Page 1 of 2
Amber , red or clear lenses for turn signals
Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 6:32 pm
by blues2cruise
It has been suggested that clear signal lenses look nicer than the amber ones that are currently on my bike. However, I think amber is safer....
What are your opinions?
Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 6:46 pm
by dr_bar
I think the clear lens' do look better and with the amber bulb are more than safe enough and highly visible...
Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 10:52 pm
by Gummiente
I've had red lenses on the rear signals of my last five street bikes and I've been told they they are all quite visible.
Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 2:58 am
by slimcolo
My BMWs and my Honda dirt bike have the amber lenses that look like crap. I prefer the red that is stock on my Harley and the Gold Wing. BTW I think most clear lenses look even worse than the amber.
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 2:33 pm
by HYPERR
According to NHTSA amber signal lights are 20% more effective at preventing rear end collision than red ones. I agree with this as I always thought red turnsignals on cars blend in with the red taillight and is very difficult to see. Wasn't amber turnsignals the law at one time?
As for looking cool and being safe at the same time, I like amber LEDs inside a white lens cover.
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 4:00 pm
by Gummiente
HYPERR wrote:According to NHTSA amber signal lights are 20% more effective at preventing rear end collision than red ones.
If you believe that amber lights give you a 20% better chance of preventing a rear-end collision, you are already living on borrowed time. Mirrors, shoulder checks, proper lane position, hand signals and a 360 degree continuous scan of the traffic situation are what will save your arse.
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 4:19 pm
by blues2cruise
I know what he means about the lights blending in on cars...amber signals are so much more noticeable than red on cars....
I am still pondering.....thank you all for the feedback.
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 4:30 pm
by Gummiente
blues2cruise wrote:...amber signals are so much more noticeable than red on cars....
On cars, yes. The average signal light dimensions are around 3" X 5" on those, yet people still manage not to see them. On bikes, the average flashing 2.5" diameter lens looks more like a distant flashing yellow traffic light to the average distracted Soccer Mom.
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 5:16 pm
by blues2cruise
It wouldn't matter if we had a lighthouse beacon on the back for those distracted drivers.
The sooner the laws come in prohibiting cell phone use while driving the better. (and reading, shaving, eating a bowl of cereal or whatever...)
People need to be legislated back to just driving while driving because a great many have shown they will not be responsible unless there are genuine consequences.
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 2:24 am
by HYPERR
Gummiente wrote:HYPERR wrote:According to NHTSA amber signal lights are 20% more effective at preventing rear end collision than red ones.
If you believe that amber lights give you a 20% better chance of preventing a rear-end collision, you are already living on borrowed time. Mirrors, shoulder checks, proper lane position, hand signals and a 360 degree continuous scan of the traffic situation are what will save your arse.
I don't see how quoting a NHTSA study or even believing them makes one a terrible rider.
But anyway, to add to your post, when stopped at a light, I always have the bike in gear and have an escape route if it looks imminent that the car behind me will fail to stop in time. Also when I look in the rearview mirror and I see a car coming up from behind quite fast, I flash my brakelight, and about 999 times out of a 1000 times, the car slows down quite a bit.
