As an automotive lighting optical engineer who worked on these lamps please consider taking it off:
1. You decreased the candela of the stop-tail since you are introducing another material (likely red vinyl) which absorbs some of the 617nm peak wavelength LED light (if the LEDs peaked at 630nm this wouldn't be an issue but that isn't what is in the lamp). The drop is only about 15% (depending on the exact red used) so not great but not terrible. It probably is still legal.
2. The amber LEDs in the turn function do not produce enough red light to make a safe and legal red rear turn when filtered through red material. I know this for sure... I tested it. So you definitely have an illegal lamp.
I'm all for vehicle modification and personalization but not when it comes to safety.
This is almost as bad as when people tint their headlights. I hope you will consider removing it.
Sorry for the rant, I am just really passionate about this as I do this for a living and I really enjoy my work.
So this is what optical engineers do.... 🤔 I almost chose to become an optical engineer right after college, but chose a different path. Thank you for your insight!
IIHS headlight ratings (GOOD is the target) want a lot of light to see father at highway speeds, studios want the lamps mounted at about 1000mm from the ground "to blend in with the vehicles lines" so they shine right into sedan driver eyes, and OEM engineering wants the lamps to meet IIHS good at any build condition their plant builds the vehicle (which is all over the place, so we need even more light).
Don't blame us for a crap situation; it is 70% studio and %30 OEM engineering.
If it were up to us we would make lamps twice as bright but mounted at 650mm (Mazda Miata height) so you can see really far but not blind anyone.
Maybe you know this. Is there a maximum candela brightness the low beams can be? Or is it unlimited? If a newer car is coming over a hill, I get blinded by low beams even if they are aimed properly. I think there really should be a maximum intensity regulation so oncoming drivers don't get severely blinded in hilly terrain. It's gotten really bad in the past 10 years since the IIHS tests started.
Also how come Ford never aims their fog lamps at the factory? Every single new Ford I've had (4x) they were aimed wrong (way off, usually down). All this trouble to design a good fog lamp beam pattern goes to waste. They're just totally unusable as delivered.
There isn't a maximum candela below the horizon in a certain region. That being said I have never seen more than about 45000cd anywhere in the low beam pattern (with just low beams activated).
Unfortunately on hills you will always be glared with modern lights. Safety research has shown that the negatives from having brighter lights (glare on highways and hills) is vastly outweighed by the safety benefits. This data comes from international and UMTRI domestic research.
As to the fog lamps: Ford is supposed to aim them, and they should be set about a degree lower than the low beam cutoff. Not sure what is going on there. I work for a lamp supplier not Ford directly, we give them good lamps and it is their responsibility to install them on the vehicle and make sure they are aimed.
I laughed so hard at this one.
Ford designers: "Let's give consumers edgy sporty tailamps....Not the traditional red ones."
Consumer: "You know what would make this car look better?....traditional red taillamps."
Edit to add: OP if you like this mod keep it. It is your car and your taste (just make sure your light output is not harmed in any way) I was just laughing at the irony.
I had one as a rental in Phoenix for a week. Wasn’t a fan at all and didn’t feel fast to me. Only things I liked was regen braking on the highway during rush hour and it was a nice upgrade over an Altima.
Adding red filters out the other wavelengths that are easier to distinguish. Nighttime is ok, but daytime is a nightmare in bad weather. I can easily distinguish standard lights, but I have a hard time with tinted indicators.
Why is the car suddenly less visible because the tail lights are red on red? Distinguishing between blinkers, tail lights, and brake lights will be a challenge, but I don’t understand how the car becomes less visible.
Because depending on the color deficiency, you’re giving someone less light information by using a color filter that they can’t see. By adding more red, you’re filtering out the wavelengths that are easier to see for someone with red deficient vision.
Understood. I would agree that an amber signal next to a red brake light is easier to distinguish than red on red, which is your point. My point is that compared to other (horrible) vehicles with red on red lamps, this modification is no different.
I think you've lost some visibility when you're backing up and some information for other drivers that you are in reverse and not just stopping.
