[BMW335iOn18s]

Hey guys,

I got my 2er coded today, most notably disabling the hideous side marker lights and enabling the rear fogs...here's how it looks:

Sorry for the low quality pics taken with a potato...






EDIT: Whoops, I mean't to title the thread "Side Marker delete and Rear fog light mod"

[Sportstick]

Rear fogs are a good idea for improved conspicuity. I'm surprised they don't work as the OE default, but I haven't checked so far. As to disabling the side markers, not so much...hope an 70+ year old with cataracts doesn't "meet" you at an intersection one night.

Potato?

[BMW335iOn18s]

You can set them up to only light up the driver's side, but I like them on both sides. And sidemarker lights aren't on in european/ROW models, and I'm sure there are 70+ year olds with cataracts over seas, so i think i'll be fine

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by BMW335iOn18s

You can set them up to only light up the driver's side, but I like them on both sides. And sidemarker lights aren't on in europe, and I'm sure there are 70+ year olds with cataracts over seas, so i think i'll be fine

I hope so....if you really want to understand why they exist for the US, look up the NHTSA docket for FMVSS 108 and read the research which was needed to convince the GAO to support the NHTSA rulemaking to justify requiring the added cost. Good tip on the rear fogs...thanks!

[BMW335iOn18s]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

I hope so....if you really want to understand why they exist for the US, look up the NHTSA docket for FMVSS 108 and read the research which was needed to convince the GAO to support the NHTSA rulemaking to justify requiring the added cost. Good tip on the rear fogs...thanks!

Well, why don't you save me some time and inform me on the reasoning behind FMVSS 108?

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by BMW335iOn18s

Well, why don't you save me some time and inform me on the reasoning behind FMVSS 108?

OK...didn't want to get too far into the weeds if you weren't interested.

This research was similar to the kind of project which lead to the adoption of the third center mounted brake light. A fleet of vehicles was equipped with the proposed marker lights and over sufficient time and mileage, a statistically significant reduction in night-time side impacts was the result. Then, using an analysis of the cost-savings of avoided impacts to the population overall vs the cost of requiring them in all vehicles sold in the U.S., NHTSA published a preliminary announcement of rulemaking, allowing the industry, members of the public, etc. to comment. The Government Accounting Office also had to assess the findings to independently confirm that the savings outweighed the costs. As a result of all of this analysis, NHTSA found basis to proceed to final rulemaking and FMVSS was modified to include side marker requirements.

It is important to realize that driving conditions, both the infrastructure and how drivers behave, vary from the US to Europe, as do a variety of requirements. There are different standards ranging from impact testing to lighting. For years, countries in Europe had requirements for turn signal "repeater" lamps which we did not in the U.S. There has been industry effort to push the continents to commonize regulatory standards to reduce manufacturing complexity, but the regulatory bodies on both sides of the Atlantic have been resistant over the decades to adopting some aspects of each other's rules. For the above reasons, it is not necessarily sound to draw a conclusion about what is actually helpful in the US based on European regs. Even within North America, there are differences from US to Canada. The best example is the different result of having daytime running lights in both countries. This appears to result (some research found) due to the different dusk/dawn lighting conditions as one moves further north, making DRLs more valuable in Canada.

Sorry if this was lengthy, but it seemed you were really interested and I spent some years working in this area....hope you found it useful info. SNL just finished Weekend Update, so good night everyone!

[BMW335iOn18s]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

OK...didn't want to get too far into the weeds if you weren't interested.

This research was similar to the kind of project which lead to the adoption of the third center mounted brake light. A fleet of vehicles was equipped with the proposed marker lights and over sufficient time and mileage, a statistically significant reduction in night-time side impacts was the result. Then, using an analysis of the cost-savings of avoided impacts to the population overall vs the cost of requiring them in all vehicles sold in the U.S., NHTSA published a preliminary announcement of rulemaking, allowing the industry, members of the public, etc. to comment. The Government Accounting Office also had to assess the findings to independently confirm that the savings outweighed the costs. As a result of all of this analysis, NHTSA found basis to proceed to final rulemaking and FMVSS was modified to include side marker requirements.

It is important to realize that driving conditions, both the infrastructure and how drivers behave, vary from the US to Europe, as do a variety of requirements. There are different standards ranging from impact testing to lighting. For years, countries in Europe had requirements for turn signal "repeater" lamps which we did not in the U.S. There has been industry effort to push the continents to commonize regulatory standards to reduce manufacturing complexity, but the regulatory bodies on both sides of the Atlantic have been resistant over the decades to adopting some aspects of each other's rules. For the above reasons, it is not necessarily sound to draw a conclusion about what is actually helpful in the US based on European regs. Even within North America, there are differences from US to Canada. The best example is the different result of having daytime running lights in both countries. This appears to result (some research found) due to the different dusk/dawn lighting conditions as one move further north, making DRLs more valuable in Canada.

