Re: IML: Side Marker Lamps/Reflectors

[Christopher H <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Those fender-mounted turn signal lights (they are not side markers, even though everyone calls them that) were not required in Europe/Japan in 1967-8 when the law took effect in the US, and the US carmakers and lawmakers were not likely thinking about export markets for US products (few US-market products even sell there today). I also don't believe Europe requires them to be behind the front wheel: Porsche puts them where our market's front side markers go, but they wrap into the wheel arch so they're visible from the rear-side.

US cars only require one reverse lamp as well, believe it or not. The reason it's more common in Europe is that the EU also requires a red rear foglamp, which many automakers locate where the left reverse lamp would be. The only vehicle I know of that is sold in the US with such a configuration is the Mercedes G-Class.

As for the US cars getting the turn signal on the fender (or somewhere visible), some carmakers already use it voluntarily. Many have adopted it in the side mirror housings, which is more visible to pedestrians in front of the car as well as vehicles in the next lane.

But looking at the degradation of lighting functionality despite all this new lighting technology (there are several new cars from the US, Europe and Asia that use cutting-edge LEDs for taillamps yet combine the brake, tail and turn signal into a single red unit, when it doesn't take a scientist to figure out that separate, and differently colored, rear lamps communicate the driver's intentions faster). I asked a Chrysler designer rep about the cheapo single-bulb taillamps on the base 300 and his defense of why there were no amber signals was "they're not required by law." 

We'll see what our new Imperial has if it gets the go-ahead, but I imagine it'll be plain red unless the Fed steps in again. Maybe they'll pay a tribute to 1969 and give us some sequentials!

Chris in LA


-----Original Message-----
>From: aeyn <mr85000@xxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Sep 13, 2006 5:53 AM
>To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: IML: Side Marker Lamps/Reflectors
>
>The reason for the front side marker light not blinking could be
>is that exported cars to many countries need to have a new marker
>light just in front of the front door and rear of the front wheel
>opening.  One additional thing to remember is that the exported
>cars only need a single reverse light also.  I am wondering when
>the US market cars are going to bet the mid side turn signal
>lights.
>
>Æyn
>
>--- Christopher H <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> This is yet another reason why I love this list... The people
>> you meet!
>> Burton, I'm honored to receive a response from Product
>> Planning!
>> 
>> I'm curious why even with the less standardized approach for
>> 1969 why the
>> reflectors couldn't have wiring and light bulbs. Especially
>> since that part
>> already existed for most models (only the C-bodies were new for
>> 1969).
>> 
>> I also have a '72 Charger, and the one part of it I always feel
>> shortchanged
>> on is the standardized side marker lamps/reflectors. Every time
>> I see a 1971
>> model with its lovely flush-mounted, specifically styled
>> design, I secretly
>> long for a '71!
>> 
>> Never knew Bornie called the '68 round lamps "whale's eyes." We
>> always
>> called them "Nader Eyes" after safety advocate Ralph, of
>> course. Wonder what
>> he'd think of the clichéd circular taillamp treatment on damn
>> near every car
>> today... Or how much he must have loved the '72-75 "shields" on
>> the rear
>> fenders of Imperials.
>> 
>> Fast forward to modern days, and I'm still amazed that so few
>> cars have
>> added the simple, no-cost feature where "front amber
>> sidemarkers...may...be
>> wired so as to flash with the turn signals." Chrysler had them
>> across the
>> line, from the Neon to the Grand Cherokee, by the end of the
>> 20th century,
>> but even the new models have dropped this useful side-visible
>> turn signal.
>> And since it costs virtually nothing to add (it's merely a
>> wiring
>> arrangement, not an additional lamp or control unit...I've even
>> re-wired
>> several of my own cars to add this feature), it just seems lazy
>> and
>> thoughtless. Then again, I never thought I'd see German cars
>> with red rear
>> turn signals again either... Suddenly it's 1960!
>> 
>> Thanks again, Burton, for the great reply!
>> 
>> Chris in LA
>> Intelligent lighting enthusiast
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/12/06 4:15 PM, Burton Bouwkamp at northburt@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> wrote:
>> 
>> > "Chris in LA" wrote "I never figured out why 1968 models have
>> illuminated
>> > side marker lamps, then 1969s have only non-powered
>> reflectors, then 1970s
>> > have both".
>> > 
>> > Here's the answer. I was Chrysler's Director of Product
>> Planning from 1968
>> > to 1975 so I was involved in these side marker decisions.
>> > 
>> > First, some background. Here is a summary of the Federal
>> Motor Vehicle
>> > Safety Standard (FMVSS #108) that required side marker lights
>> OR reflectors
>> > in 1968 and 1969. Notice that it specifies side marker lights
>> AND reflectors
>> > in 1970.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > FMVSS #108
>> > Sidemarker lights and reflectors
>> > In North America, amber front and red rear sidemarker lamps
>> and reflectors
>> > are required. The law initially required lights or reflectors
>> on vehicles
>> > made after 1 January 1968. This was amended to require lights
>> and reflectors
>> > on vehicles made after 1 January 1970. These side-facing
>> devices make the
>> > vehicle's presence, position and direction of travel clearly
>> visible from
>> > oblique angles. The lights are wired so as to illuminate
>> whenever the
>> > vehicles parking and taillamps are on, including when the
>> headlamps are
>> > being used. Front amber sidemarkers in North America may or
>> may not be wired
>> > so as to flash with the turn signals.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > HISTORY
>> > 
>> > At Chrysler we decided to do side marker lights in 1968. All
>> vehicles except
>> > Imperial used the same side marker light design. Except for
>> the difference
>> > in lens color they were the same lamp for the front fender
>> and rear quarter
>> > panel. This simplification saved us a lot of money and let us
>> do the design
>> > and engineering job a lot quicker than if we had to do unique
>> lights or
>> > unique reflectors for each carline.
>> > 
>> > During the 1968 model year we got a new Product Development
>> (Product
>> > Planning, Styling and Engineering) Vice President by the name
>> of Leroy
>> > Bornhouser. We called him "Bornie". Bornie took issue with
>> the appearance of
>> > the 1968 side marker lights which he said looked like "whales
>> eyes". He
>> > ordered us to put side markers on the car in 1969 that were
>> more
>> > attractive - more integrated with the sheet metal. So in 1969
>> we went to
>> > flush reflectors (no bulbs) that were different for each
>> fender and quarter
>> > panel. Time was short so this took a "crash program" to meet
>> 1969 model
>> > production.
>> > 
>> > The 1969 reflectors didn't meet 1970 standards which required
>> lamps AND
>> > reflectors so we had to design and tool the side marker
>> lights again. We did
>> > them three times in three years!
>> > 
>> > Burt Bouwkamp
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > -----------------  http://www.imperialclub.com 
>> -----------------
>> > This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List.
>> Please
>> > reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will
>> be
>> > shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for
>> the
>> > Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to
>> http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
>> > 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----------------  http://www.imperialclub.com 
>> -----------------
>> This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List.
>> Please
>> reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will
>> be
>> shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for
>> the
>> Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
>-----------------  http://www.imperialclub.com  -----------------
>This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please 
>reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be 
>shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
>Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
>



-----------------  http://www.imperialclub.com  -----------------
This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please
reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be
shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm