Originally posted by kgoodyear: John, I have this image of you standing at the back of your car when it is out of the car hole with a cattle prod or you putting up hog fencing around your car!
That is how I feel at times. I mean anything else on the car I can replace fairly easily. GT tail lights is another story....
quote
Originally posted by kgoodyear: I think I'm going to have one of those tent things so I can be in the shade with a table
Good idea! Also, bring some sunscreen! I live in Florida, and work outdoors. I have come away from the Tyler Shipman Memorial Car Show in Minnesota with a nasty sunburn a couple of times now! Everyone seems to think this is funny, the guy from FL getting a sunburn in MN hahaha. I try to explain, YES, I am from Florida, but in Florida I do not stand out in the sun continuously from 8am till 3pm!
[This message has been edited by JohnWPB (edited 07-15-2018).]
As far as tint. Whatever tint level hides the color of the colored lenses behind the outter lenses.
So the lightest tint possible to achieve that would likely give the effect people want but would allow as much light as possible through to make it safer.
We are having a conference call Friday and will know by then, I have a feeling we are not going to have them. It is a very frustrating issue that has dogged me since the file was sent to China. No one is more frustrated about this situation than our team.
At the very least I am going to have the printed version to show.
That last pic I understand real well... finally, a real set that is within reach, been waiting for almost a decade, can’t believe it’s finally true. God bless America and thank you
That last pic I understand real well... finally, a real set that is within reach, been waiting for almost a decade, can’t believe it’s finally true. God bless America and thank you
It has been quite the ride and still have a long way to go.
I just got off the phone with the tool maker and my project lead. It looks like there is a good possibility of having T1s at the show. Maybe not the first day but the tool maker is going to bring them from Chicago and will spend time there at the show to answer your questions. He is going to have samples of the tinted options and we will be looking for your feedback. We will definitely have the printed lenses there though you must remember these are the prototypes and do not have the same characteristics as the Ts or the finished product.
Here is the banner to look for at the 35th Fiero Anniversary
It would be awesome if some people at the show could take a video of the lenses and record you answering questions and have it uploaded here or youtube? I am sure there will be lots of photos taken of these but a video would be cool too. Keep up the good work! Wish I could be there to see them. If they are as promised I will be placing an order!
It would be awesome if some people at the show could take a video of the lenses and record you answering questions and have it uploaded here or youtube? I am sure there will be lots of photos taken of these but a video would be cool too. Keep up the good work! Wish I could be there to see them. If they are as promised I will be placing an order!
We wiil definitely have the prototypes there. We had a meeting today and the tool maker is going to be bringing the T1s to the show if/when they come in. He is going to stick around to answer questions and talk about tinting--something that really need attention.
I have no doubt about the quality of the product and the design. No way I'm putting this kind of capital and time into a project and not have it be the best! Besides I don't see Frugal Fiero Fans settling for anything but JUST RIGHT!
[This message has been edited by kgoodyear (edited 07-27-2018).]
We wiil definitely have the prototypes there. We had a meeting today and the tool maker is going to be bringing the T1s to the show if/when they come in. He is going to stick around to answer questions and talk about tinting--something that really need attention.
Wow! Glad to hear it!
If at all possible, I would love to do an interview with you and the tool maker. I will edit it and put it on YouTube for everyone to see. I will have professional video & audio equipment with me, as well as a DSLR for high resolution still frames. I can also give you / your team a copy as well.
If this is Ok with you, drop me an email with your contact information (that I will NOT share with anyone for any reason). My email is johnwpb (at) the gmail dot com domain.
I should be there Thursday evening, and we can set up a quiet place to do the interview sometime. I would prefer that than trying to do it in a loud car show environment. Also any background music that would be recorded doing an interview at the show would flag the YouTube copyright filters automatically. I will take "B" roll footage of the tail lights at the show and people checking them out to edit into the final video.
If at all possible, I would love to do an interview with you and the tool maker. I will edit it and put it on YouTube for everyone to see. I will have professional video & audio equipment with me, as well as a DSLR for high resolution still frames. I can also give you / your team a copy as well.
If this is Ok with you, drop me an email with your contact information (that I will NOT share with anyone for any reason). My email is johnwpb (at) the gmail dot com domain.
I should be there Thursday evening, and we can set up a quiet place to do the interview sometime. I would prefer that than trying to do it in a loud car show environment. Also any background music that would be recorded doing an interview at the show would flag the YouTube copyright filters automatically. I will take "B" roll footage of the tail lights at the show and people checking them out to edit into the final video.
I see no reason why we couldn''t do this. We still don't know if the T1s are going to make it but it does look promising. The day after the T1s arrive is when the stateside tool maker will be coming. Let me see what i can find out and i will email at your address.
