I'm more than a little curious as to why people feel the need to cover their headlights (more importantly, tail lights) with those black plastic covers I see all the time. I realize that some people think they look better, but how can they not reduce the amount of light that comes from your lights? Is that not physically impossible? Why would anyone want to make their headlights dimmer? And taillights.. you're just begging to be rear-ended when someone can't see your dim-as-hell brake lamps. I saw a Chevy Blazer with this crap yesterday and I nearly smashed into it (probably would have totalled my max, darned SUVs and their high bumpers) because I didn't realize that the moron inside was slowing down.

Also, in my opinion and in the opinions of those I've asked, these covers all look really stupid anyway. So, what's the point? How come these things are legal but having a busted tail light cover isn't? Please, help me understand.

 

I was thinkin the same thing! Why?

 

Isn't the answer obvious?

"To be 'cool'."

 

I think that's actually one of the things that needs to be outlawed. They bother to make legislation that the blinkers must be orange/red, but they don't care if they are covered and not seen! Can it get any more absurd?

Later

 

I was sure I was going to be flamed for this one!!

You guys are cool.

 

I just put some VHT "Nightshade" paint on my tailights last weekend.
I didn't put a lot on, just a few coats.

Why?
I don't like the orange color of the tails.
Also, I have a dark blue car and I want the whole car to have a dark look.
Future mods include tinted windows, shaved emblems and anhtracite wheels [hopefully they come today].

I also don't like the look of the
diamond-plastic-that-goes-in-fluorescent-light-covers stuff used for the red/clear rears
- not to mention the time it takes to do it, or the money it costs to buy them.

As I said, just a few coats.
I had a friend in the car step on the brakes, try signals and reverse
and I could see all the lights just fine.
But I will be looking into higher wattage bulbs anyway...

Personally I think it looks good.
If you don't, well then, don't do it to your car.
I'm sure your altezza style lights will show up just fine.

That said, I put in brighter headlight bulbs
and I won't be sparying those or putting the GTO covers on.

 

just plain stupid. Boy look how cool I am.

 

well personal opinion is great i my self you ratcher have clear tail covers and have them painted body color with the red circles still visible but i understand what your saying

 

Not a bad idea...
wish I'd seen this thread before I tinted.
I'd still go with the tint around the circles
as opposed to body color
[the can of paint was under $10 vs $? to have a body shop paint them]

 

First of all, I think they look sharp on a black car. I love the look of everything being body color. Just as I would looooove to have all-clear taillights for my white car! So, yes, I see what your saying - they do look kinda cheap - especially when they leave the GTO sticker on there - but I think it's acceptable on a black car. Now, my beef is with those stuuuuuuuuupid sunroof deflectors! It's like there is some law somewhere that if you have a Maxima and a sunroof, you must buy a cheesey wind deflector. I really don't get that one...

 

Yup. Not only should all taillights have red lenses for brakes and yellow lenses for signals (anything else is unsafe), but covering the reflectors in the lenses is a very bad idea. Those reflectors will save your car (maybe your life) one day.

 

Not sure I get your point...
I lightly tinted my lights.
But when I brake you still see red.
When I signal a turn you see orange.
When I reverse you see white.
OK, so it's not as bright as before
but it must be at least 90%, 95% of what it had been.
And if I can find higher wattage bulbs it will be as it was...
What do you mean "covering your reflectors in the lenses"?

 

Yes, I agree that smoked taillight covers and headlight should be banned. However, smoking your taillights with translucent paint should be fine. Why? Because well over 90% of the stock lighting still shows thru. If you haven't seen a Maxima with this setup then you can't judge. I've had my taillights smoked for a long time and I've never had problems. Some stock GTIs, Jettas, RX-7s, and Grand Prixs come this way from the factory. It looks black until you turn on the brakes. My turn signals still show thru orange, reverse is clear, and brake lights are red. The brightness is still there, it's not muted. My black Max looks completely black along the rear on a partly cloudy day. The look is incredible because it makes better use of the ugly tail end.


Dave

 

Thank you Dave.
Finally some support here...

 

No matter how good you think they look doesn't matter. They ARE illegal. If you look at the cans of paint for them it says they are for Off-road use only. BTW, just because you haven't been stopped by an officer doesn't make them legal) There are certain things that no matter how they look to you, they are made that way with standards for safety. And anyone who thinks that they don't affect the light coming out, needs to get their eyes checked. If you get rearended, and the driver behind you complains to the officer that you had blacked out lights ( no matter to what degree) you can bet theres a strong chance YOU will be the one getting the ticket, and sited with the wreck.

 

I never said they don't affect the light coming out.
Obviously it is reduced - but not by very much.
At least on my car as I only put about 3, 4 coats.
And, if I can put higher wattage bulbs in, it will be close to what it was.