Sorry if this was lengthy, but it seemed you were really interested and I spent some years working in this area....hope you found it useful info. SNL just finished Weekend Update, so good night everyone!

I am very interested in this type of stuff. However, at the same time I don't believe these types of things actually have anything to do with real safety. My car can still be seen from the side without difficulty. I believe that differences exist in order to make it more expensive and difficult for foreign manufacturers to compete with domestic manufacturers. Sometimes you have to look beyond the smoke and mirrors, especially with law making decisions. If you truly believe that driving everywhere else in the world is more dangerous than driving in the US because of sidemarkers and reflectors, then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. You probably think that red rear turn signals are safer too I think that FMVSS 108 allowing red rear turn signals (which are illegal for the rest of the world) in north america simply for the same reason - to make it difficult to export US spec cars to the rest of the world and to keep costs down for US automakers and costs up for everyone else. Red turn signals, especially ones that share a bulb with brake lights ARE NOT as safe as separate amber colored bulbs. I think you'd agree with me on that matter. Don't take these lighting laws too seriously.

BTW, your lovely NHTSA did a study on red vs. amber turn signals and determined that amber signals were safer. Yet, the law still allows red ones...further backing up my position..

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by BMW335iOn18s

I am very interested in this type of stuff. However, at the same time I don't believe these types of things actually have anything to do with real safety. My car can still be seen from the side without difficulty. I believe that differences exist in order to make it more expensive and difficult for foreign manufacturers to compete with domestic manufacturers. Sometimes you have to look beyond the smoke and mirrors, especially with law making decisions. If you truly believe that driving everywhere else in the world is more dangerous than driving in the US because of sidemarkers and reflectors, then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. You probably think that red rear turn signals are safer too I think that FMVSS 108 allowing red rear turn signals (which are illegal for the rest of the world) in north america simply for the same reason - to make it difficult to export US spec cars to the rest of the world and to keep costs down for US automakers and costs up for everyone else. Red turn signals, especially ones that share a bulb with brake lights ARE NOT as safe as separate amber colored bulbs. I think you'd agree with me on that matter. Don't take these lighting laws too seriously.

Still here....got into another thread where it was posted that AWD systems develop traction (it's the tires, not how many wheels are powered!). Anyway, back to lights....

Yes, amber lights do generate a quicker reaction time. That has also been shown in research. The problem in the US regs is that the cost:benefit analysis of the data collected has not justified prohibiting red turn signals. This becomes a financially driven analysis from the GAO of overall cost to society vs overall benefit to society. The turn signal analysis didn't cross that threshold. I understand your cynicism about the industry and erecting competitive barriers, but having spent about 30 years inside the domestic industry, I can only offer my experience that this is not what has happened. Any foreign manufacturer is free to take advantage of using red turn signals, and some have. This has had no effect on vehicles sales volumes, and the initial cost of tooling a second taillamp assembly to use a red turn signal pays for itself in a matter of weeks. As well, I've seen many of the vehicles we developed with the European tail lamp versions with amber lights at our facilities, and, as a Product Planner at the time, had the debate with Engineering about wanting to use them in the U.S.

I didn't say and don't know that driving in Europe is any more dangerous than in the US due to side marker lights. The issue is that there are a wide variety of known (and possibly unknown) interacting factors which affect overall safety outcomes. The research simply proved that in the US, when a large fleet racked up mileage over time, a significant reduction in side impacts occurred here. One cannot generalize to know that the same result would occur elsewhere in the world. Your youthful eyes may assess that your car is easily seen, but when a large sample of cars were seen by a large sample of drivers, differences did occur.

As to "real safety", there is no distinctive point when one becomes "safe". Safety is a issue of risk management, identifying the variety of potential causes of bad outcomes and identifying what steps can reasonably be implemented to change the risk - the odds - to be more favorable. I had the chance to testify to NHTSA about this philosophy once, and analogized it to a building a beach...it takes many grains of sand, but one or a few more or less doesn't make the metaphorical "beach" suddenly appear or disappear. The goal is to add as much as one reasonably can, based on well-founded data, to build toward the goal. But, OTOH, we can't all drive around in Sherman Tanks.

OK, now I'm really going to try to go to sleep!