Originally posted by kgoodyear: Thunder, I've been wondering when that was goign to happen. I would suppose for competitions one might need the DOT number on it.
Here is another good reason one "might" need the DOT number; It is illegal to use tail light lenses on public roads that are not DOT approved. You can be cited by a law enforcement officer and in some states you MUST correct the issue before operating the vehicle on public roads or you may have your registration revoked often called a "fix-it" ticket .
The DOT number is NOT just a number it is a certification that the lens has met the legal requirements of The United States Department of Transportation, each number that is listed in parenthesis on the light clearly relates to each of the specific certifications as required by Federal law.
I am all for this project and I could use a set of these replacement lights as mine are cosmetically damaged, however these reproductions can in no way compare to the original Tail Lights. The OEM units were engineered and designed by GM with all of its resources to meet all DOT standards and I will add also far more costly to manufacture. Mine have lasted over 30 years and endured over 196,000 miles of normal use and although they have DE-laminated in places they still work just fine and are legal. I know in California they still inspect for them.
Here is another good reason one "might" need the DOT number; It is illegal to use tail light lenses on public roads that are not DOT approved. You can be cited by a law enforcement officer and in some states you MUST correct the issue before operating the vehicle on public roads or you may have your registration revoked often called a "fix-it" ticket .
The DOT number is NOT just a number it is a certification that the lens has met the legal requirements of The United States Department of Transportation, each number that is listed in parenthesis on the light clearly relates to each of the specific certifications as required by Federal law.
I am all for this project and I could use a set of these replacement lights as mine are cosmetically damaged, however these reproductions can in no way compare to the original Tail Lights. The OEM units were engineered and designed by GM with all of its resources to meet all DOT standards and I will add also far more costly to manufacture. Mine have lasted over 30 years and endured over 196,000 miles of normal use and although they have DE-laminated in places they still work just fine and are legal. I know in California they still inspect for them.
These lenses, as mentioned before, again and again, are sold only in pairs and are meant for off road use only. Whether you choose to buy them and whether you choose to replace them is totally up to the car's owner.
Here is another good reason one "might" need the DOT number; It is illegal to use tail light lenses on public roads that are not DOT approved.
Did Ogre put you up to this? All kidding aside, I do agree that DOT approval is a requirement for car manufacturers and the like to have something certified street legal. That being said, as long as when these tail lights are sold, they are marketed as "off road use only" this covers the manufacturer. This places the responsibility on the purchaser. 99% of us are absolutely fine with that. I know I am!
Walk into any part store and look around at the lights, mirrors, fins, trim, scoops ect ect. Most of them will clearly say on the package "For off road use only".
The way I look at it, if I install these tail lights on my car, I can not fathom being pulled over just for the sole intention for a cop to poke around and try to find a DOT number LOL!
As for not being as good as the original ones from GM, I do not see how you can say that before these are even for sale, or you have inspected them. I know my OEM lenses I have in storage, are quite wavy. If you look down the length of them, they are far from perfect. The lettering is also not perfect around the edges and such. These are both issues that have been addressed with the new lenses. Sure GM had the resources, but they pumped out 10's of thousands from multiple molds. Every attention to detail is being addressed with the new ones and they are being produced in an ultra low batch compared to the originals.
[This message has been edited by JohnWPB (edited 08-03-2018).]
Did Ogre put you up to this? All kidding aside, I do agree that DOT approval is a requirement for car manufacturers and the like to have something certified street legal. That being said, as long as when these tail lights are sold, they are marketed as "off road use only" this covers the manufacturer. This places the responsibility on the purchaser. 99% of us are absolutely fine with that. I know I am!
Walk into any part store and look around at the lights, mirrors, fins, trim, scoops ect ect. Most of them will clearly say on the package "For off road use only".
The way I look at it, if I install these tail lights on my car, I can not fathom being pulled over just for the sole intention for a cop to poke around and try to find a DOT number LOL!
As for not being as good as the original ones from GM, I do not see how you can say that before these are even for sale, or you have inspected them. I know my OEM lenses I have in storage, are quite wavy. If you look down the length of them, they are far from perfect. The lettering is also not perfect around the edges and such. These are both issues that have been addressed with the new lenses. Sure GM had the resources, but they pumped out 10's of thousands from multiple molds. Every attention to detail is being addressed with the new ones and they are being produced in an ultra low batch compared to the originals.
I have stayed out of this for personal reasons (I was going to do this myself, but luckily Kgoodyear had stepped up to the plate before I could even consider it), so this is my opinion only! Have any of you exceeded the speed limit at any time? How about tinted windows.... lol, I just removed my tinted rear window tint cause it was crap..... see my latest post...…. ugly Fiero! Do you have a "non factory" radio in your car..... ok, I am stretching it a bit with the radio thing.
