Reversing lights

[bluezedd]

My car has 2 reversing lights (it probably was sold with only 1 bulb in though in the UK), so it definitely helps visibility at the rear, especially when it hits any reflectors of other vehicles.

Otherwise they're a great warning that someone who can't reverse park is coming out of a bay whether or not they can see if the road is clear.

[Pica-Pica]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

SS2. said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Even if your car didn't need one due to the year it was registered, surely if it has one, it has to work to pass the MOT? Same with spare tyres. You don't need one, but a bald one is a fail.

Items are either testable, or they're not.

A reversing light on say a vehicle from 1996 is not a testable item and, as such, it's not a failure if it's inoperable.

Likewise a spare wheel - not a testable item, although they can / should advise the person submitting the vehicle if it's defective.

OK, never knew that, every day's a skool day.

Yes, I used to remove my aged spare out when being MOT’d, till a tester told me this.

[wjwren]

I borrowed an s class with a great big LED rear light. It was great to use and had a camera on as well. I think some of the German marques have bigger reversing lights to aid the camera at night. I've also noticed them on porsches.

[Centurion07]

Last time I had a decent reverse light was a "bd lamp" on the back of a MK2 Escort. Every car since has been utter crap, to the point that I'm looking into retro-fitting something to my 16-plate Insignia that looks vaguely factory-fit rather than the aforementioned "bd lamp".

[Mr Tidy]

My 1967 MK2 Cortina had a 55w Lucas spot-light fitted to the back bumper when I bought it - very handy when someone behind had their headlights on main beam!

But I think every car I've owned since then has had one as standard - I'm just surprised it took so long for them to be compulsory!