Turn signals.
They’re a good invention.
Use them.
Every motor vehicle legal for road use has to have a certain number of exterior lights
and indicators to be considered roadworthy.
This is practically a worldwide truth, and for good reason.
Putting our fragile meat bags into metal boxes capable of traveling speeds well in excess
of what our bodies can naturally accomplish is inherently dangerous.
To help make this activity just a little bit safer, governments world-over have mandated
that these high-speed mechanical conveyance devices be fitted with indicator lights to
help inform the humans in control of other dangerous driving machines just what sort
of action the vehicles around them are currently doing, or about to do.
Hopefully, this helps avoid collisions.
And it does!
But there’s one continent in particular
--North America--
that allows tail lights that are
proven to be a safety compromise, that would seem bizarre to anyone living in Europe, and
which frustrate me to no end.
What is that compromise?
Well, let’s take a look.
Oh no, I’m gonna have to go outside for this, aren’t I?
Gah!
Nature!
This is a 2002 Honda Odyssey.
It’s a minivan, the most exciting and desirable class of vehicles available today.
This vehicle is following European tail light standards.
Notice this red section of the tail light.
This is the brake light, activated by the brake light switch on the brake pedal, and
whenever it’s lit, you know without a doubt that the driver is slowing down (at least
barring a mechanical issue or a driver riding the brake).
With the aid of the third brake light, there are a total of three indicators to tell drivers
following the Odyssey that it is slowing down.
Now notice this amber section of the tail light.
Whenever it’s lit, you know that the driver is signalling for a turn.
There is no ambiguity between these two signals.
Red always means stopping, and amber always means turning.
This is a 2013 Chevrolet Volt.
You may have immediately noticed the compromise here but let’s make it more clear.
If I step on the brake pedal, three lights illuminate just like in the Odyssey.
But if I hit the turn signal, now one of the brake lights has started flashing.
There is no amber indicator of any kind on the rear of this vehicle.
In North America - that’s right, Canada, too - the motor vehicle standards allow for
red turn signals on the rear.
But even worse, they allow for one indicator to share the function of both a brake light
and a turn signal.
To manufacturers who are continuing to use this lighting setup, I have two words:
Stop it!
Now if it’s somehow not obvious that this is a safety compromise, let’s go over the
reasons why.
Recall a statement I made 11 sentences ago.
“There is no ambiguity between these two signals.
Red always means stopping, and amber always means turning.”
Well, there most certainly IS signal ambiguity when it comes to this vehicle.
For other drivers, the only way to discern the meaning of the signal is its behavior.
A solid light indicates braking, and a flashing light indicates turning.
Fair enough, but this creates far too many unclear and thus potentially dangerous situations.
Say you’re following a vehicle with a broken tail light.
If it were the Volt, then every time the brake pedal is depressed, only one side would illuminate.
To an American driver, this would appear as a turn signal until the point in which they
have registered that it isn’t flashing.
In essence, its function is delayed for however long it takes the person behind you to realize
that the left tail light is out.
Granted, the third brake light, mandated for passenger vehicles in 1986, helps by only
illuminating with the brake pedal, but then you have to rely on the driving knowing that.
At a glance, this looks like a driver signaling for a right turn, which is not an ideal assumption
to make.
They might be slamming on the brake.
Also, if you’re on an angle and can only see one of the tail lights, again you can’t
get a clear picture of what’s going on.
If you’re looking from this angle and the driver has their left turn signal on, then
you couldn’t see that they are stopping.
This might be an uncommon problem, but imagine you’re following this car through a left
turn and you can’t see the other tail light.
With the left one flashing, it’s up to you to see that the third brake light is lit.
See the problem?
Of course if you have a brake light go out, now you’ve also lost a turn signal!
Say on this car that the left tail light went out.
Then, every time I step on the brake, it will briefly look as though I’ve engaged my right
turn signal, since this light hasn’t lit up.
And even worse, if I am using the right turn signal, now this light can’t function as
a brake light, and the only thing that will indicate that I’m slowing down is the third
brake light.
