LED's for tail/brake/signal lites

[Fred Mc]

For the interior I have replaced all lights with leds. When you are running off a battery it just makes sense. Bought the strings that are 15 ft long and you cut off what oh need. Lots of light and we love it wife likes to lay inbed and read. They are perfect for that. The strings were 15 each so quite cheap. We will see about longevity.

[PP]

@PP, Kindly post the link to the site for the cheap LED bulbs. This seems close except the price, LOL. http://www.ebay.com/itm/2x-RV-Auto-LED-Replacement-Bulb-1156-base-160-LUM-tower-Warm-Wht-12v-24v-5050168-/322151066544?epid=1711815948&hash=item4b01b32bb0:g:fg0AAMXQhuVRU20Z&vxp=mtr

I guess I should have been clearer. I opted to stick with the conventional lights and not go to LEDs because of the cheap cost of regular bulbs, I have a lifetime supply now. Sorry if I got you excited over LEDs for cheap. Them I never did find.
Will

[PP]

For the interior I have replaced all lights with leds. When you are running off a battery it just makes sense. Bought the strings that are 15 ft long and you cut off what oh need. Lots of light and we love it wife likes to lay inbed and read. They are perfect for that. The strings were 15 each so quite cheap. We will see about longevity.

I went with the 18" LED replacement bulbs. They skip the ballast and fit in the existing fixtures which are recessed in the ceilings and trimmed in wood under the cupboards. I replaced all 14 lights in the coach, even under the cupboards, but not the bedroom. I found the LEDs were too bright for the bedroom and now I have lots of spare ballasts and bulbs just for the bedroom 
Will

[Zephod]

I guess I should have been clearer. I opted to stick with the conventional lights and not go to LEDs because of the cheap cost of regular bulbs, I have a lifetime supply now. Sorry if I got you excited over LEDs for cheap. Them I never did find.
Will

I looked at the led car lights in Walmart today, pressing the test buttons. They just seemed a little dim.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Scott & Heather]

Those aren't meant to replace tail/brake/turn signal lights, they are designed as accent lights and likely the little battery that allows you to see them is going bad....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Zephod]

Those aren't meant to replace tail/brake/turn signal lights, they are designed as accent lights and likely the little battery that allows you to see them is going bad....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Those I looked at were being sold as drop in bulb replacements.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Oonrahnjay]

Those I looked at were being sold as drop in bulb replacements. 

       In my experience, those things have never been worth a fiddler's damn.  To work well, LED taillamps, brake lamps, clearance lights, etc. have an LED light source with reflectors and lenses set up to match the characteristics of the source.  "Drop in bulb replacements" are like putting track shoes on your granny and expecting her to run a 4-minute mile.

[bevans6]

The exterior lighting on a vehicle has to meet FMVSS and DOT standards and regulations, and "drop in LED replacement bulbs" don't meet either.  Has to do with light emission, reflectors and other things that contribute to how visible the light is and from what angles.  I have 7" diameter rear brake lights that I converted to LED using bulbs intended for school bus flashing lights, 24 volt.  Bright, highly visible, approved and not particularly cheap.  Love them.  As noted earlier, they don't draw enough current to turn on the tell-tale on the dash.

Brian

[akroyaleagle]

The exterior lighting on a vehicle has to meet FMVSS and DOT standards and regulations

Brian,

Let's be clear.

The references cited above, while applying if/when the coach was a bus do not apply. What those references apply to is clearly delineated in them. Confusion exists where bus or coach or RV is used. That's why since the advent of this Board, I have encouraged owners to never use the term concerning their conversion. Everyones' title should read RV.

Those references did apply to the manufacturer that produced them. For profit some manufacturer both buses and shells.
For their protection and benefit, they just produce them to the stricter standard.

An RV is not a commercial vehicle. A coach that is also used in revenue producing capacity or carries "passengers" is a commercial vehicle. The term passengers and commercial are defined in the cited references.

I am not a lawyer. I have worked in capacities where I needed to know things. I have the ability to prove them. I have proved them in the past. I am able to prove them again if required.

I hope no one takes offense to my point here.

We are among many without a lot of experience in our "madness". We should offer the correct guidance to them, or leave it to someone who can.

[belfert]

No matter if you call it a bus, a coach, an RV, or a motorhome the exterior lighting still needs to meet DOT regulations.  A bus being titled as an RV/motorhome does not exempt it from DOT lighting regulations.

