JeepinJarhead03 wrote:
it's a 3rd brake light, why the hell would it be on if they weren't braking? Duh..
anyway, i don't have one so i don't know why i'm defending it, on the other hand NHTSA has been running tests for some time with flashing brake lights with timers to switch them to steady on and so far the tests have been favorable
and out of the scenereos of flashing, the 3rd brake light flashing with steady on normal brake lights had slightly higher ratings
they did some rather stranger tests though, such as all brake lights flashing with the 3rd flashing out of sequence with the brake lights, and alternatively flashing either side and what not
instead of quoting anything, can just check this out, i'm really not trying to argue anything, i simply don't have a problem with it
the CHMSL that NHTSA is testing is nothing but a fancy 3rd brake light that does alot more than just flash
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NRD/Multimedia/PDFs/Crash%20Avoidance/2009/811127.pdf
In the 80s, the NHTSA's research showed that a 3rd brake light will decrease rear-end collisions by 50%.
In the late 90s, a follow-up study was done. Mind you, 1986 was the first year it was mandatory for cars, and 96 for trucks. Ever seen an older Dakota with a 3rd brake light on the tailgate?
It's a 96.
At any rate, their follow up study showed something like an 8% decrease in rear-end collisions.
Go figure, tire and brake advances (widespread use of radial tires on all cars, not just late-models, ABS, the trend of going to wider tires, etc) and only an 8% decrease.
For comparison's sake...a base model 1983 Thunderbird came with 195/70-14 tires. in 1993, that was upped to a 215/70-15. That is a significant increase of contact patch, plus add ABS into the equation.
What a torrential crap-storm of the deal.
Just FYI, the reason ThunderbirdJunkie knows most of this is because he did a research paper his Jr. year of High School on why the NHTSA is as useless as boobs growing on a weiner...