In the school district where my kid goes, there seems to be a perpetual shortage of bus drivers. When I was growing up, this issue was mitigated through the use of burnout high school students with one or two years of driving experience being entrusted to drive buses in exchange for getting out of school for two periods or so. I’ve written about this before, coming from the era before parents actually loved their children. This isn’t done anymore, which is partially why there’s a driver shortage, which is why I had to drive my kid to school this morning, which is why I happened to be behind this Ram truck, and which is why I happened to notice this issue with its taillights.
I think the issue I have with these taillights is an interesting one, because it represents a sort of one step forward, two steps back situation. The step forward is that these trucks – which I think are 2023 to 2024 Ram pickups – have incorporated amber rear indicators, which have been shown in studies to be safer to varying degrees.
Personally, I think amber rear indicators make more sense, because they are visually distinct from the red brake lamps, and eliminate a potential source of confusion. However, to really be effective, I think there is another important criteria, and it’s in this one that the Ram falls surprisingly short.
Let’s look at what these taillights we’re discussing today are actually like:
So, they’re fairly typical modern pickup truck taillights in size and shape; large, vertically-oriented, and these appear to contain integrated into their middle sections a radar module for blind spot detection. There appears to be plenty of lens real estate for all the crucial functions: brake, taillight, indicator. The reverse lamp is incorporated into the center radar module section.
Now, here’s where things get weird: I was behind one of these trucks, as it was simultaneously braking and indicating a left turn – an extremely common situation. You would think by looking at that taillight that one of the red areas may be a brake lamp, and one of the clear areas may blink for the turn indicator.
What actually happens is this:
Those clear areas seem to do double-duty as both brake lamp and indicator. And yes, the indicator is amber, but for some strange reason the indicators and brake lamps share areas on the taillight, so you can only do one or the other: show a brake lamp or indicate a turn.
Why?
This makes no sense to me: why would you want to disable a crucial warning lamp like a brake light when indicating a turn, especially if you both have the area and have taken the effort to make an amber indicator? This isn’t the 1980s, when truck-makers were cranking out cheap taillights with just two bulbs in them!
There’s plenty of room for separate brake and indicator areas, and there is no logical reason why a taillight-producer in this modern age should be accepting the miserable limitations of the past! What if one taillight is damaged? Then you would be completely brakelightless should you have the temerity to indicate a turn!
I would argue that having separate and distinct functional regions in a taillight is as important as color; it’s helpful for people to be able to recognize such areas and therefore be primed to know what to expect when a given area of the lamp is illuminated. And it’s not like that’s a hard thing to accomplish; hell, my incredibly minimal and spartan Citroën 2CV does this:
I just got these working this past weekend, so I’m excited for a reason to include a picture of these taillights in here. And of course there’s no reverse lamp, because that sort of thing is the same kind of decadent luxury that got Marie Antionette separated from her head.
The point here is that while I respect Ram’s decision to use amber rear indicators, the decision to make turn signals and brake lamps mutually exclusive is just baffling to me. It’s a step backward, and is absolutely unnecessary considering modern taillight hardware.
The state of taillampery in America is still in flux; I hope one day there will be some agreed-upon best practices, and I would hope that among these practices is one that decrees that each function of a taillight should get its own, discreet area, and that multiple signals can be displayed concurrently.
One can dream.
Interestingly, this method isn’t allowed under ECE regulations. I’ve seen those Ram trucks in Austria and Germany: the upper zone is for braking and the lower for the turn signal indicators.
See this video. Another video.
The reason is FMVSS requires the minimum size of four square inches for amber turn signal indicators but none for red. Using both upper and lower zones probably meets this stupid regulation. No studies had been done to indicate why four square inches is “ideal” size. That’s why the Americans cannot have the gimmick sequential turn signal indicators in amber colour.
“This isn’t the 1980s, when truck-makers were cranking out cheap taillights with just two bulbs in them!”
Actually, they were mandated in the early 1970s with two redundancy systems in case one bulb burns out. That was resciended after the manufacturers invoked the idiotic 1972 federal law, Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, forcing NHTSA to prove that the safety regulation would save lives and be cost effective. (the first generation airbags failed that act so badly!)
