Given that cars are basically computers with wheels, and so many features get enabled/disabled in the factory based on the destination country (and whether you've paid for them), you'd think if it was illegal in the UK it would be disabled, yes my last few cars all had it.
If you look at the lower right hand picture in the link I posted you will see the standard arrangement on London buses and also used on the more numerous double decker RT class.
Above the registration number are stop and tail lights side by side and above them a double headed arrow for left and right indicators in addition to the semaphores.
When it became illegal for any vehicle to not have rear lights on both sides of the vehicle (1st October 1958 IIRC) LT were given an exemption. As a result, when they were sold on they instantly became illegal to drive on the public highway!
This is a headache for preservationists who whish to restore/preserve their buses in as close to their original state and various methods have been used, mostly out of character.
But Jim Andress, who restored/preserved RF 366, has very ingeniously copied the layout on the nearside over the reversing light - not original, obviously! - but not the black surround so that it is virtually invisible in the picture.
My grandad's brother was prosecuted for having flashing indicators some time between 1932 when he started driving and 1939. Fined 7/6d.
Bill
If they were patented in 1938, that suggests it would have been towards the end of that period. Was it a foreign car, or how else was it fitted with flashing indicators?
Maybe it was the same situation as flashing red/white lights on bikes, which used to be technically illegal when they first came out because they weren't on all the time but only intermittently - completely ignoring the fact that flashing lights are more conspicuous than steady ones and so are very desired when marking hazards, or cars that are planning to change direction. A case of the law being a long way behind common sense improvements.
As long as the road has a 30mph limit, it doesn't need to be lit for you to show no lights.
Mine just turned on the offside side and rear lights. There must have been a separate wire down each side. I don't know what happened about the rear number plate light - pictures don't show anything but I assume there must have been one. (I don't think I ever had occasion to use the parking lights.)
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)" writes
Make your mind up pet. First you say yes then you say no. The Riley 1.5 which my brother owned c1965 WAS twin carb.
As far as bikes go, flashing rear lights are a massive improvement - as you say, they are highly visible - the batteries also last a very long time.
Flashing front lights are less so. The ones that are white versions of the rear ones serve the same purpose well, but the intensely bright lights that many cyclists are using (seems to be intensely bright or none at all around here) should be banned from road use, unless a proper steady dipped/steady main/weak flash version with the switch right at the riders fingertips can be arranged. The flash catches your eye and you automatically look at it, only to be totally dazzled by the brightness, making them dangerous.
It is bad enough with high intensity car lights bouncing on bumps, but on bikes, even when not flashing, they swing from side to side, bounce around and generally point a high intensity beam in all sorts of unintended directions. They have no height control, are mounted on handlebars, close to drivers' eye level - or, even worse, worn on the head, so the cyclist sees you, looks at you and dazzles you immediately!
SteveW
Though even if it's not a legal requirement, it's probably a very good idea if your car is parked in an isolated, unlit area, to make it as conspicuous as possible - and if you are going to leave the lights on for a long time, better (in the days before LEDs) to light one pair of lights rather than two.
Yes. I have heard that at three years, they need to pretty well replace the entire brake system and much of the suspension.
SteveW
It depends upon your problems. I have badly arthritic knees and find getting in and out of some normal cars uncomfortable and find it even worse trying to maintain 70 to 80 on a motorway - often having to switch to my left foot on the accelerator for a while to rest my right leg ... thank God for cruise control on my current car! On the other hand, getting in and out of my kitcar (Lotus 7 style) is no problem, as its more a case (even for fit and healthy drivers) of lifting youself with your arms much of the way and the design suits that. Incidentally, the lower, flatter position of driving the kitcar seems to be far better for my knees and I have no problem on long trips.
SteveW
You can still do that, as long as you inform your insurance company and you'll probably need to switch to a more specialised company.
It is modifying the bodyshell (or chassis) that is the real problem. Changing the engine is fine, but if you need to widen the tunnel to fit a different gearbox or you shorten a ladder chassis, you need to put it through the IVA.
It does seem daft that modifying one part of the car forces an IVA, where presumably an older car may fail because it doesn't meet new reqwuirements on seatbelts, lighting, etc. It would have made far more sense for a simple Engineer's report that the modification did not adversely affect the structural strength in such cases. I think that the introduction of SVA/IVA was a good thing for newly built vehicles, imports and major modifications, but covers that bit too much, purely to satisfy other EU countries in case you visit there.
SteveW
There have been suggestions for years that legislation might be needed to force electric vehicle manufacturers to add artificial sound to their vehicles so that pedestrian can hear their approach. There has been much debate about what sort of sound to add - my preference would be an engine sound, as pedestrians are pre-conditioned to know what that means!
SteveW
I hope they don't do that as people will want 'personalised' engine sounds like mobile phone ring tones.
It's not necessary anyway as people will get used to quiet cars as they have with quieter IC cars.
The only one I've actually examines was all done by contacts on the indicator switch. So not sure if modern ones do it all with clever electronics.
That's unusual given it's normally fitted to German etc cars, ie LHD. But all the ones I've had with it fitted allow you to select left or right with the indicator switch. Which does mean extra wiring.
I think some early Fords with this system also stopped the engine starting if you didn't cancel it before switching on. A cause of merriment to the AA. ;-)
Only the likes of bert wouldn't understand the different between a Riley called 1 1/2 litre and 1.5.
But I should clarify. There may well have been at one time a 1 1/2 with twin carbs.
But all 1.5 had them.
I did have a bit of a problem when I first got the Boxster as the floor seems to be below many a kerb level, and the seats low too. But soon got used to it. You can always lever yourself up using an elbow on the rear wing. ;-)
Yes , and there would be too many silly ones. I suppose all French cars could have the Crazy Frog.
Not sure about that, when Trolleybuses replaced Trams they were nicknamed the silent death by some. Dionne Warwick got a bit close.
G.Harman
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.