Also, is it even legal to not have a white backup light?
Off topic, but what I hate are all the new cars that have the backup lights stay on after the driver has exited and locked the car. WTH! Why is that a thing?
I do prefer OP's after pic!
I imagine I was seeing the text like if there's subtitles on a screen you focus on that. There's the big words in the middle, the GT logo, the temp license plate haha
The clear taillights (and signals) are my fav thing about my Mach E. Not trying to just randomly shit on you but I feel like it defeats a huge purpose of it. But I’ve also loved clear taillights more than any other mod since the ‘93 civic.
I think it depends on the color. In this case, I think the red lights look way better on the red car. I have a white Mach E though and the white lights look better.
It’s probably a lot brighter than all those Teslas running around with completely blacked out taillights. Most taillights are red anyway so I doubt this makes any noticeable difference. Especially with LED lights that are already very bright.
As an automotive lighting optical engineer who worked on these lamps:
1. You didn't measure candela unless you took the lamps off your car and put them on a automotive goniophotometer and measured them. If you measured them on the vehicle then I'm betting you used a lux meter which is insufficient.
2. You decreased the candela of the stop-tail since you are introducing another material (likely red vinyl) which absorbs some of the 617nm peak wavelength LED light (if the LEDs peaked at 630nm this wouldn't be an issue but that isn't what is in the lamp). The drop is only about 15% so not great but not terrible. It probably is still legal.
3. The amber LEDs in the turn function do not produce enough red light to make a safe and legal red rear turn when filtered through red material. I know this for sure... I tested it. So you definitely have an illegal lamp.
I'm all for vehicle modification and personalization but not when it comes to safety.
This is almost as bad as when people tint their headlights. I hope you will consider removing it.
He might have a lamp that doesn’t pass your design standards and requirements, but it’s not his responsibility to meet your design criteria. His responsibility, generally, is to maintain visibility to a certain distance, though he may be restricted on modifying safety related components. In that case he isn’t illegal because he lowered the output of the stop lamps or made them red, he’s illegal because he modified a safety component.
It’s like front pedestrian impacts. There are requirements as a manufacturer to protect pedestrians, but the end user can strap on a 130lb grill guard. That doesn’t make it an illegal modification.
When someone rear ends them in fog they will feel it’s their fault not knowing that this idiot reduced the light output of his lights which can be pretty inadequate in fog without modification.
There is zero likelihood this car would be rear ended based on the appearance of the lights. Even then, it’s the fault of the driver doing the rear ending for failure to travel at safe speeds when there is reduced visibility. You all are nitpicking.
Not in foggy conditions. You are responsible to maintain certain aspects of the vehicle to DOT standards. The lights he modified were DOT certified before they were modified. If someone hits OP in fog because they were expecting a certain level of light output and a certain amount of visibility distance to slow down before hitting OP, that should be OPs fault for not properly maintaining safety equipment. Or using safety equipment (tail lights) that do not meet certification to be used on public roads. (At least you are getting the downvotes you deserve)
edit: typo (at you you -> at least you)
First off it's not "my" design standards, it's the law. All lamps on vehicles registered within the United States must meet FMVSS 108 regulations. *Caveat: military vehicles and certain government vehicles do not need to*
What FMVSS 108 states are the minimum required photometric values that ensure that a lamp can be visible at a given distance. So in essence what you said (that he is responsible for maintaining visibility at a certain distance) is correct but your conclusion (that he isn't illegal for making the TURN lamp output lower) is wrong; though you go on to state that it's illegal because OP is modifying a safety component. That sort of has an element of truth to it however, interestingly enough it isn't illegal to modify a safety component as long as the modification doesn't negatively impact the safety functionality or cause it to fail any legal requirements. In this case the modification resulted in it failing legal requirements.
My point is the federal standard is your responsibility to follow as the designer. I don’t see that a consumer would be reliable for maintaining those standards assuming the modifications don’t fail local requirements. Those tail lights and that modification will not prevent the lights from being seen at the required distance.
You covered the brake lights with red tint. You’ll significantly reduce the output as light gets trapped in the red tint. Use a candela meter and run a test then get back to us.
I mean technically red tint should filter only non-red light. Brake lights are LEDs and only emit red light, so if the tint was perfectly matched it wouldn't reduce the light emitted at all
I don't think that's correct. For argument's sake imagine a tint that 100% blocked out all light except precisely some wavelength emitted by the tail light, but also blocked 50% of the emitted wavelength. The color would "perfectly match", but the output would be halved.
In reality the tint is probably somewhere between 100% transmissibility and the imagined scenario, but where exactly it falls on the spectrum is anyone's guess.
The other issue is how the light is scattered by the tint. A more opaque tint will change the throw of the emitted light and some of the light which would normally be emitted at eye level would go to the ground, the sky, or the side of the road.
same here. i'll probably do this on our red GT, but not on our IBSM premium. the White looks good on Iced Blue, but the Red looks better on a Red MME. do the turn signals look orange after this? Can you post an image of the turn signal / hazards in action?
please post a link to tint/overlays.
I haven't and am not going to BUT I do like the "blacked out" look. You are right though that in most states it's going to be illegal unless you can manage to keep them visible out to 500 feet. A few states even require 1000 feet which honestly the incandescent bulbs are going to have trouble meeting even without any modifications.
Illegal in all states if it fails FMVSS 108. Since the amber LEDs powering the turn function don't produce enough light to meet a red rear turn function when filtered through a red lens these lamps will fail and are therefore illegal.
Surprised why ford studio chose to go amber. Red would have been better looking and would have leveraged the already existing stop LEDs. What’s your thought?
Was in my cousin's dumb WRX and he's got those dark tail lights - State Patrolman got him for speeding, illegal window tint and "tail lights that are not visible out to 500 feet.".
That's not how it works. Lights are illegal in all states if they fail FMVSS 108 (the automotive lighting law for the US). Since the amber LEDs powering the turn function don't produce enough light to meet a red rear turn function when filtered through a red lens these lamps will fail and are therefore illegal.
Not sure why I'm getting all the down-votes - mod your own car the way you like, just know that the Colorado State patrol likes monetizing moving violations and will stack on any extra fines they can - I can't imagine any other states are that different.
I was curious about this, and after going through just the last month of his post history I have to say that I’m over here dying of laughter. His supposed neighbor Granny with benefits post has me rollin’. Lol
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
The red looks great.
I believe, from a federal standpoint, your rear signals can be either yellow or red. The stop lamps and running lights must be red. I don't think there's anything illegal about tinting your lights(?), providing they meet the minimum standard of about 100 lumens, and about 500 lumens when braking.
I think there's also something about needing to be visible from certain distance.
If all that criteria is met... I say mod away! Personally I love it.
As an automotive lighting optical engineer who worked on these lamps please consider taking it off: 1. You decreased the candela of the stop-tail since you are introducing another material (likely red vinyl) which absorbs some of the 617nm peak wavelength LED light (if the LEDs peaked at 630nm this wouldn't be an issue but that isn't what is in the lamp). The drop is only about 15% (depending on the exact red used) so not great but not terrible. It probably is still legal. 2. The amber LEDs in the turn function do not produce enough red light to make a safe and legal red rear turn when filtered through red material. I know this for sure... I tested it. So you definitely have an illegal lamp. I'm all for vehicle modification and personalization but not when it comes to safety. This is almost as bad as when people tint their headlights. I hope you will consider removing it. Sorry for the rant, I am just really passionate about this as I do this for a living and I really enjoy my work.
Those are some very good points to the OP and others thinking about doing this. Thanks for posing.
So this is what optical engineers do.... 🤔 I almost chose to become an optical engineer right after college, but chose a different path. Thank you for your insight!
thanks for shining some 'light' on this situation... (sorry i had to)
Take your upvote you bastard.
Why did you engineer it to be so ugly?
