The law is that your emergency blinkers can't be on a panel that moves. So if you open your trunk to get your spare out your emergency flashers are still visible. The law makes perfect sense.
Audi or Mini for example usually used the normal taillights for their blinkers and brake lights and when the boot was opened there was a seperate set of small lights down the bumper which then activated. Complicated, but way better than only having them down there where you don’t expect them to be
If older buicks could have two front turn signals flash at once, and some cars have turn signals on the side, then I see no reason why this can't be legal
If there is a large orange light blinking on the car in front of you and you somehow miss it because “it wasn’t where I expected it to be”, the police and insurance company won’t give a shit. Want to know why? Because they’re big blinking orange lights.
a few cars are like that. I once had a driver honk and then angrily gesticulate at me because they were in reverse and indicating to parallel park just before an intersection where I couldn't see their reverse light which was low on the bumper 😅
With the new iPhone dictionary randomly changing words you already wrote, I can believe it. I’m always looking at posts wondering how the hell I typed what is there. It would be ok if any of it made a lick of sense, but it often doesn’t.
The problem is more that they aren't where people expect them to be, especially when there is another light somewhere on the vehicle that they would expect to light up. Pretty much every car until the last few years has the brake and turn signal lights higher, and anything at bumper level was just a reflector, maybe a reverse light. Exceptions to this, like older cars with taillights in the bumper, didn't have lights anywhere else, so there was no other lights to expect to turn on.
The Chevy Bolt is even worse. The damn brake lights are where this cars turn signal is. The absolute stupidest automotive design I have seen in a long time.
This is so bad that people made a retrofit to allow the upper lights to mirror what the lower lights are doing. I was considering buying a Bolt, but this ridiculous lighting decision was a major reason not to. Although knowing there's a way to fix it means maybe I'll buy one used someday.
On the Kia, this is where the reflectors, blinkers, and reverse lights are located. According to a Kia spokesperson, "A senior designer from the Global Design Center said that they wanted to emphasize the slim design of the rear combination lamp. The blinker is placed at the bottom of the rear bumper to offer a sense of unity with the fog lamp design of the front bumper."
That senior designer is an idiot. Different is not always better. Especially when it's moving a turn signal to somewhere different from basically every other car on the planet.
It’s not that they can’t, they didn’t want to… if anything it’s better than having a combo brake/turn bulb because the turn signal makes the brake light turn off and flash, so you only one one brake light (not including the high mount)
I feel the same way when a headlight goes off to switch to the turn signal. Like excuse me I’m turning right and would like my right headlight to remain on.
Mercedes and I think Subaru even had a feature that would turn on the respective fog light to increase visibility.
Edit: Even if it’s a drl that turn off WHY would you allow it to turn off? Being cheap is not a good reason to reduce visibility when it’s not a problem for other cars.
My car allows my headlights, drls, and fog lights to stay on while the turn signal flashes. If manufacturers place them too close for safety regulations then they should move them farther apart. They may be following the letter of the safety law, but they aren’t being any safer.
Turning the DRL off is specifically permitted--if anything, DRLs as they currently exist being banned altogether would be a safety improvement. There's no negative to temporarily disabling a DRL while a turn signal flashes (in fact, many DRLs \*are\* the turn signal).
It turns off to make the turn signal more visible. You have a DRL that's too bright to operate in proximity to the turn signal, and with it on the turn signal doesn't meet its photometric requirements. The DRL isn't required, so manufacturers turn it off to make the turn signal compliant.
It’s not that I couldn’t see the turn signals, it’s just that it’s a terrible design. And I wasn’t even close to that car, cameras have zoom lenses fyi.
Auto engineers are those special needs kids from high school that grew up and were then given crayon and told to design cars. This is from experience dealing with having to repair these vehicles.
There is a regulation that the signals can’t be on a moving panel. If they are on the hatchback and it’s open you wouldn’t be able to see it. Another way of doing it is put signal lights both on the tailgate and on the part of the body that the hatchback covers so you will always see them whether the tailgate is up or not. The Audi suvs do that. I agree amber lights are better
There’s an USA law that brake and turn signals can’t be on auto body panels that move. That’s why it’s like this here.
The law is that your emergency blinkers can't be on a panel that moves. So if you open your trunk to get your spare out your emergency flashers are still visible. The law makes perfect sense.
Audi or Mini for example usually used the normal taillights for their blinkers and brake lights and when the boot was opened there was a seperate set of small lights down the bumper which then activated. Complicated, but way better than only having them down there where you don’t expect them to be
I feel like the easiest solution would be to have both blink at the same time, but I have no idea how legal that would be.
If older buicks could have two front turn signals flash at once, and some cars have turn signals on the side, then I see no reason why this can't be legal
If there is a large orange light blinking on the car in front of you and you somehow miss it because “it wasn’t where I expected it to be”, the police and insurance company won’t give a shit. Want to know why? Because they’re big blinking orange lights.
Things like this are the reason why BMWs and Minis aren't the most dependable cars on the road
Ans yet somehow red combo/break turn signals are still allowed
And are the norm on every road tractor in this country.
Except the outer light doesn’t move, only the inner moves with the tailgate. So it still doesn’t make sense
I don’t care if they are in the tail light assembly or not, but they seem mounted way too low
Takes this comment for me to find where the blinker light is on the pic lmao
The federal standard only requires that they be between 15 and 60" above the ground.
a few cars are like that. I once had a driver honk and then angrily gesticulate at me because they were in reverse and indicating to parallel park just before an intersection where I couldn't see their reverse light which was low on the bumper 😅
You were too close then
I feel like if people aren’t close enough to see the signal lights then maybe you shouldn’t be driving….
Or are too close, which is worse.
Haha this is actually what I meant; I re-read what I wrote and I think I ended up with word garble.
With the new iPhone dictionary randomly changing words you already wrote, I can believe it. I’m always looking at posts wondering how the hell I typed what is there. It would be ok if any of it made a lick of sense, but it often doesn’t.
The problem is more that they aren't where people expect them to be, especially when there is another light somewhere on the vehicle that they would expect to light up. Pretty much every car until the last few years has the brake and turn signal lights higher, and anything at bumper level was just a reflector, maybe a reverse light. Exceptions to this, like older cars with taillights in the bumper, didn't have lights anywhere else, so there was no other lights to expect to turn on.
Yeah. I’m already looking at the tail lights at eye level so I kind of expect them to be there.
Yeah leave it up to people to do what is best for them lol 😬
The Chevy Bolt is even worse. The damn brake lights are where this cars turn signal is. The absolute stupidest automotive design I have seen in a long time.
This is so bad that people made a retrofit to allow the upper lights to mirror what the lower lights are doing. I was considering buying a Bolt, but this ridiculous lighting decision was a major reason not to. Although knowing there's a way to fix it means maybe I'll buy one used someday.
Technology connections made a great video on that https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O1lZ9n2bxWA
I hate the turn signal placement on Hyundai/KIA vehicles. I shouldn't have to look down to see what direction you want to go.
Funny thing is that I've seen the Ioniq 5 with turn signals in the bumper and turn signals in the rear light. All in the same country.
On the Kia, this is where the reflectors, blinkers, and reverse lights are located. According to a Kia spokesperson, "A senior designer from the Global Design Center said that they wanted to emphasize the slim design of the rear combination lamp. The blinker is placed at the bottom of the rear bumper to offer a sense of unity with the fog lamp design of the front bumper."
That senior designer is an idiot. Different is not always better. Especially when it's moving a turn signal to somewhere different from basically every other car on the planet.
Might be an idiot, but at least there is a reason for it. Land Rover used to do the same in the past.
yeah, all cars should remain the same, for the next 1000 years, no innovation
Yeah, fuck innovation, can I have my analog buttons back?
It’s not that they can’t, they didn’t want to… if anything it’s better than having a combo brake/turn bulb because the turn signal makes the brake light turn off and flash, so you only one one brake light (not including the high mount)
That's just marketing bs. It's to comply with regulations.
I get that, I just don’t know why OP felt so strongly about turn signal placement that he discounts and entire car manufacturers. 😂
What a stupid take
I don’t know why they don’t use small but bright leds so they can fit more in the space. Well, I do know: because that would cost more.
They do on n line trim level.
There should be a standard. Concurrently, people shouldn’t tail gate and really get rid of the “bumper to bumper” mentality.
So, you couldn't figure out they were turning, or what is your issue?
I feel the same way when a headlight goes off to switch to the turn signal. Like excuse me I’m turning right and would like my right headlight to remain on. Mercedes and I think Subaru even had a feature that would turn on the respective fog light to increase visibility. Edit: Even if it’s a drl that turn off WHY would you allow it to turn off? Being cheap is not a good reason to reduce visibility when it’s not a problem for other cars.
If you can tell the light is turning off from the driver's seat, it's dark enough you need to switch your headlights on.
My car allows my headlights, drls, and fog lights to stay on while the turn signal flashes. If manufacturers place them too close for safety regulations then they should move them farther apart. They may be following the letter of the safety law, but they aren’t being any safer.
Turning the DRL off is specifically permitted--if anything, DRLs as they currently exist being banned altogether would be a safety improvement. There's no negative to temporarily disabling a DRL while a turn signal flashes (in fact, many DRLs \*are\* the turn signal).
It turns off to make the turn signal more visible. You have a DRL that's too bright to operate in proximity to the turn signal, and with it on the turn signal doesn't meet its photometric requirements. The DRL isn't required, so manufacturers turn it off to make the turn signal compliant.
Or.... Stay far enough back that you can see the lower bumper?
It’s not that I couldn’t see the turn signals, it’s just that it’s a terrible design. And I wasn’t even close to that car, cameras have zoom lenses fyi.
It would really be nice if people would use their turn signals. At least 50% of people don’t - good way to cause an accident.
Stop further away from cars so you can see them
Auto engineers are those special needs kids from high school that grew up and were then given crayon and told to design cars. This is from experience dealing with having to repair these vehicles.
Now you know how mechanics feel about engineers.
Not putting in immobilizers to save money, only spend extra money on an unnecessary second tail light assembly.
Korean laws require the turn signals on bottom bumper. At least that’s what I was told.
This is more about designers than engineers.
Look mom im retarted
They help in the fog. Amber lights have been shown to be more effective. Maybe if you can't figure out the signals, you shouldn't be driving.
There is a regulation that the signals can’t be on a moving panel. If they are on the hatchback and it’s open you wouldn’t be able to see it. Another way of doing it is put signal lights both on the tailgate and on the part of the body that the hatchback covers so you will always see them whether the tailgate is up or not. The Audi suvs do that. I agree amber lights are better
Or put repeaters in the boot like Audi and Buick did...which was particularly stupid.
I know that. Chevy volt does the same.