Here is a link to a page showing lighting requirements for a motorhome: https://www.truck-lite.com/content/education/fmvss/rv

[bevans6]

Lots of people think that commercial vehicles have to meet different regulations than private or personal vehicles, and it's just not so.  All vehicles have to meet the same regulations, all the time.  Commercial vehicle operators have to meet unique standards for inspections, hours of service, licenses, and so on, but that's it.  A private vehicle needs to have operating clearance and marker lights, the headlights have to work legally, the brake and running lights all need to work, the tires need to have tread, the slack adjusters need to be adjusted correctly, the air compressor needs to recover in the correct length of time, the air brake system needs to not leak down too fast.  Private vehicles are subject to random inspection at any time for roadworthy-ness.  Where I used to live the police would set up massive inspection sites on the roads to cottage country and pull over RV's, trailers, people going up for the long weekend, all private.  Where I live now, the police routinely set up inspection stations on main roads and pull every vehicle in to check for vehicle inspection stickers and license plates.

[j.m.jackson]

I believe that as far as lighting and reflectors are concerned, the vehicle must meet the DOT requirements that were in effect for the year of manufacture.

I know I don't have reflective tape on mine, even though it's required per the above referenced website. I also don't have any reflex reflectors visible from the front, which has been required for years.

[Oonrahnjay]

Lots of people think that commercial vehicles have to meet different regulations than private or personal vehicles, and it's just not so.  All vehicles have to meet the same regulations, all the time.  Commercial vehicle operators have to meet unique standards for inspections, hours of service, licenses, and so on, but that's it.  A private vehicle needs to have operating clearance and marker lights, the headlights have to work legally, the brake and running lights all need to work, the tires need to have tread, the slack adjusters need to be adjusted correctly, the air compressor needs to recover in the correct length of time, the air brake system needs to not leak down too fast.  Private vehicles are subject to random inspection at any time for roadworthy-ness.  Where I used to live the police would set up massive inspection sites on the roads to cottage country and pull over RV's, trailers, people going up for the long weekend, all private.  Where I live now, the police routinely set up inspection stations on main roads and pull every vehicle in to check for vehicle inspection stickers and license plates.  

    Brian is right.  A large part of my work for 20 years, both on the staff of major motor vehicles manufacturers and consulting for others around the world, was dealing the FMVSS (and CMVSS, in Canada) and other vehicle safety standards (and for another 15+, it was a minor part of my work).   The definitions are written to apply to the design and manufacture of the vehicle, not its use.  Those standards apply equally and evenly across the board.  You can be in a line of traffic that includes an electric-company boom truck with a trailer loaded with light poles, a 1976 Winnebago "Brave" that's never been "commercial" use, a Greyhound bus, a "toy-hauler" pickup (purely private and recreational), a 1996 Prevost converted to motor home use and re-registered from Commercial to RV.   The exact same requirements for the FMVSS (and CMVSS standard in the GWN there, eh?) apply so long as those vehicles are over 80" wide (there is a distinction in vehicle width in the standards).
    There are also requirements in the standard that specifically prohibit the removal or disabling a device or modifying a lighting system component in a way that takes it out of compliance with the standards.  This requirement is wide-ranging and complex -- there are even specific items covered, such as if you put on a snow-plow that covers front lights, you much have additional or auxiliary lights that meet FMVSS 108.  
    FMVSS 108 (and CMVSS 108) have regulations that apply to a device such as a taillight assembly as performance in a laboratory.  Other requirements are for the devices as they are built into the vehicle.  It doesn't matter, FMVSS 108 is the legal requirement for a vehicle as it is built and run on the road.  It applies to the vehicle, not its use classification.

    One thing that can vary is state and local regulation and inspection.  Meritor may build an axle with brakes and specify a 1/2" free play on an actuating component; Peterbuilt can take that axle and brake system and build it into a truck and do all the testing to Safety Standards with 1/2" free play.  Can a state government* has some bright spark in the DMV who says "Ah thank dat dat's too loose and Ahm gonna wraht a Re-quiremint fer 1/4 winn we does arr In-specshuns"?  Yes, that would be legal (under US Constitutional rights reserved for the states, vis-a-vis Federal preemption provisions) -- it would be Major Factor stupid and vehicle manufacturers and trucking companies would be going to the state requesting that the requirement be changed to be in line with the Federal compliance configuration, but - in theory - it would be "legal".
    On the other hand, a state cannot decide that they want bigger taillights on vehicles sold in that state.  In that case, Federal preemption for the Interstate Commerce of the manufacture and sale of vehicles would prevent that.  A state *can* require that a vehicle be operated with a device that meets FMVSS 108 (i.e. a "rubber stamp" of the Fed regulation) but not that it be fitted or operated with a device *different* from a Fed-required device.