Autopian Lurker here…. FYI – I have been cursed and in Automotive Lighting for almost 30 years (yikes)….Fed Regs mandate for a combined STOP/TURN, that the STOP cannot be activated and must remain OFF while TURN is activated. This is applied to flashing RED STOP for TURN or AMBER flashing TURN.
Straight from the horse’s mouth! Now can you explain in exhaustive nerdy detail WHY IN DOG’S NAME that is the case? (Regards from Canada.)
Yes, unknown and unknowable….the NHTSA brains work in their own way.
Probably rooted in these:
(1) “That’s is the way we have always done.” (since some very early edition of the rule).
(2) Safety for folks with color blindness – safety and overall conspicuity (if someone cannot detect RED from AMBER then the high intensity function is ON with no visual ON/OFF change, that indicates the TURN is active).
(3) a thing called “Retina Fatigue Negative Afterimage”. In the case if Bright RED and then changing to bright AMBER, the Amber has a GREEN appearance due to eye color sensitivity and eye cone fatigue of RED sensitive cones. This is noticeable in LED Lamps on vehicles when you see this condition at a stop light/sign. Quite a weird one.
That is all I can imagine. Brain breaks trying to figure out NHTSA reasoning. One of many for sure in the US / Canadian Regs FMVSS108/CMVSS108.
It’s like Technology Connections wished on a monkey’s paw.
T-Con has been an NPR contributor for pieces about EV’s. HE’S ONE OF US, BOYS!
Wait, WHAT?!
I need to find these.
Here’s one piece he did for NPR’s “On Point”:
https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2022/08/09/americas-electric-vehicle-future-government-car-biden
Thanks!
You’re forgetting about the CHMSL, which has exactly one function for a reason.
Side note, the CHMSL on my daily quit working this morning. I’ve had to resolder cracked joints previously, guess I’m pulling the rear seat apart after work to fix it again.
If my Dodge has a chmsl, it’s blocked by the topper most pickups have.
Surely that low end trailer brake light approach on a new truck is illegal?
Legally speaking, the topper is supposed to be wired into the truck to replace the CHMSL functionality. Most toppers I can find online have a CHMSL integrated above the rear window, same as factory. You can and arguably should get a fix it ticket if your CHMSL is blocked by a topper and not functional.
Not sure what you mean by “low end trailer brake light approach”. If you mean the hitch receiver auxiliary brake light plugged into your trailer plug, not certain if illegal but they should be if they flash along with a turn signal.
Personally, all pickups should have a LED bar in the gap below the tailgate, specifically one that includes turn signal functionality. There’s a reason all of my vehicles have LED tail bulbs and rear turn signals (if applicable). I like people behind me stopping.
I think he means, that like trailer lights, when you hit the brakes it stops indicating a turn, as there are only two lights back there (or one bulb with two filaments).
That’s the opposite of how trailer lights work. A 4pin trailer plug has Left, Right, Running Light, Ground. Brake gets overridden by turn signal on that side. 7 pin works the same. Brake controllers provide voltage between 0-12v so they are not a reliable signal to illuminate brake lights.
My simple 4-pin setup with an isolated controller most assuredly stops flashing the turn signals when the brakes are on in favor of the brake lights. So has every other utility trailer setup I have ever had. I assume 7-pin setups are a whole lot smarter about it, and the European ones are better still. The OEM BMW trailer harness I have for my BMW wagon even has reverse and rear fog lights for the trailer.
That’s not how the trailer is supposed to work. L/R are combination feeds for turn and brake, just like every vehicle with combination brake/turn lights. Brake only when turn indicator off, turn indicator overrides brake when activated on that side.
7 pin adds a reverse signal (reverse lights or hydraulic brake disable), 12v constant supply, and trailer brake signal (0-12v brake apply). The other 4 pins are ground, left brake/indicator, right brake/indicator, and running lights.
Your trailer setup is wired incorrectly if braking overrides turn signal.
Exactly.
My older Dodge has all red tail lights and I will be adding amber turn signals to it, along with separate turn signal functionality for trailers, as I especially prefer side turn signals on trailers, as well as the truck.
Because my truck is four tons empty, small vehicles can out brake me from behind.
I will be adding an enhanced bumper eventually.
That and the 10 ton rated receiver should help with anyone not paying attention.
I’m going to try side diffracting fiber optical lights driven by LEDs.
Also, I use native coloured LEDs, as they are dramatically more visible than filtered.
