Thanks for all the comments and replies. The two officer's that stopped me, one from my agency and the other was a CHP officer. I spoke at length with two CHP Officer's (today not the one that stopped me) via phone up in Sacramento and locally at the Oceanside office. Both CHP Officer's stated the bike needed red tail lamp lens. However the Oceanside CHP Officer stated that it might need to go to court since it came from the factory. Both CHP Officer's agreed that state law in this case the California vehicle code supersedes DOT regulations. In other words, vehicles have to meet federal regulations but the state (in this case California) can add to the regulation but can not reduce it from the federal standard. The Officer from my agency just attended training specifically for motorcycles and they talked at length about lighting modifications. I think the problem is that the only motorcycle that I have seem with smoke tail lamps is the CVO street glide and road glide. I would believe that Harley would have done their home work on all legal requirements prior to releasing the bike. I hate to use the word assume but I think over the years we are use to seeing red tail lamps in both automobiles and motorcycles. There are vehicle being manufactured with clear tail lamps but there is still red in the lens, one vehicle I just saw today is the Toyota Prius, I would say 90% of the lens is clear and the lower portion is red. Here is another point, when reading the CVC section most would interpret the word tail lamp as the bulb that illuminates but when I Google Harley tail lamp pictures it shows nothing but lens and both CHP Officer's again agreed. We also talked about CVC 26101: 26101. (a) A person shall not sell or offer for sale for use upon or as part of the equipment of a vehicle any device that is intended to modify the original design or performance of any lighting equipment, safety glazing material, or other device, unless the modifying device meets the provisions of Section 26104.(b) A person shall not use upon a vehicle, and a person shall not drive a vehicle upon a highway that has installed a device that is intended to modify the original design or performance of a lighting, safety glazing material, or other device, unless the modifying device complies with Section 26104.(c) This section does not apply to a taillamp or stop lamp in use on or prior to December 1, 1935, or to lamps installed on authorized emergency vehicles. Then I need to know if the tail lamps are compliant with CVC 26104: 26104(a) Every manufacturer who sells, offers for sale, or manufactures for use upon a vehicle devices subject to requirements established by the department shall, before the device is offered for sale, have laboratory test data showing compliance with such requirements. Tests may be conducted by the manufacturer.(b) The department may at any time request from the manufacturer a copy of the test data showing proof of compliance of any device with the requirements established by the department and additional evidence that due care was exercised in maintaining compliance during production. If the manufacturer fails to provide such proof of compliance within 30 days of notice from the department, the department may prohibit the sale of the device in this state until acceptable proof of compliance is received by the department. I am educating myself in this matter not only as a owner but for vehicle enforcement matters. I am going to talk with our Traffic Commissioner's to see if CVC 24600(e) deals with just the lighting bulb or the lens assembly as well.
On a positive note I love the bike
Author
Topic: 2013 smoked tail lamps in California, vehicle code violation (Read 14594 times)