Requirement for Indicators. | GTAMotorcycle.com

Requirement for Indicators.

kiwi

kiwi

Well-known member
So My noob friend is telling me that motorcycles require their indicators to be seen form the side. We are having an argument about it now as I know this not this be the case as most motorcycle lenses face backwards. Some of the newer bikes have indicator lights that are moulded so they can be seen from the sides a bit. Ie. Gixxr 750 etc.
But most if not all bikes, just have REAR facing lenses. I believe the only requirements are they need to be facing backwards, an arbitrary distance apart.. like 15cm and be amber coloured.
 
It's not so arbitrary. We had a guy yesterday, who had one of those neat little tidying kits, that lets your tire dent your license plate, or is it, let's your license plate scrape off your tire, whenever you go over a bump in the road.
His turn signal leds were right under the side, tight together, and there were times that the only way I knew which way he was turning right away, was because were were telling him by radio.

My lenses are curved and extend out about an inch, so you should be able to see them from the side.

Anyways, laws tend to work on the teeter totter of stupidity theory, i.e. they don't make one, until enough people do something stupid.

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should.
Visibility and projecting your intentions are key on a motorcycle.
Cagers, complain that we're hard enough to see as it is. Why give that up for simple aesthetics?
 
This topic has turned into a muddled mess in the past because what the HTA says is different from what the requirements are for a used vehicle and that's different from what the requirements that the vehicle manufacturers have to conform to.

Ontario HTA doesn't actually require turn signals on motorcycles at all. But if your bike doesn't have them, you have to use the hand signals ... which almost no car drivers understand, and good luck with that if you have to simultaneously operate clutch, front brake, throttle, etc.

On the other end of the spectrum is CMVSS 108, which lighting on new vehicles must be built to conform to by manufacturers of new vehicles. That standard is quite specific about the brightness from which turn signal indicators (and all other lights) must be from various directions and angles.

Even the old school original-equipment stalkie turn signals are still visible from quite an angle to the side.

There is indeed a minimum left-to-right separation distance which none of those "integrated" lamps conform to. It is around 9" in the rear and 15" in the front if I remember right. There are also minimum distances that the turn signal has to be from lamps performing other functions (headlamp, tail, brake) with the intent being that the turn signal light doesn't get drowned out by the adjacent lamp for another function. "Integrated" lamps cannot comply with this requirement.

There is indeed a minimum brightness that the signal has to be when measured from various angles. Most aftermarket turn signals are garbage and don't come anywhere close to compliance.

I keep this stuff original because I don't want anyone to use that as an excuse for hitting me.
 
What's legal, and what won't result in you becoming a red smear on a road somewhere are often two different things.

I don't understand the people that install such tiny signal lights that they might as well not even be there, but then they rely on them for actually indicating their intentions, yet get upset when people don't see them.

If you look at the lens design on the factory signals on most motorcycles you'll see that they are designed so that the light is visible from the side of the bike. Even a well designed aftermarket lens replacement (like the Kuryakyn ones I have on my VTX) retain this, albeit sometimes differently - see the pic below - the little ring at the back of the lens is designed to pickup the light and display it to the side of the bike.

s-l225.jpg
 
Perhaps the OPS friend was using the incorrect terminology when trying to get his point across. There is no requirement for a SIGNAL light to be seen from the side of the vehicle. Instead what he MAY have been trying to say is that there is a requirement for REFLECTORS to be visible from the side of the vehicle, (those little round things which are red near the front of the vehicle and yellow near the rear of the vehicle.

I have seen, in the past three days, some sport bikes with aftermarket GARBAGE for rear lighting. One in particular the signals were no bigger than a quarter and were tucked in right beside the brake, so when the brake was applied the signal disappeared, and without the brake you couldn't tell if it was going right or left.

I could see a crafty lawyer working for an insurer, advising them not to pay out on a claim, stating the vehicle didn't meet "minimum" standards, and as such the insurer wouldn't have insured had the client advised of these "mods" when asked if there were any mods to the vehicle when underwriting the policy. They would claim it was a "material misrepresentation" and therefore, voided the contract.

Except for LED headlights I always kept everything stock.
 
On a GTAM ride a few years ago, I saw the only replacement taillight that I have ever liked. Technically it didn't meet the separation distance requirement, but holy crap was it bright. It was much more noticeable than any stock lighting. IIRC it was yellow or orange for turn and red for brakes so even though they were close together, it was easy to pick out whether the yellow was on the left or right of the brake. Most are complete garbage and aside from any laws I would not be riding a bike with them because I value my life. Most integrated lights trade an incredible level of visibility and safety for a small aesthetic improvement.
 
hedo2002 said:
There is no requirement for a SIGNAL light to be seen from the side of the vehicle.
Click to expand...

This was the point I was trying to make to my friend. Also had pointed out that even though we could have stock signals on the motorcycle, don't expect people to notice them.

BrianP, Hedo2002,GreyGhost, Baggsy, PrivatePilot, thanks for the comments/replies.
 
statsman said:
Aren't hand signals still legal?
Click to expand...

Yes, but I suspect many drivers won't have a clue what you are doing. Also, in many situations you need both hands to control the bike. With more and more dashcams, you could get convicted on a failure to signal charge quite easily.
 