We all purchase what we "need" for our Fiero's when it is available. LED, most likely non DOT approved. Halogen headlights from China, most likely not DOT approved.
I guess what I am getting to is that we all make our own choices, and I for one would rather have a clean, non delaminated lens on the back than a scratched, UV destroyed one.
I for one, would rather have the person behind me see my brake lights and turn signals, not that mine are that bad, but c'mon guys, we are all adults and make choices every minute of every day.
I have to give a huge (and I mean HUGE) shout out to Kgoodyear for even attempting this! I don't think anyone here has any idea as to what a huge emotional and financial investment this is for him.
I should probably post this in "Off Topic", but I for one am tired of the DOT, etc. trying to tell me what I can and cannot do. When I finish my 50cal Kentucky long, and the 50cal Hawken, for sure I will not be on a list or have anybody even interested in what I have, and so be it with the DOT! Yes, I like my black powder guns and can make balls from all the old "DOT" approved batteries I have saved. LOL
I for one am all for this project, and will gladly be pulled over for not having the DOT numbers on my lenses! 42 years of injection molding experience in my back pocket, working with OEM manufacturers (lol, I shut down the Corvette assembly line in 1989 for the rear window mounts due to material issues) and what Kgoodyear is doing is way above and beyond what was expected back then.
Better material, better decoration, etc.
Take a breath and judge the final product when you see it in all it's final glory.
In the end, it is up to you to chose to buy, or suffer with your lenses.
As for not being as good as the original ones from GM, I do not see how you can say that before these are even for sale, or you have inspected them [/.QUOTE]
in one sentence you make this statement and the end of the paragraph you make this statement when you have not seen the new ones either, as a matter of fact no one has.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JohnWPB: Every attention to detail is being addressed with the new ones and they are being produced in an ultra low batch compared to the originals. [/.QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JohnWPB: I know my OEM lenses I have in storage, are quite wavy. If you look down the length of them, they are far from perfect. The lettering is also not perfect around the edges and such. These are both issues that have been addressed with the new lenses. Sure GM had the resources, but they pumped out 10's of thousands from multiple molds
Your lenses where in storage in the black gt that was at Kings Point sitting out in the sun for years and years he only put them inside his apartment when he listed the 2 fieros and parts. Ask the person that gave them to you.
Originally posted by Jonathan Tate: Your lenses where in storage in the black gt that was at Kings Point sitting out in the sun for years and years he only put them inside his apartment when he listed the 2 fieros and parts. Ask the person that gave them to you.
I am not sure what this is about but it stinks of red hearing. Let's start there.
I am not sure what this is about but it stinks of red hearing. Let's start there.
Oh geeze, hang in the Kgoodyear! Are we all expecting NOS lenses from the original DOT approved molds? Seriously, I do not think they are available anymore. Originally I tried to track them down through my many contacts, and I came up blank. I would have commissioned them to mold some if I found them, seriously!
Like I said earlier, we are all adults and make choices daily as to what we will or will not purchase or do.
I for one, love the fact someone has hung themselves out on a limb with the investment of both financial and emotional losses ahead.
Dave
PS: if you really want to discuss this, please email me at railshot@hotmail.com. Several people have tried this, and I have spoken in person with some now lost Fiero fans and product developers, that have said that they would not even consider it because of the negatives. Me personally, I don't care what others say, just offer a product and go from there. Really guys, we all love our cars, so let's let the cards fall where they fall.
I for one appreciate all that you have done, and are doing to make our cars just a little bit better!
I for one appreciate all that you have done, and are doing to make our cars just a little bit better!
I also say the same, I appreciate everything they have done and are doing to make our cars a little better. Only one thing, of course, it still would not change what was said before. My question kgoodyear. The taillight clear with decoration (the oem version) also does not comply with DOT ?? Just to know.
[This message has been edited by GfierOT87 (edited 08-05-2018).]
Originally posted by GfierOT87: I also say the same, I appreciate everything they have done and are doing to make our cars a little better. Only one thing, of course, it still would not change what was said before. My question kgoodyear. The taillight clear with decoration (the oem version) also does not comply with DOT ?? Just to know.
Whether or not the clear lens meets DOT specifications is unknown and irrelevant as the lenses are designed for off road use only.
Our main goal remains making a high quality lens and decoration for a price affordable to the typical Frugal Fiero Fan.
Yup, me again...… The DOT does not approve any individual part on any car other than headlights and bulbs according to my research so far.....
Being DOT "compliant" would be the key to all of this.
Actually the DOT has warned several vendors in the past about using the words "DOT approved".
The SAE (Society Of Automotive Engineers) sets the standards for testing, not the DOT. If anyone is seriously interested in what it is that SAE sets as a standard for lighting testing, I can post it here, or can email you individually the 600+ page pdf document. LOL..... Please don't make me post it here!
Headlights and bulbs are the only things I have found that actually require DOT "approval", and I have been looking at this for a few years now.
The color of the lenses for turn and brake lights is "regulated", but not the "housing" that covers them such as the lenses being talked about here. We already have the inner lenses for turn and brake, and as long as these lenses are optically clear, I will use them (once I save my meager retirement earnings up for a set. heheheh
The clear ones should be fine, but the tinted ones may not have the transparency to be used on the road, and may draw undo attention, but that is your choice as these are all being marketed for off road use only...…
I have no bone in this discussion either way, but because I was going to do this, I have a lot of data. If you can show me different, please do so, and I will stand corrected!
------------------ There's one in every crowd, and usually it's me. 1988 Solid roof GT!
Yup, me again...… The DOT does not approve any individual part on any car other than headlights and bulbs according to my research so far.....
Being DOT "compliant" would be the key to all of this.
Actually the DOT has warned several vendors in the past about using the words "DOT approved".
The SAE (Society Of Automotive Engineers) sets the standards for testing, not the DOT. If anyone is seriously interested in what it is that SAE sets as a standard for lighting testing, I can post it here, or can email you individually the 600+ page pdf document. LOL..... Please don't make me post it here!
Headlights and bulbs are the only things I have found that actually require DOT "approval", and I have been looking at this for a few years now.
The color of the lenses for turn and brake lights is "regulated", but not the "housing" that covers them such as the lenses being talked about here. We already have the inner lenses for turn and brake, and as long as these lenses are optically clear, I will use them (once I save my meager retirement earnings up for a set. heheheh
The clear ones should be fine, but the tinted ones may not have the transparency to be used on the road, and may draw undo attention, but that is your choice as these are all being marketed for off road use only...…
I have no bone in this discussion either way, but because I was going to do this, I have a lot of data. If you can show me different, please do so, and I will stand corrected!
SAE standards are often referred to as "recommended practices," which provide a basis for a particular function. The SAE standard can create a common method and performance level for a specific lighting function. SAE standards may be referenced and become part of the law in some cases, which also causes confusion.
The DOT or Federal Regulations will preempt or take precedence over the state regulations when both regulations exist.
The DOT
The DOT is, obviously, the Department of Transportation. Unlike the SAE, The Federal Department of Transportation is a governmental agency with legislative powers (they can make laws which will result in you getting a ticket when you don’t follow them). In order to legally manufacture and sell automotive accessories for use on public roads a company must have DOT approval and must conspicuously label their products as such. With regard to head and tail lights in particular, the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations (FMVSSR for short) contains the following directive:
Standard No. 108 - Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment - Passenger Cars, Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Trucks, Buses, Trailers, (except pole trailers and trailer converter dollies), and Motorcycles (Effective 1-1-68 for vehicles 2,032 mrn (80 or more inches) in width and Effective 1-1-69 for all other vehicles) This standard specifies requirements for original and replacement lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment. Its purpose is to reduce traffic crashes and deaths and injuries resulting from traffic crashes, by providing adequate illumination of the roadway, and by enhancing the conspicuity of motor vehicles on the public roads so that their presence is perceived and their signals understood, both in daylight and in darkness or other conditions of reduced visibility.
All of which is to say that without meeting these qualifications your Altezza light may not only be unsafe for use but it will surely garner you a ticket from an ornery cop or fail you on inspection. Please note that many sellers will, incorrectly, list their items as being SAE/DOT approved without this actually being the case. Furthermore, many will not even know what SAE or DOT approval is. Before purchasing any aftermarket lighting or performance product it’s important that you ask the manufacturer to provide you with a statement that the product being sold is DOT approved. If they cannot do so at least you know that your purchase will not be street legal (which is fine for most folks) and that it may have been engineered without conforming to the rigorous standards imposed by the SAE.
It is illegal to use tail light lenses on public roads that are not DOT approved. You can be cited by a law enforcement officer and in some states you MUST correct the issue before operating the vehicle on public roads or you may have your registration revoked often called a "fix-it" ticket .
The DOT number is NOT just a number it is a certification that the lens has met the legal requirements of The United States Department of Transportation, each number that is listed in parenthesis on the light clearly relates to each of the specific certifications as required by Federal law.
I will still be buying a set of these lenses when they are available even though they are for off road use only.
[This message has been edited by Jonathan Tate (edited 08-06-2018).]
]