So with this light out, and that light flashing the only indicator that you’re slowing down
or stopping is the Center High-Mounted Stop Light (CHMSL).
That’s pretty dumb!
Now for the Europeans out there, you might ask what this vehicle looks like with its
hazards on.
Let me show you!
They look like this.
Now neither one of these lights can function as a brake light!
If I were driving around with my hazards on, the only indicator that I’m slowing down
is the third brake light.
I think it’s for this reason that in Illinois, and other states I’m sure, you cannot drive
with your hazards on; it’s considered illegal.
And this is a shame because there are plenty of reasons where you would want to do that,
such as letting other drivers know that you’re on a spare tire and warning them that you’re
driving slowly.
But with this car, with the hazards on, TWO THIRDS of its brake lights are no longer functional
as brake lights.
In the Odyssey, the hazards can be on and the brake lights work completely normally.
But this car?
Ugh, I can’t stand this design!
Now there are plenty of vehicles here in the States that use red turn signals, but use
separate indicators.
In fact on this Odyssey, from 1999 until 2001, the turn signals were a slightly lighter shade of red.
That’s better, but there’s still ambiguity.
For a vehicle in Europe, red light ALWAYS means braking.
If you ever see red, you know you should slow down.
But here in North America, that’s right Canada too, red could just mean turning.
So long as this is allowed, we will always have to deal with signal ambiguity here in
North America.
While I’m up on my high horse, let me say to you, car manufacturers in America, could
you please just stop?
Why do you continue to use this flawed design?
Are you so concerned with saving a few dollars per car?
Multiple studies have shown that there is a clear safety advantage to using amber turn signals.
Even without a study it should seem obvious--
distinguishing function by color will always be faster than
by whether it’s flashing or not.
My speculative answer as to why this continues to be a thing in North America is that car
designers like the cleaner look of red-only tail lights, and the general public just doesn’t
care enough.
That second part seems clear.
When the new Chevrolet Cruze hatchback was released, GM decided to put in amber turn signals.
SaabKyle04’s review of this car mentioned this, but only as an aside in courtesy of
those who might prefer it.
It’s not preference, people, it’s safety.
It truly baffles me how little people care about this.
And other times, the design seems to be there, but the function is killed.
I was thrilled when I saw the design of the tail lights on both the Chevy Cruze sedan
and the Equinox.
Two white inserts, one of these is probably an amber turn signal!
I thought, good going GM, you fixed yourself.
Nope!
That one is a reverse light, and that one does nothing.
Although, I would bet that if either of these cars is to be sold in Europe, you would indeed
find an amber bulb behind that white lens there.
Even weirder, this problem isn’t limited to American automakers.
Sure, your GM, Ford, and Chrysler products are most likely to use this turn-signal brake-light
two-for-one combo, but a surprising number of Volkswagen and Audi models do it, too.
They couldn’t get away with it in Europe, but in the US they do.
That’s why I think it’s a designer preference.
Plenty of “foreign” automakers --
♪ lively music ♪
Plenty of “foreign” automakers
also use red turn signals on their cars for sale in the US market.
It’s less common to see the shared turn signal and brake light, but it is surprisingly
common in German makes.
Oh, and even the Tesla Model S uses this obnoxious turn signal brake light combo
for models sold domestically.
Yes, I know that’s American but, eh…
[sigh of frustration because this part of the script hadn’t been completely thought out]
Now I get it, how often is this really an issue?
We seem to be doing OK with cars like this.
And a good, defensive driver will probably still treat a red light of any sort as cause
to start slowing down--or at least cover the brake.
But I’d love to see an entity like the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety starting to take
this into account for their safety scores.
I would imagine the IIHS has data on rear-end collisions per vehicle model, and I’d be
curious to see if there’s a clear difference between red-only cars and red-plus-amber.
But the point remains--in Europe at large, a red light on the back of a vehicle will
always mean braking,
and an amber light will always mean turning or a hazard condition.
See red?
Must be braking.
See amber?
Must be turning.
But in the US, see red?
Who knows!?
You’ll have to stare at it for a moment to be sure.
And while I’m griping--I know I’m such a downer--this 16 year old minivan has a feature
that ought to be standard in every car sold today.
Here’s the instrument cluster.
Pretty basic by today’s standards, but it gets the job done.
Now I’ve pulled one of the brake lights out so it isn’t working.
Watch what happens as soon as I step on the brake--
a red light appears.
What does it say?
BRAKE LAMP.
This 16 year old car is monitoring the current going through the brake light circuit, and
when it gets too low, it illuminates a warning light on the dash.
Why is this not just a universal thing?
Another thing, can we make automatic headlights standard?
This vehicle has a light sensor on the dashboard and when it gets dark outside the headlights
come on by themselves.
Even better, they’ll also come on if you turn on the windshield wipers during the day.
I’ve seen more and more people lately driving around at night without their headlights on, and
I think that’s because so many new cars have backlit screens for gauges, so the instrument
cluster is always lit.
In an older car like the Odyssey, it’s obvious that your headlights aren’t on because at
night you can’t see the gauges, but that’s largely not the case anymore.
It’s apparently a little too easy to not notice that you haven’t turned on your headlights.
And also, too many people see the light from their daytime running lights and assume that
their headlights are already on, not realizing that their tail lights aren’t lit for nighttime driving.
So please, let’s get automatic headlights in more cars, OK?
They’re almost all computer controlled via a relay anyway, so could you just stick an
ambient light sensor on the dash and call it a day, thanks.
Now as you may know if you follow this channel, in my family there are now both a Chevy Volt
and a Chevy Bolt EV.
And in the case of the Bolt, it has separate amber turn signals!
How amazing!
Now, I suspect the reason it does is that GM is marketing this car in Europe, and rather
than create two separate tail light designs, they use the same European-compliant version
for both markets.
I think this probably also explains the Chevy Cruze hatchback’s use of amber turn signals.
But this car demonstrates a humorous dedication to design in spite of regulations.
See in the US, tail lights, turn signals, and headlights cannot be on any part of the
vehicle that moves.
So they can’t be on the hood or bonnet, the doors or the boot/trunk/hatch lid/whatever.
On this car, they are on the hatch.
To get around this, GM has installed a second set of redundant brake lights in the bumper
which the vehicle will switch to as soon as the hatch is opened.
Take a look.
What this says to me is that the whole “one lamp for both the turn signal and the brake
light” isn’t so much of a cost-saving measure.
It’s just a design that people like and can get away with.
And I don’t think they should.
Incidentally, I saw an Audi crossover on the road with tail lights like the Bolt, and one
of the LED modules had failed.
The computer had apparently detected this, so for this car,
the left-hand bumper brake light was illuminating in its stead.
It was rather an odd sight, but there was a working brake light on both sides.
That’s a very clever and thoughtful use of redundancy there, Audi.
Good job.
But the fact that the LED failed is a little, um, worrisome.
Anyway, that’s enough hammering on about automotive design for now.
I admit--I like to look at the designs of tail lights and I think they are a huge part
of the look to any vehicle.
I always appreciate a cool-looking tail light, and I can understand the temptation to keep
the design clean by eliminating the amber bulb.
But please.
Think of the children!
Or at the very least, think of the various scenarios we’ve discussed in which having
a separate amber turn signal is clearly advantageous
and creates a safer, less ambiguous driving environment.
Thanks for watching, I hope you enjoyed this video!
This is a little different from most of my videos, and I have Jared S --AKA Wookie Goldberg--
on Twitter for the inspiration to make this.
I was beginning to worry that I was the only human who was remotely concerned about this
stupid design, but it seems at least 12 others agree!
So that’s good news, I guess.
Anyway, as always, thanks to everyone who supports the channel on Patreon, especially
the fine folks scrolling up the screen.
This channel is made possible with the support of people like you, and if you’d like to
join these amazing people and support the channel too, why not take a look at my Patreon page?
Thanks for your consideration, and I’ll see you next time!
Gah!
Nature!
That actually pricked me.
Great going!