[BMW335iOn18s]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

Still here....got into another thread where it was posted that AWD systems develop traction (it's the tires, not how many wheels are powered!). Anyway, back to lights....

Yes, amber lights do generate a quicker reaction time. That has also been shown in research. The problem in the US regs is that the cost:benefit analysis of the data collected has not justified prohibiting red turn signals. This becomes a financially driven analysis from the GAO of overall cost to society vs overall benefit to society. The turn signal analysis didn't cross that threshold. I understand your cynicism about the industry and erecting competitive barriers, but having spent about 30 years inside the domestic industry, I can only offer my experience that this is not what has happened. Any foreign manufacturer is free to take advantage of using red turn signals, and some have. This has had no effect on vehicles sales volumes, and the initial cost of tooling a second taillamp assembly to use a red turn signal pays for itself in a matter of weeks. As well, I've seen many of the vehicles we developed with the European tail lamp versions with amber lights at our facilities, and, as a Product Planner at the time, had the debate with Engineering about wanting to use them in the U.S.

I didn't say and don't know that driving in Europe is any more dangerous than in the US due to side marker lights. The issue is that there are a wide variety of known (and possibly unknown) interacting factors which affect overall safety outcomes. The research simply proved that in the US, when a large fleet racked up mileage over time, a significant reduction in side impacts occurred here. One cannot generalize to know that the same result would occur elsewhere in the world. Your youthful eyes may assess that your car is easily seen, but when a large sample of cars were seen by a large sample of drivers, differences did occur.

As to "real safety", there is no distinctive point when one becomes "safe". Safety is a issue of risk management, identifying the variety of potential causes of bad outcomes and identifying what steps can reasonably be implemented to change the risk - the odds - to be more favorable. I had the chance to testify to NHTSA about this philosophy once, and analogized it to a building a beach...it takes many grains of sand, but one or a few more or less doesn't make the metaphorical "beach" suddenly appear or disappear. The goal is to add as much as one reasonably can, based on well-founded data, to build toward the goal. But, OTOH, we can't all drive around in Sherman Tanks.

OK, now I'm really going to try to go to sleep!

Here's the thing. I have no problem with you voicing a genuine safety concern, but I think that if you think that raining on my parade is any more productive for this forum than the post I made about automatics/Xi's was, then I think you're a bit mistaken. Having age or experience doesn't give you a license to be nasty to a younger stranger over the internet. Just some food for thought. If you like the hideous lights / reflectors on your car, then by all means, enjoy them! I don't. Like dackelone told me when he gave me my infraction, "if you have nothing nice to say, then don't say it. And grow up some!"


For such a mature adult, I'd have thought that you would know better than to sarcastically hope that "a 70+ year old with cateracts meet me at an intersection..."

[BD_F22]

I think this is being over thought wayy too much People have been coding the amber side markers off on BMW's for years and I am pretty sure all of them have been safe doing so.. I have mine coded off too, hope some "70 year old with cateracts doesn't get me too"

[BMW335iOn18s]

Originally Posted by BD_F22

I think this is being over thought wayy too much.. People have been coding the amber side markers off on BMW's for years and I am pretty sure all of them have been safe doing so.. I have mine coded off too, hope some 70 year old with cateracts doesn't get me too

+1

Anyways, lets get this thread back on topic!

[RDKing2]

I thought that I had read that the addition of the third brake light decreased collisions for a time, then as people got used to them the accident rate climbed right back up to where it used to be.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by BMW335iOn18s

Here's the thing. I have no problem with you voicing a genuine safety concern, but I think that if you think that raining on my parade is any more productive for this forum than the post I made about automatics/Xi's was, then I think you're a bit mistaken.

I'm not sure what the deal was with the automatics/Xi's, but I didn't read Sportstick's post as nasty at all. He just said that disabling the side marker lights would reduce the conspicuity of your car. And he actually complimented your decision to enable the rear fogs, so at worst, he's guilty of sunshining and raining on your parade (i.e., rainbowing on your parade).