OK - it's illegal.
Then what about all those GTIs, Jettas, RX-7s, and Grand Prixs
with the dark tail lights - are they just waiting for a ticket?

It says "offroad use only" just to cover their own tails.
They have no control over how many coats the consumer will use.
He can spray so many coats that only 5% of the original output shows...

If I don't use a turn signal and get hit from behind
I could get a ticket for failure to signal,
but the guy who hits me is still at fault for following too closely.
So, if I get rearended I could be open for a ticket [what the charge would be I don't know].
But the person who hits from behind is always the one at fault.

I knew a guy who hit a woman who was backing down an exit ramp.
He was the one who got the blame.

 

I dont see the true purpose of these covers either. Sure, they make the entire car look black, but covering the headlights is going too far. I appreciate the black maximas with 5% windows and clear lenses (provides a nice contrast). But I see way too many of these souped up 80's cavaliers and corsicas with the GTO covers on them, driving around at night with barely visible yellow light. I was once in Canada when a few officers on foot stopped a car with those GTO covers and told him to remove them RIGHT there in traffic. Some people seem to think its okay to put those covers on the headlights and use foglights only to replace the headlights. Now, these are cars with NO factory fogs, so they're usually mounted real low, and jitter when they hit bumps, etc.

 

Any cars that come from the factory that way have their lighs approved by DOT, yours are not. As far as the person in the rear always being at fault, NO. There are instances where that is not true. If your brake lights are out, and someone hits you from hehind, you are at fault. I have heard of cases where the driver with the blacked out lights was hit, and the other driver complained about this, and he was charged. Again, this is a saftey feature. This isn't for decoration. YOu don't tamper with safety designs. You aren't just riskig your own health when you do that. And by coloring your tails, you are. Again, there are just some things you do not do, no matter how they look. Period. I like the way they look, I'm not saying they don't. And I'm not trying to flame anyone, but it's not a safe thing to do.......

 

There is a standard in the color of reflectors the the DOT says should be on every car. The more you alter them, the more problems you are going to have with the Police and Inspection Stations.

I had those dumb HID look headlights and went back to my Sylvania Cool Blues instead. Those HID(so called Xenon gas) halogens are not bright enough to drive at night.

 

No prob, not feeling flamed
and if I cared about what other people thought
I wouldn't be modding my car at all in any way
and besides some of the flaming can get pretty harsh here
If I were the sensitive type I would only be a lurker.

Your DOT approved point is a good one...
I do wish I'd seen this thread before I went and did this.
But it's done now.

Wont the LEDs in my spolier cpount for anything?
[I didn't tint those]

Won't higher wattage bulbs help?

I wonder what the statue is?
"Tail lights must emit 14 lumens when viewed from 0 degrees at ambient light level such and such as measured by xyz light meter on the second tuesday of any month with 31 days"

NE1 know the real answer?
Or where/how I might find out?

 

You guys sound like my mom. It's hardly that big of a deal. Relax a little. Let people do what they want.
If I had a black car, I'd spray my tails too. There is a Jag in my work's parking lot that has pitch-black tails, stock. And about DOT approved, neither are our clear bumper lights! Relax guys, it's not the huge deal you make it out to be. Have a great day.

 

I think there are two issues here:
1- modding your car, and
2- keeping it safe.

Certain things, like changing blinkers from amber to white, does not make one's car more dangerous to others- some may not be used to seeing white blinkers, but they still are just as visible (hell, my Olds used to have red ones and they were stock).
Covering the headlights and tails, however, is another thing. I don't think putting a coat or two will make a difference, but some people go to extremes, ultimately risking other people's lives.


later

 

I didnt know the corners werent DOT approved, huh, well i have amber bulbs behind them and they are brigher than the were with clear bulbs behind orange, my altezzas are DOT approved though, it says so real small on the bottom corner of the lense

 

As far as I know clear corners with clear or blue lights are not legal.
Clear corners with amber bulbs are ok,
but if a cop feels like giving you a hard time he can.
But then, if he's like that, he'll be giving you as hard a time as possible over anything he can think of.

 

You guys sound like my mom. It's hardly that big of a deal. Relax a little. Let people do what they want.
If I had a black car, I'd spray my tails too. There is a Jag in my work's parking lot that has pitch-black tails, stock. And about DOT approved, neither are our clear bumper lights! Relax guys, it's not the huge deal you make it out to be. Have a great day.

 

I'm gonna post a pic later tonight and you'll eat those words, my friend.

I got pulled over earlier this year. You know what for? Having a smoked license plate cover. My taillights were smoked at the time and I got pulled over around sunset which is when my tails are at full darkness. The officer said he couldn't have people driving around with covers over the LIGHTS or plates. What's that tell ya? (hint: he thought my lights were factory) Like I said, you'll eat those words.

