i never had to replace a single bulb, in at least 7 cars my family leased over last 10 years. neither headlight nor tail, nor interior. none failed in 3 years lease term.
i’d say lifespan of regfular bulbs is way longer than of those led retrofit bulbs. even thou they supposed to never burn out, lol.
for real. 
i just replaced one of the original tail light bulbs in my 1997 plymouth neon. the car has 190k miles on it.
Brian
That’s odd. When I converted my brake lights it was after reading the results of a study like this one, release last year by the US Gov’t. It seems to have some interesting results. For example, if you drove a Honda Accord or Cadillac Deville that was the model year that was tested, you had a significant safety advantage by switching to LED, but other models such as the Infiniti M45 the stats got worse. At least this study seems to be a bit more germain to the discussion in terms of their (LED’s) effect on cars anywhere in the world, rather than quoting laws (or fabricating antidotes), that only apply to certain jurisdictions (or seem rather specious in nature).
The link I posted are Federal laws. They do vary a little from State to State but Federal law trumps State law every time in court. The law is the law. Thumb your nose at it if you like. Violate it at your own risk. NO sarcasm here.
Or to rephrase that somewhat, “The law where you live is the law where you live, and not the law where I live”. Helps to bear in mind that the members of this forum are not necessarily under US jurisdiction (at least not yet).
If however you want to make your post more helpful for your fellow countrymen, you may want to paraphase the appropriate relevant parts rather than demonstrating that you are adept at using the copy and paste keys.
The link will be helpful to anybody living here in the U.S. Any clear thinking person NOT living in the U.S. will ignore the post. Judging by your snotty comments, I’m guessing you are not a clear thinking individual. Any idiot looking to pick a fight (you?) - will. If YOU want to be helpful - quit going out of your way to start arguments about nothing. I have no interest arguing with idiots today, no matter what country they are from. Sheesh!
As I mentioned in an earlier post critical laws relating to automotive lighting do not vary greatly from first world country to first world country, you can ignore your local rules at your own peril. Ignoring the fact that the rules do exist doesn’t make the rules go away.
I don’t mean any disrespect here, but unless referenced by a peer reviewed article by an international legal expert, I find claims like the one in quotes posted in Internet forums to be absurd (as was your incredible tale about the insurance adjuster who somehow managed to ignore the legal concept of ‘evidence continuity’).
Now let’s go back to the facts folks. I would appear if you owned a Honda Accord Coupe, or maybe even more appropriate, if one of your loved ones owns one that was in the above study, you would probably consider that if they have a 33.7% less probablility of getting rear ended by an inattentive operator in a big rig truck, you might feel better if they were using LED’s. By all means, if you can get a Type Approved light, do so. In the meantime, just keep one thing in mind:
Is it so hard to believe that insurance adjusters will use every excuse to deny you coverage, and that it has happened before?
You are correct that it should not happen, but unless you can afford some pricey lawyers you are at their mercy, corporations don’t look for ways to spend money on you, they look for ways to take money from you.
I really don’t care what you do to your own vehicle, just trying to share what was a very unfortunate and costly indecent.
Ignore whatever you wish just don’t call me absurd.
Fatyburn story is not absurd. Insurance company are not your friend, they take your money and give your services for what you signed for. If it’s now what you signed for, they’re will be happy to don’t pay.
Long time ago I had a problem with my car while driving. I had to call a tow truck.
Back then my contract covered the tow truck only if I call them more than 50km from my home.
And my insurance told me that I was less than 50km from home (and the tow truck is not cheap…)
I verified later I was between 45 and 50km, definitely less so OK I don’t contest, but it was so close!
can we get back to technical part of the question? lets not turn this place, into we all know what.
do any of those (it is not legal….) advisers realize that they are not telling us anything new??? WE KNOW ALL ABOUT IT.
does any honestly think , that someone will actually, say “yea, they are right, I’m not doing it”
fk no. all that will happen, “legal advisors” will be told to f off, and gtfo. do you enjoy being told,
f off??? sure seems that way.
well it sounds fishy, and it creates more question than answers.
if leds help to reduce REC it would help all of the cars, not just select few.
may be improved braking sys on m45 responcible for it being rear ended more often. how come m37 does not suffer from same?? tail lights on m37 and m45 are identical, but brakes are improved on m45 due to extra weight, and V8 engine.
Please don’t post to these super old threads.