New Wizard / BMB tail lights?
- Thread starter Woodrow
- Start date
For those that don't have the factory connector plug on the jeep side, it looks like @mrblaine now has those connectors available on the website. Also works for those with 97 TJs@macleanflood
These connectors are not easy to find, don't think I have seen them available just by themselves anywhere else. It's awesome how much thought has went into these LED tail lights to provide as clean and as complete a solution as possible.
https://blackmagicbrakes.com/ols/pr...cense-plate-light-and-bracket-lcn-plt-rlc-lcn
View attachment 488917
@mrblaine, are these different than OEM fog light connectors?
Yep, they just looked like the fog connectors, so I wondered if it was the same thing being used there.
I think I'm going to pay the higher price for the Al in silver along with the connectors to restore my factory plugs.
Delrin would have been a better option for me given the NE winters, but I'll stick with what I have.. even though I haven't installed them yet.
That anodizing is a lot tougher than you would think.
For sure.. and that is why I am keeping them. No regrets here.
I had the savvy ones on for about three years and they looked new when I pulled them to replace with the BMB lights. I don't think you have to worry about the anodizing and the aluminum corroding.
They do a really good job at anodizing. I just wish they were a bit less costly.
To derail this a bit. I hear what it not there can't be hit. Are these lights, like your Savvy design, less easy to being hit than say to a 4" flush light and grommet?
Am I answering my own question by asking this?
I think delrin is a great material, and that’s the direction I plan on going, but is there an advantage to the aluminum that I am missing?
The acetal versions are to get the same product out there at less cost, nothing more. The only advantage I can think of is the need for a silver or aluminum color light housing. I suspect the very long term UV resistance of the black anodizing will outdo anything else since I've never seen a failure or discoloration of the Savvy housings.
The housing is slightly less than 1" tall off the back of the tub. So no, it is not less easy to hit than a flush mount. The difference though can be extrapolated by looking at a few other things. If you raise the stock gas tank skid 1", that slows down the amount of times it gets smacked on the same trails by a very large margin. The same is true for the frame side body mounts. Once we move to something like the raised Genright versions, even though they are the same shape and size as stock but just raised a bit, contact on the trails almost stops. Small changes make big improvements.
I designed the Savvy lights due to seeing a ripped off or blown up stock tail light housing on almost every trail run in JV. Once the Savvy lights went on, I never saw one damaged or hit. That was good enough for me.
To add to Blaine’s post. His new lights, in either aluminum or acetal, protect the lens from breakage by nature of sinking the light module into a box. That box is going to protect the lens. So, just like your flush mount lights being sunk into the tub, his lights are sunk into the housing. The only way you’re breaking that lens is to back it directly into a pointy rock or stick or some such truck. It will take a direct hit to the lens to break it.
I have the aluminum version, and I am pretty sure you could support the weight of the Jeep on the side of the housing and you might scratch the anodizing. Honestly, I’d be more concerned that the housing would deform the tub than damage the light itself.
Mental note: remember to call Genright tomorrow and order corner armor….
Similar threads
