Tail lights with built in indicators - WOF legal?

[bogan]

A vrod headlight might work well? That pic made me think of one of the guys who put on on their hawk; that site may have other good inspiration for you if you search around too.

http://hawkgtforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28564

[kinger]

Bugger worrying if they're legal not - important thing is: Are they really REALLY visible when you are indicating your 'change of direction'?

I've been frustrated by the modern car design idea where the indicators are inside of the headlights. Very difficult to see them compared to old school orange on the corner types.

[scumdog]

I've been frustrated by the modern car design idea where the indicators are inside of the headlights. Very difficult to see them compared to old school orange on the corner types.

Damn tootin' right - not very good really, I'm suprised they passed scrutiny.

[thehollowmen]

I failed a wof because of a light leak to the side from my indicator.
Guess it it who checks out your bike. If it is a good bike shop, then you're probably fine.

I did wonder about that. Should be perfectly visible from behind though, and I don't know many bikes where the rear indicator is visible from the side - mostly you see the front one.

[biggo]

I failed a wof because of a light leak to the side from my indicator.
Guess it it who checks out your bike. If it is a good bike shop, then you're probably fine.

Lights do not need an "e" maek or any marking for WOF , they do for entry certification.

The only reason I can see the lights may not meet WOF requirements is they would be consodered as retrofit and therefore would need to meet the light angles stated in the VIRM

14. A mandatory lamp that is not OE and not mounted in the original position emits a light that is not visible within:

a) 15˚ above and below the horizontal, or

b) 45˚ inboard and 80˚ outboard.

http://vehicleinspection.nzta.govt.n...ndicator-lamps

[Devil]

Bugger worrying if they're legal not - important thing is: Are they really REALLY visible when you are indicating your 'change of direction'?

Yerp - bugger the legality, this is my biggest problem with integrated indicators. I've never seen a set that has been effective. They're usually too close together to get an obvious picture of which way its going, or they're just not clearly distinguishable from the brake lights.

I'd rather not get cleaned up from behind by a motorist that hasn't figured out what you're trying to do.

[Motu]

Lights do not need an "e" maek or any marking for WOF , they do for entry certification.

All standards marking requirments have been removed from the VIRM for some time (years and years) and they are now a compliance/repair issue. The theory being that at a VIN or repair stage the vehicle will be compliant, and they think should stay that way. A lot of OE lamps no longer have markings, so lack of markings is hard to enforce - an inspector is still able to fail if he suspects it's not compliant, and it's up to the owner to confirm compliance. In the real world it hardly ever happens.

[Gubb]

Guess it depends who does yer WOFs. My understanding is not legal.

Two different VTNZ locations in Wellington.

[BMWST?]

I did wonder about that. Should be perfectly visible from behind though, and I don't know many bikes where the rear indicator is visible from the side - mostly you see the front one.

i think you are missing the point.The average road user fails to see 1/2 of what is presented to them i wouldnt give them ANY excuse to say they didnt see your indicator,and some of the tiny led ones and these integrated ones are pretty poor.They might be fine in the garage but on a rainy night or facing directly into the sun they are almost indistuingable from either the tailight or brake light

[rapid van cleef]

integrated tail lights/indicators definetly road legal.

[rastuscat]

Followed a new Nissan recently with the shiny new integrated indicator and tail light. I bet the designer got a real pat on the back, as they looked shit hot. Have noticed some Citroens with similar.

Didn't work for nuts, but really looked the part.

[G4L4XY]

i think you are missing the point.The average road user fails to see 1/2 of what is presented to them i wouldnt give them ANY excuse to say they didnt see your indicator,and some of the tiny led ones and these integrated ones are pretty poor.They might be fine in the garage but on a rainy night or facing directly into the sun they are almost indistuingable from either the tailight or brake light

I agree with you here. It's just like those flush front indicators, they wouldn't be very visible at all, sure they look good but wouldn't be very safe, cars in front wouldn't see you indicate to pull out and pass and cut you off or some bs.
I like the IT (integrated taillight), would help clean up the tail a bit, but would it be worth it?

[rastuscat]

Have paid a bit more attention to this since reading this thread. Sports bikes seem to be more likely to have the integrated lights. Piss poor visibility for indicators from behind. Cool factor is there, but in terms of functionality they suck salty chocolate balls.

[98tls]

Have paid a bit more attention to this since reading this thread. Sports bikes seem to be more likely to have the integrated lights. Piss poor visibility for indicators from behind. Cool factor is there, but in terms of functionality they suck salty chocolate balls.

Yep correct,bought an intergrated system years back but quickly got rid of,useless.Strangely led tailghts work well but combine indicators and you might as well don the invisible man suit.

[Motu]

I think the safety factor is hugely over rated. So long as it looks cool, and people who see you riding it think you look cool, then the product has met it's design objective. Don't over think it.