessary. It's science, not hearsay.
I feel that's a problem in this he-said-she-said world. Far too many people simply accept what they're told without demanding proof or make claims without backing up their words with evidence. As NASA used to say "In God we trust, all others bring data."

 

[OH5GT 2 S550]

You pro tail light tint guys can make all the excuses you want. I told my then 19 year old daughter not to put that crap on her Mustang. She didn't listen and got rear ended! The very first thing the guy that hit her said was I could see the brake lights. She received a ticket for the tint. Got less than owed from the insurance company on the payoff when the car was totaled and was lucky she wasn't hurt! But she sure did look cool right up until then. I'm done here.

Have you removed the 20% tint on your windows? That might be an issue also, it's a possible safety hazard!

 

[Zemedici]

Have you removed the 20% tint on your windows? That might be an issue also, it's a possible safety hazard!

:lol::lol:


Now now lets play nice

 

[Jon|3.7]

I need to become an engineer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[speedracermustangfan]

I live in Texas and I received a "warning" a few years ago for blackout cover lenses (2012 5.0) and the cop asked me to take them off so I did and he sent me on my way. Put them back on 10 minutes later lol...I was also speeding which is why he pulled me over in the first place, also got a break on that because he didn't get a radar reading on me. He just "heard" me down shifting and "hauling ass". The car had muffler delete. I was probably going 130 on the toll road.

I loved the look especially with a black trunk cover, it just looked great in contrast to the yellow blaze metallic paint job.

I never had an issue because you could easily see the tail lights in the dark and even on sunny bright days. As others have said it depends on what kind of tint we're talking here. I could see how completely blacking out the lights to the point where they could barely be seen would be dangerous.

To all of those who say tinting is dangerous...so is speeding on public roads. I wonder how many people here opposing tail light tinting speed and put others lives in danger...or worse yet text and drive.

Food for thought.

 

[Edwin]

I feel like the people bashing the legally tinted tails couldn't have seen them in person. Otherwise, there wouldn't be an argument here. The pictures aren't shopped, they're still bright as hell.

Literally blacking them out with dip though, yeah that's stupid.

 

[Old 5 Oh]

ANY tint reduces light brightness, don't kid yourself. I agree, there's no advantage to dimming your headlights, brake lights or turn signals, no matter how cool you may think it looks.

 

[CommyO]

I have the kit from AM and it's still pretty bright when braking. In california, I'm pretty sure insurance will still cover it. Maybe we shouldn't have sports cars. It's only big safety hazard for visibility.

 

[GT Pony]

A couple of weeks ago I found out a guy was refused insurance coverage!
He was rear ended and was found 100% responsible !! He had coverage but..

HIS TAIL LIGHTS HAD THE BLACKOUT TREATMENT AS WELL AS THE SIDE MARKERS FRONT AND REAR!!

That sucks ... even though they had blackout material on them, I'm sure they were still easily seen. The brake lights on these Mustangs can be seen 3 miles in the daylight they are so damn bright!

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31596

 

[CEHollier]

At lunch today. I don't get to pick the weather, overcast today, 12:00 pm Chicago time. Parking lot at the local strip mall.
522 feet, 500 feet put me right in an aisle. Pictures taken with my cellphone. I wanted the worst case scenario for images.
As you can see 500 feet is a long way and the brake lights are visible. Standing there taking the pictures I could see the lights but they weren't blinding by any stretch.
I say it would be hard to be rear-ended and say you couldn't see the brake lights at 500 feet.
Traveling at 60 mph you cover 88 feet per second. To cover 522 feet takes 5.9 seconds. Assuming both cars are traveling 60 mph and my Mustang brakes from 60 to 0 in 250 feet that adds an additional 2.8 seconds of time to contact. Thats 8.7 seconds from the time my brakes lights illuminate until a vehicle behind me makes contact. Thats really a lot of time and distance.
I feel that the odds of my brake lights being to dim to be seen in time to avoid a collision are far too small for me to worry about. I'm fairly certain most rear end collision are due to inattention rather than brake lights being to dim.
This is only my take on this subject.

The photos were taken on an over cast day. Not direct sun light. Yes your example demonstrates under good conditions the lights are visible. If I rear end someone with tinted lights it will be well documented. And when it goes to court my insurance company will be happy to point out tinted tail lights were the reason for the wreck. The tint may well turn a winnable case into a loser.

 

[Rickycardo]

The photos were taken on an over cast day. Not direct sun light. Yes your example demonstrates under good conditions the lights are visible. If I rear end someone with tinted lights it will be well documented. And when it goes to court my insurance company will be happy to point out tinted tail lights were the reason for the wreck. The tint may well turn a winnable case into a loser.

I'm certain that bright sunlight will make it more difficult to see but you're not going to rear-end me at 500 feet. I have demonstrated that my brake lights are legal per Illinois law. Again I have tested this and feel the risk from being rear-ended because my brake lights are tinted are too small to worry about. If I am rear-ended it will be from an inattentive driver or someone following too close. I will have no problems proving my case. Again the law says nothing about tint or covers or anything like that. It only states that the lights must be visible at 500 feet. If you can see my lights from 500 feet and you rear-end me it is clearly your fault.
I stand by my decision to tint my lights.

 

[CEHollier]

If you can see my lights from 500 feet and you rear-end me it is clearly your fault.
I stand by my decision to tint my lights.

You have that right as long as they are legal. However, if you are rear ended and this becomes an issue it could get real sticky when lawyers and $$$$$ are involved. Me personally I want my lights as visible as possible.

 

[OH5GT 2 S550]

The photos were taken on an over cast day. Not direct sun light. Yes your example demonstrates under good conditions the lights are visible. If I rear end someone with tinted lights it will be well documented. And when it goes to court my insurance company will be happy to point out tinted tail lights were the reason for the wreck. The tint may well turn a winnable case into a loser.

I promise you'll lose if the tinted lights are legal!!! Specially when my lawyer breaks out a good demo like Ricky did. I don't know what the problem is if the law isn't broken. If you don't like it, don't do it to your car and stop bashing those who do. It pretty black and white to me!!!

Sponsored