"Slammed" seeming to be getting DOT "approval." My statements above to "why bother" is for other people. Yet Again: DOT/NHTSA Does Not approve or even test any product unless they investigate problems. Testing, when needed, is done "in house" or at 3rd party labs. If you have plastic was made to mold other car lights then could like use that info to shorten or maybe eliminate test needed. They only making clear covers to go on OE lenses etc so some test may not apply.
quote
Originally posted by JohnWPB and others: ... sell them under the guise of "For off road use only" that everyone else uses when selling aftermarket products such as lights, mirrors and such for a vehicle.
"Off Road/Show Use Only" label may shield Store and Manufacturer but not you...
State Inspectors can fail you outright or points off to fail for any light(s) w/o DOT ID showing on the lens/cover.
Every cop can stop you for any lighting problems or illegal lighting. No DOT ID on the light/cover just adds fuel to the fire. Local cops may not bother but driving in another county or state and can be a easy ticket for them or far worse when they use light issues to go fishing for other issues.
Having Off-Road/Show parts on a street car and then in a wreck can get you sued for every penny you have and more depend on local laws where got wrecked.
Tinted covers and The "Ram" etc cutout trim for tail tight are very well known for this "problem." I seen people b---- and whine when they are force to remove them by cops/courts to avoid/settle tickets or to pass NY, NJ, PA, DE, and MD inspections.
Sadly Allot of people have illegal HL too... Most all HID setups, H4 housing and/or bulbs, etc. TFS and others love to hind behind BS like "Check your local ordinances for legality," like TFS 84-88 Mega-White Bulbs (100X55) # 72209, because they know the products are illegal for most buyers. Some can't be bothered by saying the light could be illegal. Big problem is that even if a buyer cares light etc is legal or not Most buyers have No Clue how to find the State laws/rules or to check all states drive thru later. When you have DOT lights then you can safely bet the light etc are legal is all States and often other Countries.
Originally posted by Rodney: The inner tail lights have the DOT markings. That should be sufficient. The outer lens is clear.
Sorry but Nope. 1. Any Cover etc w/o DOT marks are illegal in many states w/ or w/o inspection. See post above.
2. Dot Makings on lens are different... Worse, Notch Back often have them hidden at the top. (Edit> I took apart spare set to take lenses photos then generate lens image below. Don't have a GT to look.) In Fiero case... DOT markings are on the Lenses, the Cover and the back. Only the Cover is viewed by everyone most times. Lenses have only code(s) that they do whatever job. The Cover has all Codes for all functions the lenses under the cover. These are DOT markings on lens for notch back at top often hidden by trim paint on the cover. vs Cover... Back of the assembly have same code string as cover.
I think GT codes should have: (All should end w/ 86 GUIDE 2P) R for White lens (2)S (2)T for Red lens (2)I for Yellow lens All above on the Cover and the back of assembly.
[This message has been edited by theogre (edited 04-23-2015).]
I don't see anyone here, including myself, whose goal it is to discourage this project from completing. I know I'd love to have a source for OEM-look new tail lights.
I do think there are a few different categories of folks interested in these:
1. Those who have very bad tail lights (or none) and would be happy with most anything at a reasonable price. 2. Those who (like me) have a pretty good set but would like to see a new option, even if they are expensive, but also want them to last. For my part, I want to just be able to stop fretting about mine getting hit. 3. People in either #1 or #2 who've seen these projects come and go without bearing fruit. Or tail lights.
The questions and issues being posted are, I think, good conversation bringing up salient points...depending on which category you're in above. And again, I don't see anyone's posts or questions or comments aimed at anything like "The OP should stop trying to do this". Goodness, we ALL want a viable source for replacement tail lights. As I mentioned in another thread, the lack thereof is, I think, potentially scaring potential owners/buyers off. No one want to pay $2000- $5000 for a car and then have to pay $1000, $1500, or more to get a 6/10 set of tail lights for it. The success of the OP on this benefits all of us, except perhaps those who are hoarding NOS tail lights waiting for them to hit $2000/set
Slammed, I wish you all the best in this project. I hope to be ordering a set or two in the near future. Again, I'm sorry if my comments came across in an unintended way.
I think the lenses not being DOT approved, would really only be a problem for a small amount of Fiero owners, I've have never had a inspector or police officer check my tail light lenses for DOT Approval and why would they if the lenses are reproduction looking? if their custom looking yea of course they might, they're screaming "Look at me, Look at me!". And yes there properly may be some states that will and for those owners in those states, you should know who you are, they can buy everyone else's old lenses which would be then be more available. Its like saying it wont pass California CARB/smog so you shouldn't make them for the other 49 states. As far as being sued for illegal tail lights sure, if it could be proved that the illegal taillights caused or contributed to the accident or injury but you would most likely be pretty much in the same situation for having tail lenses that are not in a safe and serviceable state of repair. Too bad we live in such a sue-happy society that people are afraid to step out their front doors with out their DOT approved Umbrella. Just my 2 sarcastic cents.
I don't see anyone here, including myself, whose goal it is to discourage this project from completing..
Maybe it is me. I seem to see a lot of discouraging stuff here. But maybe I am seeing it differently than everyone else. So I'll keep out of this topic now from here on in. Good luck. I hope they get made.
------------------ Rodney Dickman
Fiero Parts And Acc's Web Page: All new web page!:www.rodneydickman.com Rodney Dickman's Fiero accessories 7604 Treeview Drive Caledonia, WI 53108 Phone/Fax (262) 835-9575
Leave it up to the buyers, if they are more concerned with having it say DOT than they are cost and conditon, or concerned about getting warnings, thats their choice not to buy them. I would guess if the plastic went through some sort of DOT process they would then sell for more.
