My new tinted taillights and emblems...

In almost all states, if rear ended, it is the fault of the driver stricking the other vehicle in the rear end. An insurer cannot deny coverage for this type of scenario, ragrdless of brake lights. Additionally, if you have comprehensive collision coverage, which most lenders require if you do not own your vehicle outright it doesn;t matter who is at fault. In situations involving an accident where the other driver was negligent then their insurance will pay for the cost so long as they have insurance, if they don't and you do then your insurer will provide um/uim coverage that applies to those situations where the negligent driver is not insured or is underinsured.

 

In almost all states, if rear ended, it is the fault of the driver stricking the other vehicle in the rear end. An insurer cannot deny coverage for this type of scenario, ragrdless of brake lights. Additionally, if you have comprehensive collision coverage, which most lenders require if you do not own your vehicle outright it doesn;t matter who is at fault. In situations involving an accident where the other driver was negligent then their insurance will pay for the cost so long as they have insurance, if they don't and you do then your insurer will provide um/uim coverage that applies to those situations where the negligent driver is not insured or is underinsured.

 

I was thinking along the same lines. Why not take these to a chrome shop and have them de-chromed?
(They can use a reverse process to electrically remove the chrome.)
Or how about using a Dremel tool with sanding discs to take off the chrome?

 

So you're saying if I decide to disconnect my brake lights, drive the flow of traffic on the freeway, and then do a full panic stop, the driver that hit me would still be at fault? I think not.

 

If you intentionally disconnected your lights there may be some comparative negligence on your part. The driver who struck you would still share the lion's part of the liability however.

 

I'm not certain, but I thought I read somewhere that in most jurisdictions in the U.S. it is illegal to have red lights in the front of the car. It would be fun, but might get you a few traffic citations.

 

He said, the insurance would pay regardless of the brake lights. I was making one example.

 

the light filament will tell you whether the bulb was on at the time the accident occurred- the other driver's lie about the lights not being on would not stand up to an accident investigator.

when we were considering tinting our taillights, DH just tacked a sample of the tint (our tint guy rules) on to the tail light and drove to the other end of the massive parking lot where we lived at the time. i could see the tail lights just fine from several hundred ft, and the brakes were of course easily visible as well.

as long as your car meets the limits of the law, it should not be an issue for the insurance companies either in case of an accident. for the record, we did not tint our lights because we preferred to use the money for other things.

 

True to a point. The driver(s) behind you are to keep a reasonable distance and be in control of their car. This means being able to notice you stopping. The brake light 'malfunction' would come into play when Law Enforcement gets involved.
Your getting hit in the rear is often a result of chargeable violations of the V+T laws, IE following to closely, failure to yield, inattentive driving- cell phone use.... Thus putting blame on the drive who strikes your car.
It can be disputed, IE brake light malfunction, which includes the lights being out. (However no "third eye" while the other brake lights are operational has not been a justifiable defense, in a few cases I've dealt with.)

 

Illegal, no. (Fine is less than $1000) A violation of V+T laws, yes.
It becomes illegal when this light is used to move through traffic or have traffic yield the right of way.
(Obstruction of Government Administration, Could also be Criminal Impersonation if an other crime is involved.)
Yes, you're right. This is because this color is reserved for Fire Departments and Volunteer Firemen (Offical Fire department vehicle ie; Chief's car, Asst. Chief's car.)

New York State V+T law in summary:
§ 375 (41). Colored and flashing lights.
"2. Red lights and certain . One or more red or combination red and white lights, or one white light which must be a revolving, rotating, flashing, oscillating or constantly moving light, may be affixed to an authorized emergency vehicle, and such lights may be displayed on an authorized emergency vehicle when such vehicle is engaged in an emergency operation, and upon a fire vehicle while returning from an alarm of fire or other emergency."

FOG lights were illegal in New York up untill a few years ago. It was sledom enforced, but the only Vehicle that was allowed other than standard forward white lights was a snow plow! (No, yellow lights didn't cut it either.)

 

You did not quote the whole section of the vehicle code, not just part of the section. If you read the heading of section 24600 you will see it mentions during hours of darkness, so those tinted taillights might be legal if they can be seen from 1,000 feet away:

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.
(f) Taillamps on vehicles manufactured on or after January 1,
1969, shall be mounted not lower than 15 inches nor higher than 72
inches, except that a tow truck, in addition to being equipped with
the required taillamps, may also be equipped with two taillamps which
may be mounted not lower than 15 inches nor higher than the maximum
allowable vehicle height and as far forward as the rearmost portion
of the driver's seat in the rearmost position. The additional
taillamps on a tow truck shall be lighted whenever the headlamps are
lighted.

 

are you going to tint the rear center stop light? i think that would really make the rear end complete.

 

Good luck proving the taillights didn't work when the rear end of your car is destroyed. I believe someone else mentioned that if you intentionally disconnect the brake lights then you have another problem i.e. some states recognize i.e contributory negligence. However, if you have collision your insurer will repair regardless of fault so long as you didn't intentionally cause the accident. If it was intentional on your part the policy would be void under the intentional acts provision of your policy of insurance.

 

Look, I like the tinted tail light look.

My point is tinting your tail lights is an intentional act of obscurring the light that is emitted by the bulbs. It could leave you open for litigation. That's all.

 

I'm missing something here.

According to Merriam-Webster,
illegal: not according to or authorized by law

So, if it is a violation of laws, then it is not permissible according those laws. If it is not permissible according to law, then it is not authorized by law. So how is it not illegal?

 

True, I'm talking about the difference between a felony a misdemeanor and a violation of the law.

In this case tinting the rear lights would be a violation of the law, the fine would be under $500 (an example, more than likely a "FIX" ticket would be issued or the fine would be less) (per Violation, hence two lights= $1000) and jail time (if any) would be under 15 days. -V+T fines can be compounded and not increase a violation to a misdemeanor, unless specified under the law, ie DWI.-

Misdemeanor fine over $1000, jail time over 15 days.

Felony fine over $5000, jail time of more than 60 days.

Rough guidelines but that's normally where the cut offs begin.

So while it is illegal to tint your lights, it is only a violation of the law.
I miss spoke, sorry for the confusion I may have caused.

 

Looks great!
I've already e-mailed the tint shop for a quote.


QUESTION ON THE EMBLEMS:

Why:
Remove the chrome?

Why not:
Clean with denatured alcohol
Spray with adhesion promoter
Spray with chrome paint (3 coats)
Finish with clear coat
.

 

It's like the question "Why scale Mt. Everest?",
Answer:
Because it's there.

Besides, chrome anybody can do, It's cheap looking and cheap.
Now polished aluminum is not cheap and looks alot better.

Although in this case, I'm blacking out my emblems to match my White on Black (or is it Black on White?) color scheme.

ZC1

 

what I meant was, in the interest of blacking out the emblems (because I'm going to black mine out tomorrow), why sand the chrome off?
Can't I just apply black paint over the chrome using the following process?


Clean with denatured alcohol
Spray with adhesion promoter
Spray with black paint for chrome surface (3 coats)
Finish with clear coat

result = black emblem without having to sand the chrome off first.
.

 

Chris,

I stand corrected. I misread your question.

I agree with you, although in the interest of laziness I'm simply spraypainting mine with black caliper paint. It has several coats now and after a few more days of drying, I will clear coat it a few times.

Under normal circumstances, I'm thinking the emblems should stay black without chipping.

ZC1