Even on toppers that are wired, and trucks that are, it’s just not generally going to be kept up with on trucks constantly in use.
I have multiple toppers for one truck.
I was never impressed with the lowest bidder approach to a single chmsl anyway.
There’s no perfect way to get the trailer wiring I want and the custom rig will be a pain.
I’d like a dude to side brake lamp and day/night settings, but larger area is a workaround.
What I find most baffling is that this is a legal setup in a country that insisted on sealed beam headlamps for decades.
The last Cherokee did this as well. Drives me nuts.
My VW GTI does it too. AMber turn signals and brake lights are the same light
So more half assery from RAM?
Color me not surprised in the least…
My 2022 RAM has this. Seems ok to me but I don’t really look at the back of it. The vehicles are confusing to me are the new small Buick SUVs, that for whatever reason the brake light is in the bumper, not on the one in the middle of the gate.
Say Don, my kid told me her school bus driver, which is a middle-aged woman is constantly running over a curbs and she finds it hilarious
Chevy twin has it too
I’m not even joking, bumper taillights should be illegal. It’s so easy to miss them in so many driving situations!
Non-dedicated, non-amber turn signals are a a war crime.
Counterpoint – I don’t care if turn signals are red, amber, green, purple, or polka dot – just USE the damned things. Blinking light on one side of the vehicle means that’s th way you are going (theoretically, at least). I seriously don’t care what color it is, just USE it!
It’s sad that point needs to be made 🙁
Sorry Torch while I agree those taillights are incomprehensible I have to say older generation parents in general clearly loved their kids more because they didn’t send them out into the world when they turned 40 totally unprepared for life. Sure so.e may say releasing kids totally unprepared is cruel but today’s society disagrees. In the old days teenagers were intelligent and capable enough to run their own lives. Now many people in society reach middle age and are incompetent to run their own lives.
“Old man yells at cloud” energy.
The kids are alright.
If you love something set it free? Certainly worked for us feral Gen-X kids.
Capable enough to *ruin* their own lives, maybe.
Discrete =/= discreet
Your right!
I’m amazed a Ram driver used the signal tbh.
A rare moment of lucidity!
The lead picture gave me an ear worm.
“So Close, Yet So far
All I smell is diesel fart
Forever confusing on where you are
And Nothing else matters”
That is a righteous rant. I am sure somewhere deep in the bowels of Stellantis some beancounter got an achievement award for saving $2.15 on consolidating the brake and turn signals.
that 2.15 was their profit last quarter.
ouch! lol
My 2022 has these taillights as well. I believe they totally removed the amber lights from the current iteration of the trucks taillights though which sucks.
Imagine there were people available who would be willing to work, drive a bus for a couple of hours a day, be paid reasonably low, could probably speak 2 languages and would be living in the area? Ah nah wait, we’re kicking them out of the country, because we don’t want them here.
So the shortage of qualified bus drivers continues. Maybe Tesla can make FSD for school buses soon! Sounds like a great plan!
Yes who cares if those unvetted illegals were child molesters, rapists, murders, unable to read road signs as long as they were cheap let us allow them to drive our children around.
Hey folks running the Autopian, I know we have a lot of patience for different perspectives here, and this person in particular has occasionally pushed up on that, but this is a line I am going to draw extremely clearly as a member: this sort of comment has to be removed. We cannot allow racism and xenophobia like this, least of all when horrifying real-world violence against immigrants and others is rapidly expanding past anything in recent memory.
I trust this site to be a place that welcomes all people, and it can’t be that if it allows blatant bigotry like this. If I begin to see this sort of comment regularly, I will be leaving the site – I’m struggling with how to help protect my neighbors right now; I have no time, patience, or least of all money for any organization that allows this sort of crap to stay standing. (I’ll happily edit this post if it’s removed.)
To the poster above, I have very little to say other than that I am deeply thankful for the varied and innumerable contributions of migrants and immigrants to my life, my region, my ways of thinking and being, and, far less importantly, to my local car culture.
Enough of the fiat guy’s bullcrap.
Tired of the bad and racist takes.
I second your motion…
Border criminals are not migrants.
And your false claims of racism and “xenophobia” are dismissed for what they are.
If you are uncomfortable with citizens being employed at living wages, there are other countries where the serfdom system is still enforced.