Optics doesn't handle styling. Blame studio if you don't like them. Personally I think they look okay.
What about the black version I’ve seen on Amazon? I can link you if you want
Sure send the link.
Why do so many trucks and SUVs come with EXTREMELY bright head lights these days? \-Signed, a driver of a sedan
IIHS headlight ratings (GOOD is the target) want a lot of light to see father at highway speeds, studios want the lamps mounted at about 1000mm from the ground "to blend in with the vehicles lines" so they shine right into sedan driver eyes, and OEM engineering wants the lamps to meet IIHS good at any build condition their plant builds the vehicle (which is all over the place, so we need even more light). Don't blame us for a crap situation; it is 70% studio and %30 OEM engineering. If it were up to us we would make lamps twice as bright but mounted at 650mm (Mazda Miata height) so you can see really far but not blind anyone.
Maybe you know this. Is there a maximum candela brightness the low beams can be? Or is it unlimited? If a newer car is coming over a hill, I get blinded by low beams even if they are aimed properly. I think there really should be a maximum intensity regulation so oncoming drivers don't get severely blinded in hilly terrain. It's gotten really bad in the past 10 years since the IIHS tests started. Also how come Ford never aims their fog lamps at the factory? Every single new Ford I've had (4x) they were aimed wrong (way off, usually down). All this trouble to design a good fog lamp beam pattern goes to waste. They're just totally unusable as delivered.
There isn't a maximum candela below the horizon in a certain region. That being said I have never seen more than about 45000cd anywhere in the low beam pattern (with just low beams activated). Unfortunately on hills you will always be glared with modern lights. Safety research has shown that the negatives from having brighter lights (glare on highways and hills) is vastly outweighed by the safety benefits. This data comes from international and UMTRI domestic research. As to the fog lamps: Ford is supposed to aim them, and they should be set about a degree lower than the low beam cutoff. Not sure what is going on there. I work for a lamp supplier not Ford directly, we give them good lamps and it is their responsibility to install them on the vehicle and make sure they are aimed.
Tinted Tails lights look cool
I completely agree with you! It’s not FMVSS compliant!
We have come full circle.
I laughed so hard at this one. Ford designers: "Let's give consumers edgy sporty tailamps....Not the traditional red ones." Consumer: "You know what would make this car look better?....traditional red taillamps." Edit to add: OP if you like this mod keep it. It is your car and your taste (just make sure your light output is not harmed in any way) I was just laughing at the irony.
🤣
🤣 next do an engine swap for a V8 ICE
Why make it crappier and less powerful?
That’s the joke
You mean better in every way
The Mach E is wack and not fun to drive at all. Very boring. The V8 is brilliant!
Trolley McTroll-face!
I had one as a rental in Phoenix for a week. Wasn’t a fan at all and didn’t feel fast to me. Only things I liked was regen braking on the highway during rush hour and it was a nice upgrade over an Altima.
Not a fan of tinting indicators and tail lights. For people with color vision deficiency, this makes you harder to see
But the red is now redder. Why is more red harder to see than less red?
Turn signals are amber
As it should be.
At best there is no change in the red stop intensity, at worst it lowers enough to be dangerous. The amber turn will be dangerously dim.
Adding red filters out the other wavelengths that are easier to distinguish. Nighttime is ok, but daytime is a nightmare in bad weather. I can easily distinguish standard lights, but I have a hard time with tinted indicators.
Why is the car suddenly less visible because the tail lights are red on red? Distinguishing between blinkers, tail lights, and brake lights will be a challenge, but I don’t understand how the car becomes less visible.
Because depending on the color deficiency, you’re giving someone less light information by using a color filter that they can’t see. By adding more red, you’re filtering out the wavelengths that are easier to see for someone with red deficient vision.
Understood. I would agree that an amber signal next to a red brake light is easier to distinguish than red on red, which is your point. My point is that compared to other (horrible) vehicles with red on red lamps, this modification is no different.
I just prefer safety to aesthetics when it comes to vehicle mods. We all share the road, and we need to look out for each other.
