Does rear of the R3 comply with DOT regulation?

[Bee]

There's a DOT regulation that says tail lights can't be placed on moving hatches unless there's redundancy elsewhere. Where do they add tails? Bottom somewhere? Federal Government gonna ruin everything. Could the tiny slits at the bottom in the second pic be them? Going to be poopy if they do what they did to the Bolt (meaning the lightbar will be just a running light, blinkers handled by bottom slits and brakes handled by slits plus hatch light). It doesn't need more or bigger light fixtures

Sponsored

 

[LittonLad]

Could they be inside perhaps, and illuminate only when the hatch is open? I think that would meet regs, right? That said, I don’t recall noticing any during the launch event, although this was a high prototype, and will ultimately need to meet EU regs as well, so plenty of scope for change.

 

[justwidomthings]

Whatever way they choose to address that regulation, I hope they choose the weirdest possible way lol

 

[Augsburg]

There's a DOT regulation that says tail lights can't be placed on moving hatches unless there's redundancy elsewhere. . . Federal Government gonna ruin everything.

You're right. the Federal Government should not protect us from idiots that would drive around with their hatch open and the taillights not visible.

 

[racekarl]

There appear to be other compliance issues with the R3's taillights beyond just the hatch opening problem (e.g. no side marker lights). It seems like there is a 0% chance the rear of the R3 makes it to production looking like that.

 

[webfootdawg]

IIRC my Q5 gets around this with lights on the bumper that only respond to brake and blinker settings when the hatch is open.

 

[White Shadow]

The R3 (and even the R2) that we saw may not be the final production version. I'm sure they are close, but there could be small detail changes before production. That said, other vehicles already being sold that have their tailights/brake lights in a moving hatch also have a secondary set of lights lower on the bumper that are enabled when the vehicle's hatch isn't latched. Those lights act as taillights/brake lights to appease DOT rules.

 

[RayzorBEV]

I wonder if Rivian is skirting the regulation by having a dual opening tailgate where by having the flipper rear glass hatch opening independently from the rear tailgate?

 

[Bee]

You're right. the Federal Government should not protect us from idiots that would drive around with their hatch open and the taillights not visible.

This is complicated, how far do we want to parse this? My bottom line is the regulation is outdated and OEMs are both lazy and cheap. How that manifests across the industry varies.

99% of people are clearly the idiots. I'd be that idiot. You think I'm going to sit here and lie and say I'm not going to drive 4 blocks like that from my friends house or whatever really guerilla shit I'm attempting? Of course not.

That being said, Europe has managed to update their regulations to allow for "cooler" tech without people rear ending each other to death or going off mountain roads from being blinded by LEDs that can be aimed in new ways.

It's complicated.

I wonder if Rivian is skirting the regulation by having a dual opening tailgate where by having the flipper rear glass hatch opening independently from the rear tailgate?

Perhaps they can do this by not allowing the car to drive with the full hatch open? That seems like a pretty big compromise. I actually wonder if those slits in the metal (implied, real or fake) under-body protection are LEDs that are diminutive to the max to only have to operate in such rare circumstances.

 

[supernu8]

The turn signals and running lights also need to be visible from the side.
I think they have all this covered. The small bar at the bottom rear holds the reverse and non-moveable brake lights. Above that looks to be a light bar that wraps around the side of the vehicle to be used for turn signals.

 

[Bee]

The turn signals and running lights also need to be visible from the side.
I think they have all this covered. The small bar at the bottom rear holds the reverse and non-moveable brake lights. Above that looks to be a light bar that wraps around the side of the vehicle to be used for turn signals.

If that's intended to be the main blinker, people aren't going to be happy about that. Rivian should really pillage ChevyBolt.org for the feedback on the Bolt doing this. People hate the aesthetics and there are stories of cops even pulling people over thinking they have tail lights out.

That side blinker thing is going to be the killer to this whole equation isn't it?

 

[Sgt Beavis]

I don’t know if y’all noticed this or not, but that wasn’t a production car. ?

Obviously changes are going to have to be made. Rivian probably has three years to make them. My prediction is that they will integrate tail lights and turn signals into the rear bumper unless a miracle occurs and the US rules change. As stated earlier, they are WOEFULLY out of date.

 

[supernu8]

If that's intended to be the main blinker, people aren't going to be happy about that.

I agree, not a fan of blinkers down that low. Maybe they'll be creative with the light bar and assign some pixels on the ends to work as a more visible main blinker in addition to the lowers. I'm sure we will see some changes before it launches years from now.

 

[RayzorBEV]

The turn signals and running lights also need to be visible from the side.
I think they have all this covered. The small bar at the bottom rear holds the reverse and non-moveable brake lights. Above that looks to be a light bar that wraps around the side of the vehicle to be used for turn signals.

Yes indeed. Problem solved

 

[Augsburg]

It's complicated.

Haha, I think everything will be alright. I'm confident Rivian's design team will solve this issue with a great solution that looks good. They've shown themselves to be topnotch. i expect the taillight concern is pretty small potatoes compared to the big issues they are facing to get these vehicles into production.

Sponsored