[Oxyno]

Would these changes be DOT legal?

A lot of things people do to their cars, aren't technically DOT-Approved. 🤷‍♂️

You trade a little bit of night-time brightness, of the INNER lens, at night. The outer lens are still full-brightness anyhow. The camera is showing a decent difference, but, I bet in-person, that it's a bit more noticeable than the processed phone camera would belie.

But what you get in return, are more eye-level brake lamps of the inner lens, and a small but noticeable increase in brightness of the inner, when the running lamps are on.

I like it! I am still leaning toward the LED-strip idea, personally.

Or I'll do both, and advertise the rear of my EUV as aircraft landing assistance.

 

[evtinker]

If my 2023 ever gets built and delivered this sure looks like the solution for me.

 

[RacerX00]

Would these changes be DOT legal?

Actually, yes. The reason they don't have it on the tails is the regulation states that if the brake lights are on a moving thing, they also need to be somewhere else. This satisfies that.

How a normal OEM would have handled this situation is they would have wired it up so if the tail gate was open, then it would use the bottom lights. What GM did here is called, "cost cutting" which apparently means we lose for no really good reason at all.

Friggin design engineers will shiv you and your family to remove a few wiring harnesses when cutting costs and pleasing the Federal Government are involved.

 

[Wattz]

Would these changes be DOT legal?

The sad thing is that the current 2022-2023 design apparently is legal.

 

[Electric Personality]

Would these changes be DOT legal?

Legal?
No one is gonna bust you for doing it.

Just so I am on the same page, there is absolutely no difference at night, or when the park lights are on correct? Only during daytime operation is it noticeable?

 

[pkaso]

Legal?
No one is gonna bust you for doing it.

Just so I am on the same page, there is absolutely no difference at night, or when the park lights are on correct? Only during daytime operation is it noticeable?

At night the iner run lite are dimmer (see picture) and get bright when you brake.
At day time iner and outer run lights off, so when you use brake iner light turn on full bright. Its work like regular brake (STOP) light.
Perhaps i should record youtube video like the one with diode fix.

 

[Raxstone]

So you dimmed the running lights? Then they show full brightness only when braking? Hmmmm.

Yes, but also when you don't have your running lights on, they now light up as brake lights. Factory set up does NOT light up EVER when you brake. This is when things are most critical - daylight when you only have the CHMSL and the small very low brake lights. Adding the tailgate lights as functional brake lights during the day is a tremendously effective mod.

 

[LaughingSuperCruiser]

Actually, yes. The reason they don't have it on the tails is the regulation states that if the brake lights are on a moving thing, they also need to be somewhere else. This satisfies that.

How a normal OEM would have handled this situation is they would have wired it up so if the tail gate was open, then it would use the bottom lights. What GM did here is called, "cost cutting" which apparently means we lose for no really good reason at all.

Friggin design engineers will shiv you and your family to remove a few wiring harnesses when cutting costs and pleasing the Federal Government are involved.

Please don't blame the design engineers. I can't tell you how many times I proposed to management some change or improvement and was told we don't have the budget for it. Blame the bean counters and the MBAs who make the rules.

 

[RacerX00]

Please don't blame the design engineers. I can't tell you how many times I proposed to management some change or improvement and was told we don't have the budget for it. Blame the bean counters and the MBAs who make the rules.

I get what you're saying, but I feel the same way about things at work I know are the wrong way to do things but have to anyway. Doesn't mean I don't have to shiv people on my way to my slaver's goals just like you do too.

I didn't mean any offense and you can tell me if I'm wrong in how I see this. There was a scramble across the entire car to cut costs and this did that, while still passing regulations. Wiring specifically is a thing I understand OEMs have been trying to tackle on that front, so this is even less surprising to me. No engineer was being lazy or stupid or thought this was ideal. They were hitting marks given to them.

Didn't mean to personalize this at you. GM is the bad boy here, not you. I actually have boat loads of respect for people who do this.

 

[Voldar]

...

 

[Raxstone]

I get what you're saying, but I feel the same way about things at work I know are the wrong way to do things but have to anyway. Doesn't mean I don't have to shiv people on my way to my slaver's goals just like you do too.

I didn't mean any offense and you can tell me if I'm wrong in how I see this. There was a scramble across the entire car to cut costs and this did that, while still passing regulations. Wiring specifically is a thing I understand OEMs have been trying to tackle on that front, so this is even less surprising to me. No engineer was being lazy or stupid or thought this was ideal. They were hitting marks given to them.

Didn't mean to personalize this at you. GM is the bad boy here, not you. I actually have boat loads of respect for people who do this.

With all the tech they added to this car, I doubt very much that penny pinching is the reason for the lack of the tailgate lighting functioning as brake lights in addition to the lower lights. Even Ferrari did this afterthought lighting on one of their super expensive exotics. It was simply an oversight and this was the quickest fix.

