REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum

taylor192 · 04-01-2009, 01:31 PM

From what I've read the law seems the same as in Ontario.
- As long as the lamp is not visible, its legal.

The catch in Ontario was: that glow on the road could be coming from a neon sign on a building, thus if the officer cannot see the physical lamp, there's no regulation governing how much light/glow can be on a roadway.

I've been pulled over several times in Ontario for it, never given a ticket, just caught the attention of officers cause my kit does this:

sho_bc · 04-01-2009, 03:15 PM

Do a search for a more thorough response, but the short and skinny of it is that the lights must be covered while on a highway (ie. public roadway)

46_valentinor · 04-01-2009, 06:37 PM

its illegal to have it on and having the tube exposed to the public on the highway.

ninjatune · 04-01-2009, 10:01 PM

It's also illegal according to the good taste police.

CRS · 04-01-2009, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninjatune

It's also illegal according to the good taste police.

Especially when put on a Mercedes...

threezero · 04-01-2009, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r6_4life

its illegal to have it on and having the tube exposed to the public on the highway.

so is it ok to show it off while the car is parked?

taylor192 · 04-02-2009, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRS

Especially when put on a Mercedes...

Save those comments for another thread, I'm looking for a real answer.

taylor192 · 04-02-2009, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sho_bc

Do a search for a more thorough response, but the short and skinny of it is that the lights must be covered while on a highway (ie. public roadway)

I've searched many forums and cannot get a consistent response.

Found a few that have beaten the ticket since the bulbs were not visible, yet it seems the police are going to ticket it more often here than Ontario. Oh well, time to sell it, I'm getting old.

Soundy · 04-02-2009, 06:59 AM

Short answer: it's legal to HAVE, but not legal for use on the street... and the key part: IT MUST BE COVERED WITH AN OPAQUE COVER while on the street (that technically includes parking lots and the like as well). "Not visible" isn't sufficient to the law; it must be fully covered.

Edit: ps. agree with CRS

taylor192 · 04-02-2009, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soundy

IT MUST BE COVERED WITH AN OPAQUE COVER while on the street

Weird. Where is that written in the law?

zulutango · 04-02-2009, 08:38 AM

Dang it Soundy...you beat me to the punch. Now let's grab some popcorn & sit back and watch the rationalization and knit-picking begin

Adsdeman · 04-02-2009, 08:40 AM

Gay!

PACER · 04-02-2009, 10:54 AM

There are a couple of places the law applies for undergay lamps...

General lighting requirements
4.02 (1) A vehicle on a highway must only be equipped with and use lamps, reflectors or other illuminating devices authorized by this Division or authorized in writing by the director.
(2) A vehicle on a highway must be equipped with lamps equivalent to those provided by the original manufacturer in http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/reg/...8/26_58-01.htm (10 of 25)9/13/2005 10:36:27 AM Motor Vehicle Act -- Motor Vehicle Act Regulations - Divisions 1-4 accordance with the requirements that applied under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada), or a predecessor to that Act, at the time of vehicle manufacture.
(3) All lamps, lamp bulbs and reflectors required or permitted by this Division must comply with
(a) the approved standards established by the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada) and the applicable SAE standards,
(b) the conditions of use described in this Division, and
(c) the requirements of Table 1 of the Schedule to this Division.
(4) The function of 2 or more lamps or reflectors may be combined if each function meets the following requirements:
(a) no turn signal lamp may be combined optically with a stop lamp unless the stop lamp is extinguished when the turn signal is flashing;
(b) a clearance lamp must not be combined optically with a tail-lamp or identification lamp.
(5)The director may exempt vehicles or classes of vehicles from the requirements of this section.

The section requiring a cover is here as these lamps would be considered off-road lamps as they are not permitted under the regs.

Off-road lamps
4.25 Despite section 4.04 (2) (c), a vehicle equipped with off-road lamps when on a highway must have the off-road lamps concealed with opaque covers.

Berzerker · 04-02-2009, 11:19 AM

You know what guys... 5 posts in this thread have some sort of opinion on the look of underglow. Keep the negative comments to yourselves. Just because its not your taste it doesn't mean you have to post in a thread that was simple question.

Pacer I'm disappointed in your choosing to follow suit as well calling it undergay. Just because a trend is no longer popular doesn't mean you get the right to talk negatively about it. People have their own tastes and this wasn't a "What do you think about underglow?" thread.

Berz out.

taylor192 · 04-02-2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berzerker

You know what guys... 5 posts in this thread have some sort of opinion on the look of underglow.

and I bet not one have clicked my sig link to see what my car actually looks like.

I may drive a Benz, yet the UG certainly isn't out of place on mine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berzerker

Keep the negative comments to yourselves. Just because its not your taste it doesn't mean you have to post in a thread that was simple question.

Its always funny to get compliments from Mercedes owners that recognize the McLaren colours and paint scheme, and modding a car that rarely gets modded, then get trashed by Honda owners for "ruining a Benz".

My take on it is those that cannot afford higher end cars would leave it stock, cause Mercedes defines "luxury". Those that can afford higher end cars treat their cars as toys, and aren't as concerned with leaving them stock to define lunacy, aka luxury.

There's appropriate places to mock my car, I'd rather avoid mocking it everywhere especially when I need a question answered. I'm disappointed that a moderator chose to make an asshat comment.

There's pics of it in the Euro section with the UG on, feel free to mock it there. Here's one with the angel eyes and UG on:

skidmark · 04-02-2009, 11:46 AM

Underglow is defined as an "off road lamp" in the MVAR.

!Yaminashi · 04-02-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by taylor192

I'm not gonna lie, I think that looks awesome

zulutango · 04-02-2009, 01:11 PM

Munch munch munch...anyone got any melted butter and a beer?

Soundy · 04-02-2009, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berzerker

You know what guys... 5 posts in this thread have some sort of opinion on the look of underglow. Keep the negative comments to yourselves. Just because its not your taste it doesn't mean you have to post in a thread that was simple question.

HAHAHAH this is RS, what did you expect? Everyone's a smartass - doesn't even mean they actually think it's ugly, such comments are just as often meant to get a rise... and indeed they have.

Berzerker · 04-02-2009, 06:37 PM

This isn't the section for "getting a rise" this is the police section and should be treated with the respect it deserves.

Berz out.

zulutango · 04-02-2009, 08:00 PM

I think it IS ?

taylor192 · 04-03-2009, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soundy

HAHAHAH this is RS, what did you expect? Everyone's a smartass - doesn't even mean they actually think it's ugly, such comments are just as often meant to get a rise... and indeed they have.

I'm on several other forums, and many have a "smack" section to keep the smartass comments out of "technical" threads.

Hell you can mock my car all you want in the pictures thread, just when I ask for technical/law/... advice, please leave the thread uncluttered.