Apparently, according to Alex from The Truth About Cars, the 2016 XC90 now has Red rear turn signals for the US models. For a company that had an original emphasis on safety, that's a shame. The previous generation S80 used to have amber turn signals that shone through a red/pink plastic. Seems like they decided not to use that method this time.
Looks like Volvo may be following suit with the rest of the European marques.
That's what I am hoping, but according to the above post and video, Alex states otherwise based on his reviewer test drive of the U.S. spec model. I would love it if this was not the case!
Yup, amber is better since it's unambiguous. I remember being disappointed when I figured out that neither our Sienna nor Odyssey had them. Even though rear-end collisions are the least likely to be fatal (vs side and front impacts), it's still significant.
With the turn signals do we still retain the Mustang-esque consecutive/direction signaling? I remember seeing the off-road demo of the xc90 signal illuminate in that pattern
While you guys worry about the turning signal, I'd talk about the brake lights. Not related to XC90 but I don't like the red tail light that is not distinguishable with rear brake light. Some SUVs and trucks have quite small brake light, just one square, and it is hard to tell the brake light at night solely from brightness change.
I'm wondering why no better lights are designed for night driving. Orange rear light and red brake light would be much better I think. Rear turning signal can be same color as brake light, no ambiguity as it is blinking.
In 2008, NHTSA (the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, responsible for writing U.S. vehicle safety standards) released tentative findings that amber ("yellow") turn signals are up to 28% more effective at avoiding crashes than red ones. Then, in 2009, they released preliminary findings that across all situations, including those in which turn signals don't matter, vehicles with amber rear turn signals are 5.3% less likely to be hit from behind than otherwise-identical vehicles with red ones.
That means amber turn signals were seen as being more effective at avoiding crashes than the center third brake light (CHMSL) mandated in 1986 (with a 4.3% crash avoidance).
Also, I'll throw in this link from a peer-reviewed journal showing that having amber would be more visible against a sea of red: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22269546.
Like a few people above, I don't believe there's cost savings for Volvo considering: 1. minute cost differences between bulb colors, and 2. by unnecessarily complicating the supply chain. Yannis, I'd be very interested in Volvo's rationale here.
I'm starting to sense fanboy defensiveness and its pissing me off.
Most cost effective is one global standard. Amber would suffice globally, red will not. NA is solely deviating from that one global standard. Doesn't matter how big that deviation is, it's a deviation. Period.
What is so difficult to understand here? (Beyond, of course, why this was done for NA.)
Frankly, I like my European cars to look... European.
I still haven't heard a viable reason for US XC90's having red turn signals.
- I haven't argued red is safer than amber. It is clear amber is. (personal attacks ignored as it is a sign of frustration on their side)
- Volvo XC90 always have had amber turn signals until 2016. Same as S60, XC60, .....
- It would be cheaper for Volvo to sell all 2016 XC90's with amber. GM (mentioned above as an example) could save money because they didn't sell those vehicles overseas and didnt need to configure for amber. Volvo doesnt work like GM anyway.
- Volvo does have a long history of complaining about stupid USA homologation rules that dont make sense. Yet the USA demands it.
My new theory:
A Volvo homologation engineer was tasked to make the 2016 XC90 ready for the USA. He/she wanted a way to make a USA destined vehicle instantly recognizable when viewed in the storage lots. So they chose red rear turn signal lights. It sailed through all design reviews as it meets USA homologation standards and there were other things to worry about.
Thoughts? As an aside, I am to see a couple Volvo factory reps this week. I will ask them their opinion.
I still haven't heard a viable reason for US XC90's having red turn signals.
- I haven't argued red is safer than amber. It is clear amber is. (personal attacks ignored as it is a sign of frustration on their side)
- Volvo XC90 always have had amber turn signals until 2016. Same as S60, XC60, .....
- It would be cheaper for Volvo to sell all 2016 XC90's with amber. GM (mentioned above as an example) could save money because they didn't sell those vehicles overseas and didnt need to configure for amber. Volvo doesnt work like GM anyway.
- Volvo does have a long history of complaining about stupid USA homologation rules that dont make sense. Yet the USA demands it.
My new theory:
A Volvo homologation engineer was tasked to make the 2016 XC90 ready for the USA. He/she wanted a way to make a USA destined vehicle instantly recognizable when viewed in the storage lots. So they chose red rear turn signal lights. It sailed through all design reviews as it meets USA homologation standards and there were other things to worry about.
Thoughts? As an aside, I am to see a couple Volvo factory reps this week. I will ask them their opinion.
In regards to your new theory, isn't the light the same color except when illuminated? This wouldn't help for a car sitting in a storage lot. I'm stumped for reasons beyond perceived aesthetics.
Just a thought, maybe amber is being saved for the midcycle refresh?
LOL
If the tails are LED, then there is virtually no cost difference in amber vs red LEDs, not sure on the new XC, though I saw it in person, I did not see this thread till after I drove it.
I've watched as the European car companies started to replace amber turn signals with red. It seems to coincide with LED lights. Audi/VW, then BMW, then Mercedes on most models... I thought I was always safe with Volvo in that they would stay amber (which I always prefer because it is a distinguished color from red and proven to be safer in studies). I really can't believe that they went to red. Its quite simply putting aesthetics over safety. What about the "2020" initiative?