So you’re actually ok with that idiotic comment?
Which one?
I don’t think we should subsidize human trafficking, cartels involved in extortion, kidnapping, smuggling and murder.
A country without borders cannot claim to be a country.
Let’s keep the narcomensajes on bridges in other places.
We have enough of our own criminals already.
Experts believe there are 20,000 serial killers operating freely on both sides of the border.
Some people don’t think that is a good thing.
I’m onboard with your take. Light-hearted joking is one thing. This guy isn’t joking, he is vile.
Maybe one should take a look at the child molesters, rapists, and other turds in DC and the WH before throwing stones like an ignoramus?
Just sayin’ ya know….
Did they eat your dogs and cats too?
I don’t want someone who is happy to break our laws be responsible for children in a 25,000 pound vehicle. There’s a reason bus drivers are required to have a CDL, criminal background check, and submit to fingerprinting before they can get hired. Any of which should flag an illegal immigrant to ICE for deportation.
If you think illegal immigration should not be a crime, okay I understand your position. Currently however it is a crime with punishment prescribed by law.
Let them get their qualifications. Let them become legal. The process takes forever. It is clear there is a need for people who can do simple, menial, basic work. If we look at other countries, especially Japan, you’ll see it is aging, rapidly. The US is ‘younger’ but eventually will age as well, to a point where a lot of jobs would be available but literally nobody around to fill in the spot.
Either we go full Robots and AI and thus eliminate a lot of those jobs with automation, but which also might eliminate regular jobs of regular Americans, or we get people onboard to do those basic jobs.
Simple, menial, basic work, is how you would describe driving a 25,000+ lb, 35-45 foot long, commercial vehicle? Or are we creeping the scope to any job we don’t want to pay a decent wage for?
We disagree on the immigration topic, but I believe we can agree that too many jobs don’t pay anything close to decent money.
Google’s AI answer is bus drivers make $16-$28 per hour, which may vary the yearly salary significantly based on benefits and if pay is amortized across the year or strictly school days. Basic calculations say anywhere from $14,400-$25,200 for 5hr per school day, 180 school days a year, to $33,280-$58,240 if paid full time year round. No wonder no one wants to drive a school bus.
Here’s a good podcast about the economics of school bus driver jobs (and why no one wants them): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frC3BB5yVGY
I didn’t say driving a school bus is menial work.
But yeah it seems the gov’d and schools don’t see it as a high paid job…
Not even a median pay job, it’s borderline poverty income. Almost literally a wage slave.
Proverb from the ussr
“They pretend to pay us.
We pretend to work.”
Predatory companies hate that threatening to fire someone from a $10 an hour job without benefits makes the victims laugh.
Plenty of citizens want to work.
Supply & Demand.
You can juice labor supply with immigration to keep wages low, or you can restrict immigration causing the wages to increase. Basic economics.
I’m fine with higher wages. Just don’t be surprised everything outside the US is going to be cheaper, for their citizens, until it hits the borders (upon import) and you need to pay a ton of tariffs (to the government) so they can avoid the local production to collapse. Like now.
Soon you’ll have to wait for vegetables and fruit from overseas (oh, wait, that’s already happening) because harvesting them in the states is uneconomical.
It is a death spiral. Higher wages. Higher domestic product prices. Higher tariffs. Higher costs for everyone. Higher wages needed… etc
IF the US was in the state of the 60s where it was producing most of the mid and high end goods themselves, then cutting off access to the rest of world had little consequences except less wealth coming into the country from the buyers who wanted American goods.
But now there is no domestic production capacity and the US HAS to import things. From electronics to trucks (made in Canada and Mexico). Putting a higher price tag on those things don’t magically makes them get produced in the US – that takes years if not a decade. And great investments. And people to man those production lines. People. Where do we get them from? We teach the bus driver to be on the production line of trucks, chips, solar panels, low cost furniture? Then who is going to drive the school bus ?
The situation is way more complicated than people want to believe.
It will be fixed or end in collapse.
We are far past the tipping point.
Most current problems result from profiteering, not costs.
Profiteering, and especially vertical integration of entire supply chains. All the added costs from deeply interwoven supply chains across dozens of companies are paychecks to hundreds of people. Vertical integration siphons hundreds of paychecks to a handful of people, along with all the power that comes with that income.
Agreed