[LDSM]

Originally Posted by danimal

I'm not sure what the deal was with the automatics/Xi's, but I didn't read Sportstick's post as nasty at all. He just said that disabling the side marker lights would reduce the conspicuity of your car. And he actually complimented your decision to enable the rear fogs, so at worst, he's guilty of sunshining and raining on your parade (i.e., rainbowing on your parade).

agreed, that was an interesting back and forth. I guess BMW335iOn18s didn't like the remark about getting into a collision, which is understandable...but really Sportstick's info was pretty interesting and didn't come off at all like raining on his parade

anyway nice car OP congrats

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by BMW335iOn18s

Here's the thing. I have no problem with you voicing a genuine safety concern, but I think that if you think that raining on my parade is any more productive for this forum than the post I made about automatics/Xi's was, then I think you're a bit mistaken. Having age or experience doesn't give you a license to be nasty to a younger stranger over the internet. Just some food for thought. If you like the hideous lights / reflectors on your car, then by all means, enjoy them! I don't. Like dackelone told me when he gave me my infraction, "if you have nothing nice to say, then don't say it. And grow up some!"


For such a mature adult, I'd have thought that you would know better than to sarcastically hope that "a 70+ year old with cateracts meet me at an intersection..."

I was sorry to awaken to see that you felt our conversation had been hostile and you felt attacked, when nothing like that was intended. The written words may not always come off the screen with the affect with which they were placed, but I thought we were having an interesting discussion as you asked me early-on for more information and you raised substantive issues. Perhaps my writing style is an acquired taste, but if you don't appreciate it, we don't need to engage on future threads. FWIW, the comment on the "70+ year old" was not sarcasm (I believe I said I hope you "don't" meet). That was a generalized characterization of the likely oncoming driver who will struggle the most with night-time vision. Many start to feel it around in their late 50s/early 60s as oncoming headlights seem to glare more and can cause pain, causing the driver to look away and more likely miss a less obvious visual cue.

In any event, we won't do this again and good wishes to you.

[horsepower_and_hounds]

I think a lot of mods that are to our cars increases the chances of being hit by an old man with cataracts except louder exhaust...which might give him a heart attack. Lowering, tinted lights here and there, blacking stuff out etc.....but it is done anyways which shows a lot lean to the side of looks vs safety. Not taking sides...just say'n. The amber lights really have never bothered me for some reason but I know people all over the world want what the other countries have to stand out

[todd hollander]

I bought a European light switch for our '12 X3 which enables the rear fog lights and there is even an lit icon in the dash that lights up. How do you turn on the rear fog lights on your M235i? I don't think there are front fogs with the Msport front bumper. I don't have my car yet so I can't check on the switching in the car.

[mike@tpc]

please don't drive with the rear fogs on when its not foggy. that is so freaking annoying to other drivers.

[BD_F22]

+1.. Except when someone is right up your ass, turn the fogs on and they usually get the message

[ska///235i]

Originally Posted by BMW335iOn18s

+1

Anyways, lets get this thread back on topic!

Yea man, get off his back. When did so much soccer moms join 2addict :

Nice coding mod op

Did u have to buy a euro light switch?

I use the rear fogs for backing up dark areas

[BMW335iOn18s]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

I was sorry to awaken to see that you felt our conversation had been hostile and you felt attacked, when nothing like that was intended. The written words may not always come off the screen with the affect with which they were placed, but I thought we were having an interesting discussion as you asked me early-on for more information and you raised substantive issues. Perhaps my writing style is an acquired taste, but if you don't appreciate it, we don't need to engage on future threads. FWIW, the comment on the "70+ year old" was not sarcasm (I believe I said I hope you "don't" meet). That was a generalized characterization of the likely oncoming driver who will struggle the most with night-time vision. Many start to feel it around in their late 50s/early 60s as oncoming headlights seem to glare more and can cause pain, causing the driver to look away and more likely miss a less obvious visual cue.

In any event, we won't do this again and good wishes to you.

Let's agree to focus on our shared passion for these BMW's, and less on starting meaningless arguments and personal attacks.

Originally Posted by mike@tpc

please don't drive with the rear fogs on when its not foggy. that is so freaking annoying to other drivers.

Don't worry I won't

Originally Posted by BD_F22

+1.. Except when someone is right up your ass, turn the fogs on and they usually get the message

You know it!

Originally Posted by ska///235i

Yea man, get off his back. When did so much soccer moms join 2addict :

Nice coding mod op

Did u have to buy a euro light switch?

I use the rear fogs for backing up dark areas

Thank you! Rather than buying the euro switch, I followed this DIY:

http://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=877278

[Dackelone]

US guys want Euro stuff.

Euro guys want US stuff.


Personally, I think the drl headlights and amber "corners"(and side maker lights) as safer. Over here in Europe the side profile of the cars at night is very dark. Its hard to see another car - at say a 90' intersection.

And btw... over here in Germany, you can only use those "rear fogs" when you have LESS than 50 meters of sight! That is less than the next little white and black "sticks" on the side of the Autobahn.