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 04-23-2015).]
Maybe it is me. I seem to see a lot of discouraging stuff here. But maybe I am seeing it differently than everyone else. ..
No. I agree. Ok, so who won't buy them if they are not DOT approved?? OP, make a list of these to reduce from the potential ones who will buy them. I am going to predict you may only count to three or four....
It wouldn't bother me at all if they aren't DOT certified. I've never heard of anyone up on Canada who has been checked with that degree of probing, even in provinces where we have yearly safety inspections. Lights must function. That's the extent of it. As long as they are manufactured to produce comparable light output, I very much doubt that the issue would ever come up.
Having said that, what is the procedure for getting them DOT certified? (If it was earlier in the thread, I might have missed it)
I think the lenses not being DOT approved, would really only be a problem for a small amount of Fiero owners, I've have never had a inspector or police officer check my tail light lenses for DOT Approval and why would they if the lenses are reproduction looking? if their custom looking yea of course they might, they're screaming "Look at me, Look at me!".
Even if you had 'corvette' or 'ferrari' taillight lenses, no cop is going to realize they are after market if they fit the car properly. Most people don't even know what my car is, so I HIGHLY doubt anyone would care to look and see if a lense is 'dot' approved.
To those that make an argument about having 'DOT' stamped on a taillight lense is in my words, 'nit picking.' Is anyone in the Fiero community going to turn these down for not having 3 letters? I sure as hell wont!
[This message has been edited by zzzhuh (edited 04-23-2015).]
Even if you had 'corvette' or 'ferrari' taillight lenses, no cop is going to realize they are after market if they fit the car properly. Most people don't even know what my car is, so I HIGHLY doubt anyone would care to look and see if a lense is 'dot' approved.
To those that make an argument about having 'DOT' stamped on a taillight lense is in my words, 'nit picking.' Is anyone in the Fiero community going to turn these down for not having 3 letters? I sure as hell wont!
I would buy these particularly because they look OEM and not like an aftermarket Ferrari or Corvette light panel. We have pretty picky inspectors in Texas but I don't recall anyone ever checking for a DOT code.
From the opposite side of things, (& on a semi-related cop note) wasn't YellowStone ticketed for window tint, that being the green on his stock windshield?
** Edit ** for anyone counting, I am also interested in $500 or less GT tail lights
[This message has been edited by no2pencil (edited 04-24-2015).]
yes window tint is not allowed in many states but that can be seen the tail lights will look like the stock tail lights so they wont even know the difference i know i will buy a set mine are cracked & delaminated .
you can not have a obscured license plate in any state they must be able to read it but the funny thing is look at the car the tail lights are not even stock but they never said anything about them so stock looking ones there not going to start looking for the dot stamp
you can not have a obscured license plate in any state they must be able to read it but the funny thing is look at the car the tail lights are not even stock but they never said anything about them so stock looking ones there not going to start looking for the dot stamp
Those (yellowstone's) are stock lenses and have the DOT stamp on them, so even if the cop looked, there wouldn't have been an issue with them.
my point was that the cop dint ask to look so if it is stock looking there not going to ask because they don't know and there not going to bother with it so this whole dot thing imo is a none issue and if you are afraid they will just don't buy them
Originally posted by Danyel: Huuuuummmmmm Tony ya know something we dont ? regards Danyel
oh, ...Member is newly registered, email is hidden, no location. Just a few signs. need more?.............
quote
Originally posted by Slammed: .....Expect them to be for sale mid-June/early-July through our website that is being constructed specifically for these AND a large vendor most of you are already familiar with.
pretty unrealistic research/design/production time (No website provided for them either). Nothing listed on the "large fiero vendor's" website under R&D. A quick call to the large vendor could solve this?
[This message has been edited by 007DOUG (edited 04-26-2015).]
pretty unrealistic research/design/production time (No website provided for them either). Nothing listed on the "large fiero vendor's" website under R&D. A quick call to the large vendor could solve this?
Found this while researching the DOT issue. Found this story quite interesting (have not read through all of it to see if there was a solution)
I read through it enough to see that the owner of the G8 had tinted his lenses with Nightshade then claimed they were stock. No wonder he was found guilty.
pretty unrealistic research/design/production time (No website provided for them either). Nothing listed on the "large fiero vendor's" website under R&D. A quick call to the large vendor could solve this?
Location and email are now there. It was a personal account I made to use the forum, I didn't think this was going to happen when I signed up.
I broke the rule of too much information. Wait and see. We have nothing to gain from BSing all of you.
[This message has been edited by Slammed (edited 04-27-2015).]
I like Slammed`s Git-er-done attitude. In the past, the norm on here has been to go months on end and even years with nothing to show at the end. So, when someone gets a project going and it moves faster than expected, then people are skeptical. Look at it this way, if this doesn`t come to fruition in a few months, then people only have a short time to be disappointed.
I would encourage the proposed manufacturing of the taillights to continue. We don't need to ask permission of big brother on what taillight covers to use.
------------------ " THE BLACK PARALYZER" -87GT 3800SC Series III engine, custom ZZP /Frozen Boost Intercooler setup, 3.4" Pulley, Powerlog manifold, Northstar TB, LS1 MAF, 3" Flotech Afterburner Exhaust, Autolite 104's, MSD wires, Custom CAI, 4T65eHD w. custom axles, HP Tuners VCM Suite. "THE COLUSSUS" 87GT - ALL OUT 3.4L Turbocharged engine, Garrett Hybrid Turbo, MSD ign., modified TH125H " ON THE LOOSE WITHOUT THE JUICE "
I WANT to be proven wrong. Please prove me wrong. 