 

[RacerX00]

IMO GM isn't the bad boy here. They changed my battery pretty fast if you ask me. Maybe I am the lucky one... but I doubt. I also think the "fire hazard" problem targeted mainly the 2019 editions, that's why GM swapped them faster than any other years.
It's also true, they agreed to swap-repurchase the other cars, and they did a pretty good job for those who now have a 2022 EUV at a price that no owner would have think of. Even @RacerX00 is happy with what he has, even though he had to wait for months. In the end, he's the winner anyway, no matter how he presents it. As they say, it doesn't matter how, it matters the end result.
That's all I had to say about this subject.

You should probably read what this thread is actually about.

With all the tech they added to this car, I doubt very much that penny pinching is the reason for the lack of the tailgate lighting functioning as brake lights in addition to the lower lights. Even Ferrari did this afterthought lighting on one of their super expensive exotics. It was simply an oversight and this was the quickest fix.

No it's actually what they did. This isn't debated. This is why you have things like steel panels on the EUV and aluminum panels on the EV. They needed to cut costs because they were losing money (and may still be) on each Bolt EV they sold. That's not debated either, it was rumored at release and confirmed by Mary Barra herself in I believe 2019.

Whether or not the brake lights functioning like this as a result of wiring reduction, that's speculative. But I think decently guessed speculation.

 

[Voldar]

...

 

[RacerX00]

I did. And as you posted in your first message, you got what you wanted in the end. That's what matters IMO. How you got there... I think it's irrelevant. Every person has a different story. Some had it harder, some had it easier.

You still have not.

 

[Voldar]

You still have not.

Oops, you are right. I somehow find myself on the tailgate drama... my bad.

 

[RichK]

I get what you're saying, but I feel the same way about things at work I know are the wrong way to do things but have to anyway. Doesn't mean I don't have to shiv people on my way to my slaver's goals just like you do too.

I didn't mean any offense and you can tell me if I'm wrong in how I see this. There was a scramble across the entire car to cut costs and this did that, while still passing regulations. Wiring specifically is a thing I understand OEMs have been trying to tackle on that front, so this is even less surprising to me. No engineer was being lazy or stupid or thought this was ideal. They were hitting marks given to them.

Didn't mean to personalize this at you. GM is the bad boy here, not you. I actually have boat loads of respect for people who do this.

Wow dude, you are quite the opinionated character and sounds like you have an axe to grind with people in leadership positions and GM in general. You say "you didn't mean any offense and you can tell me if I'm wrong" but in the same breadth you accuse a complete stranger of "shivving people" and that poster does things to support his "slaver's goals". WTF are you talking about and what gives you the right to say stuff like that. You're the typical know-it-all tough guy on a message board. I have found 99% of the people on this board to be respectful posters that are passionate about their cars and want to have enjoyable dialogue and exchange of ideas and information. It's OK to have differing opinions, but there is absolutely no call for this type of aggressive language and attacks on another poster. If I was the moderator, I would ban you from the site.

 

[RacerX00]

Wow dude, you are quite the opinionated character and sounds like you have an axe to grind with people in leadership positions and GM in general. You say "you didn't mean any offense and you can tell me if I'm wrong" but in the same breadth you accuse a complete stranger of "shivving people" and that poster does things to support his "slaver's goals". WTF are you talking about and what gives you the right to say stuff like that. You're the typical know-it-all tough guy on a message board. I have found 99% of the people on this board to be respectful posters that are passionate about their cars and want to have enjoyable dialogue and exchange of ideas and information. It's OK to have differing opinions, but there is absolutely no call for this type of aggressive language and attacks on another poster. If I was the moderator, I would ban you from the site.

Who exactly are you in this conversation right now and what are your goals?

Why am I all of the sudden the troll police on this thread?

The only person I care to talk to about anything unrelated to tail lights on this thread is the person I offended, @LaughingSuperCruiser , whom, I'll make clear because of all the BS now here, I'm trying to explain I meant no offense and please forgive me. Simple, clear, concise. Everyone else, what the ****.

Also, sorry OP, really awesome job you did here. I was not trying to invite drama on your thread, to you I also feel I owe some sort of apology even though I don't feel like I was inviting any.

 

[RacerX00]

@MichBolt @ARob @atc98092 Calling your attention to this heavy derail of a very useful, highly trafficked thread that should probably have clarity over time and not, whatever this was/is. I could not have been taken more out of context in my intentions. I made a joke about GM engineers being good at cost cutting down to technicalities of regulation at the expense of what some believe, our potential safety. I was not calling out anyone personally. Apologies again to both @LaughingSuperCruiser and @pkaso .

 

[stangbat]

I did the diode mod on my 2022 EV. Guess I'll have to look into doing this on an EV since it is a little different than the EUV. Should be possible. Thanks for the info!

Edit: Ordered the PWM dimmer with bypass. I'll update with my progress and pics on an EV vs. an EUV.

 

[ARob]

Hey all, let's keep things respectful and get back to the original point, the mode this OP did to improve safety on rear tail lights.

While a little heated discussion is good, let's not forget to respect differing opinions. There probably isn't a right vs wrong in this, and really, who cares if, why, or how GM dropped the ball. All of this debating over hurt feelings just detracts from the solutions a few members have found. Maybe someone will commercialize it?