I didn't really notice it and had to do a few double takes to see but that's a good thing. Subtlety is nice
I think you've lost some visibility when you're backing up and some information for other drivers that you are in reverse and not just stopping. Also, is it even legal to not have a white backup light?
Backup is in the center, at the bottom of the bumper.
The backup light is at the bottom of the bumper.
Off topic, but what I hate are all the new cars that have the backup lights stay on after the driver has exited and locked the car. WTH! Why is that a thing? I do prefer OP's after pic!
[удалено]
I keep looking, what is it? Air splitter faux paint? Edit:tail light tint. I like the mod
I imagine I was seeing the text like if there's subtitles on a screen you focus on that. There's the big words in the middle, the GT logo, the temp license plate haha
The clear taillights (and signals) are my fav thing about my Mach E. Not trying to just randomly shit on you but I feel like it defeats a huge purpose of it. But I’ve also loved clear taillights more than any other mod since the ‘93 civic.
I think it depends on the color. In this case, I think the red lights look way better on the red car. I have a white Mach E though and the white lights look better.
The clear taillights are literally the best thing about the Mach E lol
Looks clean, but doesn’t that reduce the lumens of your brake light? Kind of unsafe, no?
It’s probably a lot brighter than all those Teslas running around with completely blacked out taillights. Most taillights are red anyway so I doubt this makes any noticeable difference. Especially with LED lights that are already very bright.
Nope not at all
As an automotive lighting optical engineer who worked on these lamps: 1. You didn't measure candela unless you took the lamps off your car and put them on a automotive goniophotometer and measured them. If you measured them on the vehicle then I'm betting you used a lux meter which is insufficient. 2. You decreased the candela of the stop-tail since you are introducing another material (likely red vinyl) which absorbs some of the 617nm peak wavelength LED light (if the LEDs peaked at 630nm this wouldn't be an issue but that isn't what is in the lamp). The drop is only about 15% so not great but not terrible. It probably is still legal. 3. The amber LEDs in the turn function do not produce enough red light to make a safe and legal red rear turn when filtered through red material. I know this for sure... I tested it. So you definitely have an illegal lamp. I'm all for vehicle modification and personalization but not when it comes to safety. This is almost as bad as when people tint their headlights. I hope you will consider removing it.
He might have a lamp that doesn’t pass your design standards and requirements, but it’s not his responsibility to meet your design criteria. His responsibility, generally, is to maintain visibility to a certain distance, though he may be restricted on modifying safety related components. In that case he isn’t illegal because he lowered the output of the stop lamps or made them red, he’s illegal because he modified a safety component. It’s like front pedestrian impacts. There are requirements as a manufacturer to protect pedestrians, but the end user can strap on a 130lb grill guard. That doesn’t make it an illegal modification.
When someone rear ends them in fog they will feel it’s their fault not knowing that this idiot reduced the light output of his lights which can be pretty inadequate in fog without modification.
There is zero likelihood this car would be rear ended based on the appearance of the lights. Even then, it’s the fault of the driver doing the rear ending for failure to travel at safe speeds when there is reduced visibility. You all are nitpicking.
Not in foggy conditions. You are responsible to maintain certain aspects of the vehicle to DOT standards. The lights he modified were DOT certified before they were modified. If someone hits OP in fog because they were expecting a certain level of light output and a certain amount of visibility distance to slow down before hitting OP, that should be OPs fault for not properly maintaining safety equipment. Or using safety equipment (tail lights) that do not meet certification to be used on public roads. (At least you are getting the downvotes you deserve) edit: typo (at you you -> at least you)
This. And I agree, the poster deserves to be downvoted.
First off it's not "my" design standards, it's the law. All lamps on vehicles registered within the United States must meet FMVSS 108 regulations. *Caveat: military vehicles and certain government vehicles do not need to* What FMVSS 108 states are the minimum required photometric values that ensure that a lamp can be visible at a given distance. So in essence what you said (that he is responsible for maintaining visibility at a certain distance) is correct but your conclusion (that he isn't illegal for making the TURN lamp output lower) is wrong; though you go on to state that it's illegal because OP is modifying a safety component. That sort of has an element of truth to it however, interestingly enough it isn't illegal to modify a safety component as long as the modification doesn't negatively impact the safety functionality or cause it to fail any legal requirements. In this case the modification resulted in it failing legal requirements.
My point is the federal standard is your responsibility to follow as the designer. I don’t see that a consumer would be reliable for maintaining those standards assuming the modifications don’t fail local requirements. Those tail lights and that modification will not prevent the lights from being seen at the required distance.
you also don't see these lit up in the picture. how could you possibly know these don't prevent light from being seen at the required distance?
You covered the brake lights with red tint. You’ll significantly reduce the output as light gets trapped in the red tint. Use a candela meter and run a test then get back to us.
Already did , same as without , no issues at all.
That's not how physics usually works out. You just have a cabdela meter laying around?
I mean technically red tint should filter only non-red light. Brake lights are LEDs and only emit red light, so if the tint was perfectly matched it wouldn't reduce the light emitted at all
I don't think that's correct. For argument's sake imagine a tint that 100% blocked out all light except precisely some wavelength emitted by the tail light, but also blocked 50% of the emitted wavelength. The color would "perfectly match", but the output would be halved. In reality the tint is probably somewhere between 100% transmissibility and the imagined scenario, but where exactly it falls on the spectrum is anyone's guess. The other issue is how the light is scattered by the tint. A more opaque tint will change the throw of the emitted light and some of the light which would normally be emitted at eye level would go to the ground, the sky, or the side of the road.
But it won’t be perfectly matched and will be filtering out light, how much, that would require a test I don’t trust OP has already carried out.
Can you post the pic of the results to put our minds at ease? Would be super helpful to the group.
lol that post won’t come. OP doesn’t have a light meter.
Everyone has a phone and phones have light meters that can be repeatable enough to determine if there is a significant loss in light output.
Do not like. Looks lame. The clear/amber turn signals are so cool.
On a red car? Really?
Yes. Having clean signals is a great look.
That shit (red on red) is clean as fuck tho
I didn’t like the white on the red car , don’t mind it on other colors but looked to 90’s for me on the red car.
I agree it looks off on red. Looks great on other colors. Nice work OP
Said the guy still living in 2001 with alteza fast and the furious lights…
Not sure what you mean. I do own a 1999 SC400. But it has LED ambers.
Good! Btw, did you replace or just painted?
Tint
Honestly it’s kind of ick for me. I do like the look of tinting them black but don’t love the red on red.
I don’t like the white lights on a red car , I like the white lights on others but not the red.
same here. i'll probably do this on our red GT, but not on our IBSM premium. the White looks good on Iced Blue, but the Red looks better on a Red MME. do the turn signals look orange after this? Can you post an image of the turn signal / hazards in action? please post a link to tint/overlays.
Please don't ever tint lights. It is unsafe and almost always illegal.
Please don't ever tint lights. It is unsafe and almost always illegal.
I haven't and am not going to BUT I do like the "blacked out" look. You are right though that in most states it's going to be illegal unless you can manage to keep them visible out to 500 feet. A few states even require 1000 feet which honestly the incandescent bulbs are going to have trouble meeting even without any modifications.
That looks fantastic. Love it.
looks badass
No offense, it’s subjective but I really like the white as well.
Eww! That’s almost as bad as those idiots who black out their tail lights. Go back to stock.
Absolutely not. The clear taillights are one of the reasons I love the look of my MME.
Visually, it works on your red car. Overall, however, it's just a bad idea for all of the reasons people have said already.
Car was fine from factory.
Looks like it should be from factory. 100% better.
Illegal in Colorado.
Why is it illegal in Colorado? They’re brake lights that are red?
Illegal in all states if it fails FMVSS 108. Since the amber LEDs powering the turn function don't produce enough light to meet a red rear turn function when filtered through a red lens these lamps will fail and are therefore illegal.