    For another subject, there is the matter of modifications.  Say for instance, Prevost builds a bus with legally-required lights built into the rear bumper and "Custom Coach" is doing a lot of updates to the vehicle and removes the rear bumper so that they can put on a luggage box in place of the rear bumper.  As a part of this, Custom Coach installs lights to replace the ones that were removed when the bumper was taken off.  Is this legal?  Yes, but in this case, "Custom Coach" becomes a "vehicle alterer" under Federal standards and must install lights that meet the Federal standard; CC would also be required to keep documentation as to the certification of the lights that they installed and their design criteria for the installation.  Does it matter if the modification is made for a large leasing company in Nashville that rents buses out for entertainers (i.e. completely commercial) or to be sold to a little old lady who only drives it from the RV park to church on Sunday?? -- NOT ONE BIT.

    Is it legal to take a tested and certified bulb out of a taillight on a vehicle manufactured to meet Federal standards and replace it with a half-esssed lightning-bug fart bulb that's not nearly bright enough to meet the requirements?   No, it is not -- and it doesn't matter whether the vehicle is registered and used in commercial service or private use and it doesn't matter what classification is on the vehicle title.  It just isn't legal.

(* I'm pretty sure that there are detailed differences between US and Canada legalities on this score, due to Canada's different Federal/ Provincial structure.  That's why I've use "state" in particular here.  I believe that the general requirements are similar but details differ and I'm not in any way trying to argue with Brian's knowledge and experience in Canada.)

[B_K]

I looked at the led car lights in Walmart today, pressing the test buttons. They just seemed a little dim.

I know the direct replacements you are referring too, and yes they are for stop/tail lamps.
But two things to keep in mind they are powered by a VERY cheap 9 volt battery not a good 12 volt supply and how many hundreds of people have pushedthat same testbutton just as you did!

I can verify they are BRIGHT! as a matter of fact I put them on my motorcycle to help make me more visible to others on the road!
  BK 

[akroyaleagle]

I have recently moved and am some distance from my coach where I keep a personal copy of the references cited with the applicable areas that some interpret differently highlighted and the page dogeared.

I have had this discussion many times and only wish to do it further with both parties present and a copy of the references. I managed a fleet of over 150 vehicles in Alaska. These vehicles belonged to the GSA and were operated by the US. Army. I spent a considerable amount of time showing State and other agencies the areas that the Government/Military was exempt. Same with vehicles On a fire contract. I served as a Safety and driver training Supervisor with a tour bus company. I proved many times to other complaining companies and law enforcers that all buses did not have to stop at RR crossings. Only passenger buses carrying "passengers". The Driver is not a "passenger". The Tour Director" is an "Employee", not a "Passenger". I cite this as but one example. If the bus is placarded with this bus stops at all RR crossings, that is a horse of a different color.

I do not dispute what the references say. Only interpretations of them. I spent many years in the Army proving to the FAA the rules didn't say what they had always thought. They always had to agree when shown the location, in their own Regulation, that limited their influence to airspace where they "had a need" to control and that fell under the definition of "FAA Controlled Airspace". They had to acknowledge the "Exceptions" there too. They were not always "happy" when forced to concur, by their own reference, and definition. Especially, when they had always been taught "that's the way it is". If everyone had the correct interpretation of matters, we would not need lawyers nor arbiters. I only ask that one take an open minded approach and seek the facts.

My post was not to indicate approval of insane thinking by the original poster but simply to point out that the references cited did not always apply to us in all areas.

I am aware of many of the differences between US and Canadian law. I am by no means versed in Canada law. I found that out when trying to prove to A RCMP Officer that my wifes' nephew did not require a CDL, or whatever Class that license is in Canada, to operate an RV when both are licensed in the US. Even if that RV was a former Calgary City Bus manufactured in Winnipeg. I'm not sure if I ever got that done, but I created enough doubt that he allowed us to continue.

I, and I ask of others, operate by the assumption that "I could be wrong". The proof is "In the Pudding."