Apparently, some Euro LED amber turn signals are shaped in such a way that they are not legal here. These tend to be long narrow shapes where one dimension is too narrow to meet the US standard. So the solution that Audi and others use is to have the brake and turn light be illuminated together and then one side blinks in its entirety when signaling a turn. This looks cheap to me, and requires more visual processing to understand than a consistent blinking amber light that is separate from brake and tail lights. But the Euro companies do it because it allows them to use the same lens and just reprogram the software that blinks the LEDs. Hence, no part change.
In the case of the XC90, Volvo doesn't even get to use this excuse. That is because the blinking square of red could have just as easily been amber as it is in Europe. I am convinced they are following a "me too" approach with other Euro makers that are dumbing down and switching to red for the NA market.
Ironically, more of the newer American cars seem to be using amber. Even the new Corvette has amber LED turn signals at the rear. Perhaps the Americans are trying to be more European, while the Europeans are trying to be American.
Volvo needs to realize that this is a big deal to those of us who care about these things. I will not buy the XC90 with red signals because I don't buy cars with red rear signals. My two Volvos and my Mercedes all have amber and it was a consideration at purchase. Perhaps somebody will come up with a retrofit that doesn't require all new taillights, but the annoyance of having to do something like this with the car touted as the world's safest is just frustrating.
Volvo needs to realize that this is a big deal to those of us who care about these things. I will not buy the XC90 with red signals because I don't buy cars with red rear signals.
You basically summed up my opinion in your post. Every car we have bought has had amber turn signals and will continue to do so. It's quite unfortunate that Volvo chose to follow the rest of the European brands with this decision. Even the new Escalade has rear amber LED turn signals.
(FWIW, I'm still in a bit of denial that I own a minivan, and can't imagine buying another once all kids are out of safety seats. Still, kudos to Toyota for such masterful engineering expertise to integrate AWD, 2+2+x seating, and rear amber turn signals onto the same vehicle. All will be required for whatever replaces the minivan.)
I'm also in the camp that wishes the US-spec XC90 has amber turn singles, but not buying the car (because of this reason) is stupid. The new XC90 is infinitely safer in a rear end collision due to the new avoidance system (see below.)
Rear-end collision avoidance system. Rearward facing radars detect if a rear impact is imminent and safety belts are tightened in advance in order to keep the occupant in a good position. Lights also start flashing to warn the driver behind, and the brakes are activated to help reduce the impact on the occupants.
You basically summed up my opinion in your post. Every car we have bought has had amber turn signals and will continue to do so. It's quite unfortunate that Volvo chose to follow the rest of the European brands with this decision. Even the new Escalade has rear amber LED turn signals.
I just hopped onto Volvo's site and wrote them about this. I think they should know that at least some of their loyal customers care about this stuff. I suggest, to those who are bothered by this, to go on over to http://volvo.custhelp.com/app/FormFramed and let them know!
Turn signal colourEdit
Until the early 1960s, most front turn signals worldwide emitted white light and most rear turn signals emitted red. The auto industry in the USA voluntarily adopted amber front-turn signals for most vehicles beginning in the 1963 model year,[53][54] though the advent of amber signals was accompanied by legal stumbles in some states[55] and front turn signals were still legally permitted to emit white light until FMVSS 108 took effect for the 1968 model year, whereupon amber became the only permissible front turn signal colour. Presently, almost all countries outside of the United States and Canada require that all front, side and rear turn signals produce amber light.
In Canada and the US the rear signals may be amber or red. American regulators and other proponents of red rear turn signals have historically asserted there is no proven safety benefit to amber signals, though it has been recognized since the 1960s that amber turn signals are more quickly spotted than red ones.[56][57][58] International proponents of amber rear signals say they are more easily discernible as turn signals,[59] and U.S. studies in the early 1990s demonstrated improvements in the speed and accuracy of following drivers' reaction to stop lamps when the turn signals were amber rather than red.[59][60][61][62][63]
A 2008 U.S. study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) suggests vehicles with amber rear signals rather than red ones are up to 28% less likely to be involved in certain kinds of collisions,[64] and a 2009 NHTSA study determined there is a significant overall safety benefit to amber rather than red rear turn signals.[65]
There is some evidence that turn signals with colourless clear lenses and amber bulbs may be less conspicuous in bright sunlight than those with amber lenses and colourless bulbs.[66]
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that the LED lights can change color like white to yellow/ Amber . I see Lots of the newer cars the DRL are white and change when used as indicators.
I must say I never paid attention on amber vs red tail light turn signals. After reading this thread I intentionally looked for the turn lights on cars in front of me while driving home last night. Amber turn signals were much easier to spot from a distance than the red, so I would tend to agree on the safety aspect of the amber turn signals. FWIW, my X5 does have red turn lights.
Just back from a run, was paying attention to rear turn signals like never before (crazy, I know). Saw rear amber turn signals on a couple GM products, a Subaru, and even a Kia.
Its one thing for a car to be engineered for mediocrity, but a far greater crime for a premium brand to direct a downmarket change order like this. What's next, a gun rack?
They've gone very heavily into the design direction as of late. It used to be "body, but good" now it's more a Scandinavian design thing. I think they went red because in the U.S., that'll the "euro" look. And they want to look euro. Look at how they've moved all the navigation displays into the dash. Nowhere near as ergonomic or safe as the pop up system it replaced.
So, do they not blink amber? My '11 BMW X5d has lenses that are entirely red, but the indicators still blink amber through the red lens.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum
3.9M posts
157.6K members
Since 2000
A forum community dedicated to Volvo owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, builds, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, new releases, and more!