Hey everyone.
I just wanted to know if anyone can tell me the laws regarding headlights for bikes that have colors other than white/yellow.

There's a product out there that casts a green projection on the ground from a mounted headlight, to alert pedestrians or drivers of your presence a head like...I don't know, maybe 5-10 yards ahead.
I was watching a video about it and in the comments people were saying that anything other than white or amber colored for a headlight on a bike will get you a ticket. Someone said that in the UK it's okay, but not in the US.
Is this true?
I would think it would be illegal for a car OR a bike to have a headlight other than white. It's a distraction right?
But is there an exception for a bicyclists?
And if not, does it matter that the light would be pointed down at the road to project the image?

If anyone can help answer this question it'd be greatly appreciated, thanks.

I believe bicycle headlights are regulated by the states, so you would have to search the regulations by state.

I have heard of red stripe laser rear lights. So far I haven't chosen to use them as my choice is to be visible, and allow cars to choose how to safely pass.

I have seen multi-colored wheel lights, and nobody seems too concerned with them.

If your green box projected 100% to the ground, and the bulb was not visible from in front of the bike, then if you ever are nabbed, you could likely argue that it isn't a headlight at all.

But, you may be required to also have a white headlight on the bicycle at night.

You need to specify your location if you want to find out the laws that apply in your area.

I would be surprised if green was a problem anywhere. Red and blue are an issue for forward facing lights. OTOH, a green laser is not eye-safe.

The only way to answer this question is to know in what country and state you live.

In most of the USA...lights are almost unregulated in terms of power/color-so long as their focus is correct.

Thank you so much for the responses!

I'm in the United States, and currently live in California.

I just found a website at Calbike.org that mentions the CVC code, and yeah, it says you MUST have a white colored headlight. But it doesn't mention anything about an additional colored light of some kind. This product is from the UK so I'm assuming that maybe there laws are the same from region to region for vehicles/bikes, but they didn't take into consideration that the US laws vary state to state?

I'm trying to find if there's a database of bike light laws where I can just check colored headlight mounts. It's a sticky situation because the laser light is advertised to be projected at an angle downward, so they're might not be laws addressing that.

Only color that I know is prohibited in Calif. is blue since that's reserved for emergency vehicles. But I really doubt anyone would ticket you for even a blue light that just projected a circle or lines onto the pavement. When our club has its Christmas lights ride I decorate my bike with a string of colored lights, some of which are blue, and have never worried about getting pulled over.

Most state laws say red to the rear, white displayed forward with amber used and turn signals. bicycle laws would be regulated by the state and in some cases per the city you live in sometimes.

BUT according to the California Bicycle Safety Co and California Bike Org:


Lights: At night a white headlight visible from the front must be attached to the bicycle or the bicyclist. CVC 21201(d) and CVC 21201(e)

Reflectors: At night bicycles must have the following reflectors:

1. Visible from the back: red reflector. You may attach a solid or flashing red rear light in addition to the reflector.
2. Visible from the front & back: white or yellow reflector on each pedal or on the bicyclist's shoes or ankles
3. Visible from the side: 1) white or yellow reflector on the front half of the bicycle and 2) a red or white reflector on each side of the back half of the bike. These reflectors are not required if the bike has reflectorized front and back tires. CVC 21201(d)

From the California DMV website:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/?1d...t_facts/ffdl37

Nothing says you can not have a different colored lights but being it pretty much says you must follow vehicle laws otherwise stated I am assuming its not allowed. Although I am sure no LEO probably cares short of getting a complaint.

There's no exception, but it might be ignored. Its pretty generally understood that cyclist have the same rights and must follow the same laws as do motorist when on the roadway. I would think that would be particularity important when consider head/tail lights.

A white headlight is legal and required although I wouldn't think the light you describe (Is it a laser aimed at the ground?) would get you onto trouble unless it was visible/distracting to motorist. Too bad you didn't upload a photo with your question. Blue -- and red other than in designated locations -- are reserved for police/emergency vehicles.

The only prohibition of a colored light for bicycles in California that I can find is given in CVC 21201.3:
" No person shall display a steady or flashing blue warning light on a bicycle or motorized bicycle except as authorized under subdivision (a)." [which allows blue on police bikes]
There are additional rules prohibiting certain types and colors of lights on 'vehicles' but these don't apply to bicycles in California since the CVC definition of vehicle specifically excludes bicycles.