I would in no way do something to my car so that it puts me or someone in danger. In the daylight or at night, the brightness showing thru is nearly (95%) like stock. The reflectors still work. There is NO way an officer will know if you've smoked your taillights because it looks factory. Like I said, some cars are made this way. An officer doesn't have a book that says, "Statute 0.00901 F-435.E 95-99 Maxima taillights amber, clear, red - unsmoked".

Clear corners are not legal IF the car did not have them stock. Same goes for the Altezza lights etc. There is no such thing as "DOT approved". That's just a marketing thing to get you to buy the product.


Dave

 

No I won't
My roomate in NYC had a Jetta,(older one) and did what you did to the tails. Within a week he was given a fix it ticket. He did a total of 2 coats, and I watched him do it. My brother has recieved a couple tickets for haveing smoked taillights on his Dodge Ram. Also I remember hearing a story on here about a guy on ClubSi that was rearended and had smoked tails, and he was charged with the wreck. Like I said before, I like smoked tails. I think they look great, but you cant get around that fact that they are illegal. Like I said earlier, just because you haven't gotten a ticket for it, doesn't make it legal. Just makes you lucky. If you like them Dave, cool. Your car looks great. I love it. Always have. I'm just saying that altering lights in any way is illegal, and can be hazardous. That's all.

 

I understand what you're saying, but as you can see, there is no safety issue. This was taken at 730 pm in the daylight. Nightime they are even brighter. If some fool hits me from behind, he's got no one to blame but himself

Dave

 

What do you mean DOT approved does not exist, are you some sort of law expert? maybe we need one to sove this problem

 

Agreed

 

Does your stealth box hit hard? Can people hear you commin? Is it worth the money or should i get 2 JL 12W3D4's?

 

Yes, people hear me coming. It does hit hard, deep, and clean. You just need to give it all the power it can take( and the 10W6 woofer inside LOVES power). But the Stealthbox is IMO for those that want great bass for them more than for the outside world. You won't win any SPL contests with it. But I love it. I have had no regrets with it....

 

I'd just like to know exactly what the light output requirements are
that allows DOT approved dark lights on some cars but not "self-tinted"...
I mean there must be something written somewhere, some
requirement that the auto makers met to allow them to sell a car like this.
And so, if we meet the same requirement, it should be legal.

Any lawyers on the forum who'd know how to track this down?

Dave B - did you put in brighter/higher wattage/led bulbs?

 

They can't be DOT approved because there's no red reflector on the side. If you look at any stock car sold in the US, there is a red reflector facing the side of the car in the rear. Without exception. These tails don't have it, so they're not legal.

 

Sorry to be dense here Weasy, but what do you mean?

My 97 has rears with red lights that bend around to the side.
They still show red through the tint.
The factory original type cars with the dark lights don't
have "regular" lights on the side.

What tails are you talking about?
By red reflector, I assume you mean the red plastic over the bulbs that diffuse the light?

 

Well In Maryland, Clear Tail lenses are Illegal. As well are "Black Outs". And Can I say....Thank god. I have a Midnight Blue Max. I wouldn't want to black out my headlights. I agree that I couldn't see anything with them nor could anyone. Now I have seen smoked lenses before. They aren't so bad However, People go too far wit this. Let me just say, Thank go dMaryland outlaws things like that.

But in support of people who like it. It is opinion. And If that's what you like to make your car look good. Most definately do it.

Pete
95 Max GXE

 

By red reflector I mean something that shines back red light when you shine light at it.

Further explanation...

This is a stock IS300. Notice how the taillight has no red panel facing the side but one is included on the bumper.
(Note- it looks orange in the pic but it's actually red)


This is the Maxima altezza, there is no reflector included in the taillight as it would be in the stock taillight assembly, and no such reflector exists on the side of the car. If you shine a light on this taillight from the side it will not refect back at you except some off the chrome, but this is not a design feature and the reflecting surface is not red.

 

ohhhh ok
gotcha now, thanks

 

?????????????????????????

 

DOT (Dept of Transportation) isn't a federal entity. DOT exists for every state therefore there is nothing that is DOT approved. If you've ever worked with state and federal offices, you'd know that none of these groups can agree on anything. I think most states require the lights to be visible from 300 feet or someting like that.

I'm still using the stock light wattage. I applied two light coats of paint. On a sunny day, you can still clearly see the outline of the taillight housing along with the colors red, amber, and clear (just darker than stock). Lighting and reflection from the side is nearly the same as stock.

The real question here is "Is it legal?" Hell NO!!! But this is one of those mods that if you do right, they will never know. Tampering with the factory lighting system is a NO NO in every state I'm sure. However, if a cop pulled you over and said that your tails looked too dark, he'd be hard pressed to fine you because the lighting is nearly the same as stock and it looks factory. Taillight covers are easy to pick out because they are extremely dark, the light is affected, and it's clear that they are velcroed on.


Dave