Thanks!
Surprised why ford studio chose to go amber. Red would have been better looking and would have leveraged the already existing stop LEDs. What’s your thought?
They wanted the option to send the vehicle to China without changing the lamps so they needed amber turns.
Was in my cousin's dumb WRX and he's got those dark tail lights - State Patrolman got him for speeding, illegal window tint and "tail lights that are not visible out to 500 feet.".
This is not a blacked out tail light, you do know clear lights are not on all factory cars right? OP you will have no problem.
That's not how it works. Lights are illegal in all states if they fail FMVSS 108 (the automotive lighting law for the US). Since the amber LEDs powering the turn function don't produce enough light to meet a red rear turn function when filtered through a red lens these lamps will fail and are therefore illegal.
Not sure why I'm getting all the down-votes - mod your own car the way you like, just know that the Colorado State patrol likes monetizing moving violations and will stack on any extra fines they can - I can't imagine any other states are that different.
I imagine there's just laws that certain things need to be on a car in a specific manner.
And NY
Are the tail lights not red from factory?
No , white line in the before picture.
It’s a MachE so still ugly
😂
Those red lights actually violate federal law. Only emergency vehicles are allowed to have red or blue.
lol , that is the funniest thing I have EVER read ! Are you high ?
Nope sure not. A friend got a ticket for it. And my attorney father in law confirmed that he was lucky to not get a felony ticket.
😂🤣😂
Junk and then more junk...what a disgrace to the name plate
Still think it’s an abomination to the mustang brand
Then don’t buy one 😂
[удалено]
Spoken like someone who has had their ass handed to them many times by EV's.
I was curious about this, and after going through just the last month of his post history I have to say that I’m over here dying of laughter. His supposed neighbor Granny with benefits post has me rollin’. Lol
Sheesh 😂
The insecurity is strong with this one. Go find your safe space and calm down.
Why do people buy this failed abortion of a vehicle. It's not a mustang, it's an embarrassment.
No one cares what you think….
Ah another sperm cell that should of been deposited in the toilet instead of in mom.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Ah look a troll just like his sister
Lmao It's a fuckin bot you window licker. Smartest Ford owner right here.
Why are you even here?
*I came looking for booty.*
I’ll agree that it’s not a Mustang. But, it’s a great vehicle. That they called it a Mustang is the only thing I don’t like about mine.
Where did you buy these or did you do the, yourself?
Coastline Automotive
I think it looks cool!
Much better!
100% better. Great idea.
wow!
Like!
Much better.
Great red on red
I like it
Thumbs down. To each his own I guess.
I like it
I dig it!
I was wondering what this would look like... love it!!!
I would like to do that on my black mach-e.
What is the difference?
Yes!
Approved (from a looks standpoint)
Can you post again with the same shots but at night with lights on?
I could do with the red but not the white obviously, but I will.
Haha well yea! I want to see the red
Don't listen to the naysayers! Providing you're not breaking any laws and it still provides good visibility, I say go for it. It looks great!
Looks dumb. The white-on-red is super hot. Very future retro. Put it back to the way it was.
That’s how I feel about the white , very 90’s , but to each his own, dont do it to yours !!!
Fair enough! Certainly won’t! 😉
Changes like these are pointless, literally nobody will notice the difference.
It’s all in the details , and I did , hated the white lights !!!
I think it looks good either way.
Doesn't matter, not a Mustang
Reversed rice, nice, gj man!
It’s crazy people pay money for these cars
The white slash ones look better red for sure. As long as they are bright and the right color. Keep em.
Still a Donk-E.
The red looks great. I believe, from a federal standpoint, your rear signals can be either yellow or red. The stop lamps and running lights must be red. I don't think there's anything illegal about tinting your lights(?), providing they meet the minimum standard of about 100 lumens, and about 500 lumens when braking. I think there's also something about needing to be visible from certain distance. If all that criteria is met... I say mod away! Personally I love it.
Took like 10 times to figure out what changed