I have seen people say that certain lighting systems on cars are illegal, at least in some states. Like the skirt lighting that lights under the car. I suppose it depends on how a bicycle is classified in a given state and if the vehicle code has been changed to get rid of these kinds of decorative lights. I haven't been doing as much highway driving as I was doing a couple of years ago, but in my recent trips I haven't seen any trucks decked out like a Christmas tree like I was seeing before.

NYC's Citibiks have a green projection of a bicycle image in the front:

Maybe amber side lights , White front

any other color is a filter so not as bright (Adding colored filters in photography reduces exposure.)

tail lights are red. cars with broken tail lights get tickets.

Only a few in the fleet have it, and it's an ineffective idea. Forget about it.

Agree. The money they spent buying those would have been better spent on some low powered wheel lights.

As for colored bike headlights....white or Amber should be fine almost anywhere. Using anything else is just stupid. That said many cyclists use multi-colored wheel lights and no one seems concerned about that. Of course it would be a hard to argue that any multi-colored lights rotating in a closed circle close to the ground would be anything else other than a bike. Anyone that would say otherwise I'd have to question their IQ rating. I think it needs to said that in some cases ( such as wheel lights for bicycles ) the law has yet to catch up with the tech. Would be absolutely stupid to ban m/colored wheel lights for bikes. Anything that can make a bike more safe to ride at night needs to be considered legal as long as it is not a threat to public safety.

The big flaw is that no one looks at images of light on the ground, so it's not an attention grabber in any way.

Actually I think it's worse than that because it creates the false notion that the cyclist using these are now somehow safer. Laser to ground projection whether either front or rear is not really going to be useful as a safety feature because in order to view it someone in a car would have to already be pretty close to the cyclist using it. This means that such a device might actually take attention away from the cyclist as someone who is driving might actually be distracted as they start to gawk at the projection and end up losing track of what the cyclist themselves are doing. Probably not going to happen with someone using the rear laser lights that project red lines on the road but I can foresee the front ones that project the bike image ahead of the bike as being a potential distractive danger.

It's a gimmick no doubt, but the good news is that manufactures are aware and actively trying to improve on bike safety. So although this particular innovation may not pan out, perhaps the next one will. That's always a step in the right direction.

Fortunately, they are useless and not worse than useless. I don't believe drivers are distracted by images on the ground. They do not look at the ground at all, I believe, which is what makes them useless.

Next time you cycle or drive at night, ask yourself if you're looking at images on the ground, even beams of light.

In Illinois, blue is legal on bikes but not motor vehicles. Lately, I've been using green on my bike because that's what Walmart sells. The cops haven't said anything to me.

I had some spoke lights I bought from China. They were pretty nifty. They turned themselves on when it was dark and it detected motion. Both conditions had to be true for them to turn on. They alternated blue and red. Well, those are police car colors. Once while riding along a residential suburban street, a car moving in the opposite direction pulled over. I decided they weren't good lights for me to have.

I know, I posted it because the OP seems to want to know whether green light is not legal.

To date I've not seen any one using a laser projector on a bike in person. As I do a great deal of my job while driving on the road at night I can't help but notice what is on the ground in front and to the near front of my car. Failure to do this would have me constantly hitting large pot holes or any small object that might be in the road. This is not saying I don't agree with you. In all likely-hood seeing something like the image of a bike projected on the ground in front of a bike is not something I feel I'm likely to see unless I'm stopped at a light and happen to be the first car with no one in front of me. If I do end up seeing the image I figure it's quite likely that I've already seen the cyclist and I'm already parallel to the cyclist or on near approach. If that's true I fail to see the advantage of using something like that. What's more important; seeing the cyclist or seeing some stupid image on the ground 20 ft. ahead of the cyclist?

I take back what I said about a moving image on the road being dangerously distracting. Pot holes, road kill and objects on the road, those can be distracting.

OK, I take the point that it would be hard to measure the effectiveness, especially since these things are rare. And you point out that we do look at the surface. We don't train our eyes to look for projected images, and I don't think we should bother.