Hyperion said:
Which is funny because led headlights are illegal and perform worse than their oem counterparts.
Click to expand...

Define worse? As an oncoming vehicle, I hate the glare they produce and I don't use them because I don't want to do that to other people (or increase my heat score), but many people that install them love the light output (once they find a decent set of bulbs that cooperates with their housing).

And yes, they are illegal and are now checked as part of the revised safety procedure.
 
LED lights are illegal?

sent from my Purple LGG4 on the GTAM app
 
Joe Bass said:
LED lights are illegal?

sent from my Purple LGG4 on the GTAM app
Click to expand...

From the new safety checklist. It pretty clearly eliminates every HID/LED conversion I have ever seen.

"Reject if lamp has been altered from OEM condition so as to reduce or significantly increase the intensity of the light, surface area of the lens, colour of light emitted, or any modification to change the function or operation of the lamp"

Now as far as an actual HTA charge, probably the cop would hand out an equipment violation. It looks like blinding bulbs may not actually be in contravention of the HTA. Section 168 is "When on a highway at any time when lighted lamps are required to be displayed on vehicles, the driver of a motor vehicle equipped with multiple beam headlamps shall use the lower or passing beam when . . ." so replacement bulbs pass that. Section 169 is regarding alternating lights, so you pass that section as well. Section 62 says no more than 4 headlamps (but I can't see a cop winning the argument that each led is a lamp). I didn't see any other applicable sections.

EDIT:
"2. No lighting device of more than thirty-two mean spherical candela shall be used in a single beam headlamp. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 596, s. 3."
Anyone measured stock lights to see what typical ratings are? I suspect many modern cars may exceed this rating from the factory (but the well designed optics minimize the blinding of oncoming cars).

It looks like MVSA may provide authority over HTA regarding intensity. This is starting to go down the rabbit hole though, I'm out.
 
Last edited:
GreyGhost said:
Define worse? As an oncoming vehicle, I hate the glare they produce and I don't use them because I don't want to do that to other people (or increase my heat score), but many people that install them love the light output (once they find a decent set of bulbs that cooperates with their housing).

And yes, they are illegal and are now checked as part of the revised safety procedure.
Click to expand...
The output that they producing can never replicate that of a halogen bulb. The halogen Bulb Has a 360-degree output, led, in 99% of cases only has chips on 2 sides. If they're rotated incorrectly, you get massive glare, "properly" and they still don't have width, which let's you see them deer/pedestrians.
Led also does not have a not spot, which allows you to see into the distance.
What it does have, is forground. Which focuses your eyes close infront of you instead of into the distance, and therefore you strains your eyes to look where you are going.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
GreyGhost said:
From the new safety checklist. It pretty clearly eliminates every HID/LED conversion I have ever seen.

"Reject if lamp has been altered from OEM condition so as to reduce or significantly increase the intensity of the light, surface area of the lens, colour of light emitted, or any modification to change the function or operation of the lamp"

Now as far as an actual HTA charge, probably the cop would hand out an equipment violation. It looks like blinding bulbs may not actually be in contravention of the HTA. Section 168 is "When on a highway at any time when lighted lamps are required to be displayed on vehicles, the driver of a motor vehicle equipped with multiple beam headlamps shall use the lower or passing beam when . . ." so replacement bulbs pass that. Section 169 is regarding alternating lights, so you pass that section as well. Section 62 says no more than 4 headlamps (but I can't see a cop winning the argument that each led is a lamp). I didn't see any other applicable sections.

EDIT:
"2.No lighting device of more than thirty-two mean spherical candela shall be used in a single beam headlamp. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 596, s. 3."
Anyone measured stock lights to see what typical ratings are? I suspect many modern cars may exceed this rating from the factory (but the well designed optics minimize the blinding of oncoming cars).

It looks like MVSA may provide authority over HTA regarding intensity. This is starting to go down the rabbit hole though, I'm out.
Click to expand...
You're 99% right.
The section they quote for plug and play HID is "dazzling". Which is their word for excessive glare.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
I have a question about LED's which I was hoping I could get some insight on. The European model of the GSXR1000 has factory LED's for the following, headlight, tail lights, brake lights and indicators however the Canadian version of the same bike has all of the pre mentioned except the indicators are regular bulbs. The re-seller said its because of Canadian regs so I would like to know if this is true because if I change these the indicators to LED then I would be breaking the law?
 
BRIT said:
I have a question about LED's which I was hoping I could get some insight on. The European model of the GSXR1000 has factory LED's for the following, headlight, tail lights, brake lights and indicators however the Canadian version of the same bike has all of the pre mentioned except the indicators are regular bulbs. The re-seller said its because of Canadian regs so I would like to know if this is true because if I change these the indicators to LED then I would be breaking the law?
Click to expand...
For signal/brake light, so long as it is equally bright it won't matter. For low beams/headlights it "by law" needs to be the oem halogen. Not that anyone listens to that tho...

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
CMVSS 108 is indifferent to the type of light source as long as the various brightness and other performance requirements are met. My Kawasaki beast has LED lighting all around including turn signals and it's the same part number worldwide, the only difference is that outside North America they omit the reflectors. If Suzuki didn't design their lighting to meet worldwide regulations, it's just Suzuki being either sloppy or lazy. The EU signals are probably so close in functionality that in practical reality there will be no difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom